[Leica] Noctilux

[leica_r8 at hotmail.com (Aram Langhans)]

No matter what you do with a sensor, a 1.0ish lens shooting wide open cannot 
be duplicated with a 1.4.  Even just from a depth of field stand point, let 
alone the other characteristics of using such a fast lens wide open.  So, if 
that is what you want it is indeed necessary.

Aram, who owned a 1.2 lens at one time but could no longer focus with it.


-----Original Message----- 
From: Richard Man
Sent: Monday, December 30, 2013 11:07 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Noctilux

I think with the modern digital sensors and cameras, very few lens are
truly "necessary," and most are a matter of "wants." Nothing wrong with
that since I succumb to gear lust myself, but the world's best pictures are
seldom taken by the world's most expensive and best lens.


On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Henning Wulff <hjwulff at gmail.com> wrote:

> The 0.95 is as good as it gets at high speed, with the well understood
> downsides of price and size. At smaller apertures the pictures are hard to
> distinguish from Summilux-ASPH pictures, but the large size and price
> remain. Focus shift exists but is quite manageable. It is the only one of
> the three that can be considered an all in one lens, if you can live with
> the size. This lens, like the other Nocti's focusses down to only 1m, 
> which
> is a distinct limitation in comparison to the slower current 50's and in 
> my
> opinion its main operational failing.
>
> The f/1 is of much lower contrast at wider apertures, but also sharpens up
> nicely with the downside of considerable focus shift. It has incredible
> flare tolerance which allows it to capture images that no other lens seems
> capable of. A lens shade is largely pointless. This is a lens that is not
> easy to master and renders in a unique way, but the rewards are great. Our
> Dr. Ted did most of his medical photography for his books with this lens,
> and mostly at f/1. True mastery!
>
> The f/1.2 is pointless unless you plan on placing it in an honorary
> position in your collection. Current prices are exorbitant, and it is not
> as good a lens overall as the f/1 while being slower. It is a much softer
> version of the old Summilux 50. The Nokton f/1.1 is definitely a better
> lens overall.
>
> If you have the Summilux ASPH and an M240, the 0.95 is not as necessary as
> it was with the M9, but it of course still allows a little but lower light
> subjects to be recorded successfully (as long as they are at least one
> meter away) with shallower dof, but the f/1 will allow a different vision,
> if you are willing and able to master it.
>
> I used to have an f/1.2, have used the f/0.95 and the Nokton f/1.1 and
> currently have the f/1 and the Summilux ASPH.
>
> Henning
>
>
>
> On 2013-12-30, at 9:30 PM, David Ching <davidhhching at yahoo.com.sg> 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Emanuel,
> >
> > The Noct f0.95 is surely superior in some ways to the Lux 50 ASPH or the
> Voightlander Nokton f1.1 of the later two which I  have.
> > How would you rate the 3 Noct versions , f0.95, f1.0 and f1.2?
> >
> >
> >
> > David Ching
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
>
>
> Henning Wulff
> henningw at archiphoto.com
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
// richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>
// http://facebook.com/richardmanphoto