Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/12/31

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Noctilux
From: sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter)
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 15:18:39 -0600
References: <6E419175-7D02-4D0C-9C7B-8B79E223F8D8@yahoo.com.sg> <20052A61-22AE-4B1C-929E-29D629781F36@archiphoto.com> <CAF8hL-HAx9aM=C0H8psxyq7Arqc-S_itfDrpXO83U0mF1xDK5A@mail.gmail.com> <BLU173-DS4E902B42235661BE03934B8C90@phx.gbl> <EBB5BA64-09FE-4355-A843-747C492E6570@verizon.net> <CAE3QcF45aX_ALMss=RhoF-tXrfeyX3=tqohEVG7vq+V84wfBfg@mail.gmail.com>

The Noctilux I owned was a magnificent beast.  It was just too big for my
taste, but I really like what I could do with it.

This is a detail from the Bishop's chair in the Cathedral here in
Natchitoches.  It was part of a series of posters named "Sacred Places."

http://sonc.com/bishops_chair.htm

Wide open, handheld, close as I could get.   I doubt I could have shot this
as successfully with a Summmilux.


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at 
gmail.com>wrote:

> Unless someone actually posts pictures to illustrate these opinions, you
> guys are all going to be in so much trouble if Dr Ted sees this thread.
>  ;-)
> I know that Tina and Ted are masters of these lenses wide open. Let's see
> your stuff.
>
> I just stopped the (borrowed) thing down because that was the light I had
> and the DoF I wanted too.
> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/153201969
> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/153260573
>
>
> Cheers
> Geoff
> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
>
>
> On 1 January 2014 06:55, Frank Filippone <red735i at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > The difference between the DOF of a 50/1.4 and 50/1.0 lens is actually
> > pretty minimal.
> >
> > Both are hard to nail critical focus, especially close in. With the EVF
> of
> > the M or Sony or Fuji, the issues of focus are remarkably reduced.
> >
> > The real difference between the various (age) 50's is the fingerprint of
> > the lens, weight, and cost.
> >
> > If you are not in favor of weight around your neck, then all 3 Noctis
> fall
> > off the list, closely followed by the ASPH Lux. The lightest is the more
> > recent (black) Summicron.
> >
> > If you can not afford $3-10k for the lens, then the choice boils down to
> a
> > Summicron.
> >
> > Fingerprint is so subjective. But for pure unmitigated sharpness, the
> ASPH
> > Lux is the clear winner.
> >
> > I am (almost) down to only the ASPH Lux. And have no regrets. Absolutely
> > great lens.
> >
> > Frank Filippone
> >
> > > On Dec 31, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Aram Langhans <leica_r8 at hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Leica Users Group.
> > > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
Regards,

Sonny
http://sonc.com/look/
Natchitoches, Louisiana
1714
Oldest Permanent Settlement in the Louisiana Purchase

USA


In reply to: Message from davidhhching at yahoo.com.sg (David Ching) ([Leica] Noctilux)
Message from hjwulff at gmail.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Noctilux)
Message from richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Noctilux)
Message from leica_r8 at hotmail.com (Aram Langhans) ([Leica] Noctilux)
Message from red735i at verizon.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Noctilux)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] Noctilux)