Noctilux 50/1 lens

[lonersam]

What I say 'the BEST' is very personal, I like my pre-ASPH Lux50 too, so as Rigid Cron and Summar, etc. But from my experience to shooting 'artsy' portraits, the Noc + say Provia400X is really hard to beat. So go for it my friend. :-)

[lonersam]

Oh last but not least, I re-read what you said for your 'street photography'. Well, get a 28 - I heard from somewhere they are making a 28 Lux or Cron - and you would be really getting into street photography. What I said in my previous posts were just about portrait lens. Noc can be okay to carry around on the street but not exactly advised, indeed.

 

All in all, if you still want a 50 for street photog, I recommend either a Rigid Cron (U never go wrong with that one, especially for B&W pictures - wait, M8 ... okay ... still, no problem) or the latest Cron - sharp like razor blade.

[kelly_flanigan1]

The F1 Noct cost me 400 bucks used back in the late 1970's; about what a used Ford Pinto was worth; or two Chevy Vegas; or 700 gallons of gasoline. As an investment buying Walmart would have been better.Tools typically are NOT investments; you are nuts if you think they are. If you use a lens for street work its going to get some non functional blems with time. Buying a used Noct is a better bet; most folks own it for a fling and then sell it off as even money; or a loss.The lens IS sharp if focused well; its NOT if you miss focus; or have a body normally used with a Summicron at F8.:) It has an outstanding lack of flare. If you are going to use it stopped down you should just use at Summicron at F2. When I got my Noct the fastest print film was 200 asa; and 400 was just coming out and total crap. Today Superia 800 at Walmart is better than a 1970's asa 160 print film;plus it has 4l ayers to handle odd/mixed lighting types. With a F2 Summicrons today and asa 800 film you are better of than using a Noct at F1 back in the 1970's if one uses print films. I only learned of the "blocking hallf the viewfinder; heavyness,a nd having to use a "steer" AFTER photo.net came out; TWO decades after owning the lens. Here with my M3 the blockage is not much and has never been an issue; nor has the lens had any stiffness issues; its not much heavier than my old Nikkor 85mm F2 made out of brass.

[vic_.]

Hi May, You're better off getting the Noctilux on the user market. There are some for sale here, most of them, if in

mint condition, go for US$5500 to US$6000, for the same lens that is being sold in the wooden box:

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost-classifieds/index.php?cat=1

 

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=29

 

 

Don't listen to all the negative views on the Noctilux. Some are indeed legitimate, but most of the others are from

people who have never held the lens, let alone used it. It takes patience and perseverance to fully exploit its

capabilities. In other words, it's not for everyone, definitely not for the "f8 and be there" crowd.

 

Here are some pics from this lens:

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tommyoshima/tags/noctilux/

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=63325

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=60589

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49075

 

To get more meaningful responses, try these two forums:

 

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=3

 

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/

 

I'm sorry to say, but there is a lot of negativity towards anything Leica on this forum lately. And some of those who

post these negative views belong to other forums that I mentioned, and somehow don't say anything negative about

Leica over there.

 

Best of luck with your decision!

[paul_neuthaler]

35mm 1:2.8 Summaron was born for street shooting<div></div>

[craig_shearman1]

I think depth of field is the key. If I want to be able to quickly pull my camera up to eye, shoot and scoot I'm going to be prefocused at a given distance and stopped down maybe to f/8 for some depth of field. Dont' need 1.0 for that.

[notraces]

You don't even need a Summicron for that -- buy a Summarit -- or Summitar -- save some money and donate the rest to a good cause...

[harvey_edelstein1]

A Cosina Voigtlander 35mm f1.2 and an M8 would be about a fast 50mm FOV and its got a flatter less light falloff on the edges. Go on Flicka and look up photos taken with this lens they really pop. Its a large lens but a great bargain at $800.

[john_shriver]

One important point -- the Noctilux 50/1 has a very long focusing throw, almost an entire turn to go from infinity to the closest distance (a little under 1 meter). That's required to make it focus accurately. But, when working fast, even stopped down to f/8, it means you still have to turn it a lot more than a typical Leica 50mm lens, which has half a turn of focusing throw, or the 35mm Summicron, which as a quarter of a turn of focusing throw.

[tom_levidiotis]

I have a Noctilux 50/1 and shoot only film through non TTL M6s. I use it rarely. I prefer the Summicron 50/2. On a recent South American trip I took the 50/2, the Voitlander Cosina 35/1.2 as a low light option and a 28/3.5 Color Skopar.

 

I used all three lenses but the overwhelming majority of shots were taken with the 28. I am a rank amateur and enjoying shooting candid street shots. The big lenses are just too much trouble for me to actually use.<div></div>

[tomasz_widlak1]

May, I've been shooting street with Noctilux for almost a year and I went through quite a few other 35-50mm lenses including Leica 35mm f1.4 both pre-ASPH and ASPH, Leica 50mm f1.4 ASPH, Voigtlander Nokton 40mm f1.4 and Minolta Rokkor 40mm f2 and in my opinion Noctilux is like no other lens. Surely it is heavy, large, difficult to focus, very expensive and obstructs 1/4 ow viewfinder but once you'll learn how to deal with all this it will give you images like no other lens. It is not as sharp as other lenses, it does vignette, it does have swirly bokeh sometimes but it has much more of something else too that I value the most - character. It is simply the best lens I have ever used, I always think that when I look at my images. The only problem for you is that on M8 50mm is no longer 50mm, you'll have FOV of 65mm lens and it is a little too long for my taste. Anyway, here is a few images form my beloved Nocti:

 

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/01.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/02.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/03.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/04.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/05.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/06.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/07.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/08.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/09.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/10.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/11.jpg">

<img src="http://www.tomwidlak.com/stuff/nocti/12.jpg">

[fred_obturateur]

A M8 and a mint Noctilux? In other words a few grands hanging from your neck while walking the seedy streets?

 

I didn't know street photography has gone "bourgeois" ;-))

[nathan_wong2]

The lens will be heavy and the edges will have built in vignette. This is because the lens is normally used in dark, dark places where the vignetting won't make much difference. If I were you I'd take a trip to a large library where they have back copies of Popular Photography or Modern Photography. You'll find a comparison of all the ultra-fast lenses of yesteryear with the Nikon 50 f/1.2 Noct, Leica 50 f/1, and Canon's 50 f/.95 lenses tested. I think the comparison was in the early 1980's. Good luck. Personally, I'd love to have one of those lenses just to have one, especially since most of my pictures are taken in available light, but the weight and price differences compared with the f/1.4 models is really high.

 

Good luck.

[02Pete]

May Yoon --

If street photography is what you want to do, and do most often, the 35mm focal length seems to be preferred by many photographers for several reasons. There is greater apparent depth of field with a 35mm lens than with a 50mm lens, so one can zone focus (that is, focus the lens using its distance scale for the approximate distance one expects to be from the subject when taking the photo) and take pictures very quickly without pausing to refocus the lens. The 35mm lenses also tend to be physically smaller and lighter than 50 mm lenses (although there are a few notable exceptions), so they are easier to carry around for long periods of time, and don't attract much attention. Most 35mm rangefinder lenses since the 1950s also have relatively large maximum apertures, useful for shooting in available light.

 

There are a number of good 35mm rangefinder lenses available for Leicas, covering a broad range of prices. The classic one is Leica's own 35mm f/2 Summicron, which has been made in several different versions over the years. There are also older Canon 35mm f/1.8 and f/2 lenses in LTM mount, usable on an M-mount camera with an adapter; various Voightlander/Cosina 35mm lenses; Leica's 35mm f/1.4 Summilux lenses; and some fairly recent Zeiss lenses.

 

The 50mm focal length also has its advocates for street photography. This focal length has a somewhat more natural perspective than the 35mm; and can be given a large maximum aperture while still remaining a relatively reasonable size and weight. The 50mm f/2 lenses, such as Leica's 50mm f/2 Summicron, tend to emphasize maximum visual quality at the expense of speed. The 50mm f/1.4 lenses, such as Leica's 50mm f/1.4 Summilux or Canon's older 50mm f/1.4 in LTM, deliver a good balance of high optical quality and high maximum aperture.

 

The Leica 50mm f/1.2 or f/1, the older Canon 50mm f/1.2 and 50mm f/0.95 in LTM, and the rumored new Leica 50mm f/0.95, tend to emphasize the largest possible maximum aperture for shooting under very dark available light conditions, but often do not match the optical quality of the slower f/2 and f/1.4 lenses until stopped down by several stops. They also have very shallow depth of field compared with f/2 and f/1.4 lenses, and thus require careful, precise and accurate focusing to produce effective results -- which means slower focusing and less grab shooting for street photography. They tend to be noticeably larger and heavier than 50mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.4 lenses, and draw more attention to the camera. They are also much more expensive, because they are produced in smaller quantities or, if older and out of production, are rarer. If your camera gets damaged or stolen while doing street photography, they will be much more expensive to replace.

 

Having said those things, Leica's 50mm f/1 Noctilux has a reputation for very painterly photographic qualities at maximum aperture, for excellent suppression of flare and ghost images, and for very high optical quality overall. It offers those qualities at the cost of being larger, heavier, more obvious, and much more expensive than 50mm f/2 or f/1.4 lenses.

 

If you do a lot of photography under dark available light conditions, need an extra-large maximum aperture to maximize your chances of getting adequately exposed photos under such adverse conditions, and are a professional photographer who can take a tax deduction for the cost of equipment, then a 50mm f/1 lens might make sense.

 

If you are just starting out with Leica and street photography, my personal suggestion would be to buy a used Leica 35mm f/2 Summicron first, and then a used Leica 50mm f/1.4 Summilux, and use them both for a while to get a sense of what they can do, before making a very large investment in a specialized lens. If they meet your needs, then you are all set. If neither one of them has a large enough maximum aperture to handle the kind of photography you do on a routine basis, then you can always sell the 50mm f/1.4 and buy a Noctilux.

[majid]

I sold my Noctilux because it was just gathering dust. The long lens throw makes it too slow to use in any kind of dynamic situation, and I bumped into the 1m minimum focus distance (vs. 0.7m for the other lenses) surprisingly often. In practice the Summilux lenses get the shot more often than the ponderous Noctilux.

 

The lens I use everyday on my MP is a 50mm Summilux ASPH and on my M8 a 35mm Summilux ASPH. Consider also the 28mm Summicron or the excellent 21mm, 25mm or 28mm Biogon ZM from Zeiss Ikon.

[may2]

Hi there guys, I want to say thank you to all who had taken their time to express their thoughts, advice and words of

encouragement to me. Greatly appreciate. As a freshie, I guess I got a long way to go and enjoying what my passion is

"people photography/portraiture"

 

I have to say Tomasz, I love your story images. This is the way I see and want to capture my surroundings, I know

there is time what, where and when as to do these, cos sometimes I want my subject to look alive and not flat. Please

advice me in future on your skills in photography.

 

Thanks to Peter for you are so detailed and knowledgeable with cameras and lenses, you gotta write a handbook or

something related, cos I need one! I will take heed of your advice. I am presently using the 35/2 ASPH Summicron and

loving it. Agreed it is the best for street shots.

 

Thanks to Fazal, I will definitely look into the 50/1.4 Summilux ASPH and the 28 Biogon, I would assume it is just as

great, as they are Zeiss lens.

 

Thank you so much, who knows if a Noctilux ever come my way at a good bargain, I still will give it a go, I know I want

this in my collection whether I get to use it or not, but not at US$16k though, not yet!!!

[kelly_flanigan1]

In a rougher area I just use my old black Zorki 3c and 50mm F1.2 Canon LTM; this combo cost me less than 100 bucks long ago. To three decade Noct owner many of the comments about the Noct seem totally bizzare; goofy, weird. Here my M3 is only set to use 1 meter lenses; I have not modified it; most all of my lenses only focus to 1 meter. Comments about the lens being taking long to focus seem oddball too; my lens is easy to focus; heck almost loose. Comments about the lens being heavy are also oddball; its a bigger tool; it HAS to have more glass to be a F1 lens. My 10" Bigfoot circular beam cutting saw is heavier than my 7 1/4" saws; its a bigger tool to do a bigger job; ie cut 4x4's and 4x6's with one cut. My 16 and 12 pound sledge hammers weight more than my 6 lb ones for a reason; they have to be.:) The Noct is a one night stand lens for most all photo.net folks; its bought and used for awhile and then folks find out it its heavier; it cannot cook,sew, raise kids and bake bread like a F2 Summicron. Its not rocket science that a F1 lens; or a 10" circular saw; or a 12 Lb sledge hammer has to weight more; or cost more. Many folks will be fine to own a F2 Summicron; 7 1/4" skill saw. and a 16oz claw hammer; they weight less; they cost less; they take up less room. From a Summicrons users standpoint a pile driver is not needed; you just tape the pile a zillion times with a claw hammer. :)

[kelly_flanigan1]

Probably no other Leica lens except the Noct is a one night stand lens. Folks buy them used and shoot some images with a body thats not been aligned since Ford was President and then blame the lens due to ego reasons. Thus many duffus folks say the Noct is not sharp wide open and its horrible. The *safety factor* of using your F2 Summicron at F8 has been lost; OR you bought somebody elses poorer Noct thats probably been messed with. <BR><BR>From a street shooting perspective using a 35mm lens might be a better choice; a fast lens if you can afford one.

[el_fang]

<i>but it has much more of something else too that I value the most - character.</i>

 

<p>I think this so-called "character" is actually what makes most images shot with a Noctilux visually annoying.

Any content that was in the picture is overcome by the Noct's intrusion on form. You want a personal style to

come from the way you handle shape, line, value, tone and moment, not from using a particular exotic lens. The

first is

not easily imitable; the second can be imitated by anyone with a decent credit line.</p>

 

<p>Having said that, there are valid reasons to own a Noctilux:</p>

 

<p>1. You are not a good enough photographer to handle foregrounds and backgrounds. Cranking a Noct to f/1

effectively obliterates them, so you only have to consider subject.

<br>2. You still shoot film. A Noct will allow you to finish that ISO 100 roll even as the light begins to fade.

<br>3. You shoot an M8. Leica's design philosophy of "let's make stratospherically expensive, exotic optics to

make up for the fact that our sensor is piss-poor at any ISO higher than 640 without extensive post-processing"

almost makes a

Noct mandatory. If you had the wherewithal (lol) to pony up for an M8 despite all its issues then a Noct

shouldn't be too much of a stretch either.</p>

 

<p>If you wish to be "none of the above," then 1) get a 35 or 50/2 Summicron and learn how use foreground and

background to effectively convey depth; 2) go digital so you can set ISO to whatever a particular situation

demands; or 3) lose the M8 and buy a real camera (even a $500 digital Rebel gives superb ISO 1600 performance

without needing post processing, freeing up time you can spend shooting instead of Photoshopping).</p>

 

<p>I also recommend studying the work of great street photographers like <a

href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dipTqJfiE4" target="_blank">Joel Meyerowitz</a>, Jeff Mermelstein (part <a

href="

target="_blank">1a</a>, <a

href="

target="_blank">1b</a>, <a

href="

target="_blank">2</a>), <a

href="

target="_blank">Bruce Gilden</a> and <a

href="

target="_blank">Garry Winogrand</a>. As you can see, good

street photography doesn't have anything to do with an f/1 lens.</p>

[Paul Lewis1664881697]

Thanks for the images, Tomasz. The bokeh of this lens is very unusual... it almost looks manipulated (or painted as someone else said). I'm used to shooting with the extreme bokeh of the Nikkor 85mm 1.4mm, but I've never seen anything like the Noctilux. I could see how some people would love that bokeh and others would steer clear.

 

I would never hang $8000 around my neck.

[el_fang]

BTW I didn't pull that Leica philosophy BS out of my ass, it came <a

href="http://www.popphoto.com/popularphotographyfeatures/5316/the-future-of-leica.html" target="_blank">straight

from the horse's mouth</a> (Leica CEO Andreas Kaufmann):

 

<p><i><b>PopPhoto:</b> In testing the Leica M8, I found its performance to be outstanding at ISO 320 and very

good at ISO 640, but with noticeable noise at ISO 1250. Many late-model DSLRs from other leading makers now claim

to deliver topnotch performance in the ISO 1600-3200 range. Will Leica do anything to provide enhanced

performance at higher ISOs in a future M model?</p>

<p><b>Kaufmann:</b> The fundamental concept of the Leica M is delivering the pure image captured by the lens, and

this is not possible if you adopt the philosophy of using extensive software to massage an imperfect image.</i></p>

<p>Yeah, because colorful speckles and blotches are part of the "pure image captured by the lens," amirite? LOL</p>

[vivek iyer]

<i>I know I want this in my collection whether I get to use it or not, but not at US$16k though, not yet!!!</i>

<p>

May Young: When did the price jump to US $16,000/- for this lens?! ;)

[kelly_flanigan1]

Whats funny is that here I bought the used Noct back in the late 1970's for astro work; it had nothing to do with street photography or shallow out of focus effects; or street usage or artsy farts stuff.. Its cost was about 1/3 more than my 1973 new Nikkormat Ftn with 50mm F1.4 SC; about 1 1/2 times considering inflation. Its cost was about the same as a round Delta airline flight from LA to NYC then; NOT something super BIG. I paid more for a high end HP engineering calculator than my Noct. My used Noct cost 40 percent of what a new TI99 computer cost. The Noct lens was "only":) 800 to 1000 bucks used in 2001; about double; what a used M3 body went for. The lowest price I have seen a Noct for a Leica go for is 280 bucks back in the 1970's In the old Shutterbug adverts. The current US dollar's decline has made many German items more expensive. Angst and rubbish about the Noct being bad seems to be a modern trend for folks new to Leica; by many folks who like to bash it since its now a more expensive lens. Modern Color films and digital bodies make for radically easier shooting with low light work;and a F1 lens is often not required as much today; thus the Noct is fun to bash as being not required by most all. One can go to Walmart and buy a 130 dollar digital P&S camera and have a more powerfull settup then a 1970's M camera and Noct with asa 200 print film. If one today has iso 800 film and a Noct and the exposure is 1/8 at F1; summicron users can shoot at 1/2 second at F2 since they have a perfect hand holding ability. In the same light farmers can stop using bush hogs and just weed eaters too!:)<BR><BR>

[kelly_flanigan1]

For astro fun stuff the Noct here on the Epson RD-1 records Orion in 4 seconds what I would shoot in the late 1960's with GAF 500 slide film with many minutes exposure using my then fastest F1.4 Nikon F Nikkors; with the on clock driven telescope hand corrected with a reticle say on a bright star. The F1 Noct is radically better than my 1960's and 1970's F1.4 Nikkors ; the main stars of Orion have way worse batwings. The shot was with the moon in thes sky too and with street lights. <img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/EPSON%20R-D1/_EPS2428500widefull4secf1.jpg?t=1221332422"><BR><BR><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/EPSON%20R-D1/_EPS2428OrionBelt4secF1.jpg?t=1221332962">

[john_wayne4]

If street photography is your main shooting situation. I would use a 35mm f2.0 Summicron ASPH. For the street you want, light, fast, and complete visibility through the viewfinder. If you want even smaller and faster. You can use the 35mm f1.4 Summilux. It's not as sharp as the ASPH but is one of the smallest lens Leica made (without the hood). Thanks