Just got the Nokton 50/1.1

[Alex_Es]

<p>I got the Nokton 50/1.1 today and have been using on the M8. My first impression is that is is great. I am surprised that it is this good. If you want to see some images and what else I have to say about it go here:</p>

<p>http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexes/sets/72157620582618505/</p>

 

[frederick_muller]

<p>An intriguing lens, Alex. Of course, it's difficult to evaluate sharpness on-line, but it looks promising. Would love to see more examples up close with out-of-focus backgrounds. Shots in low light with light sources in the frame.</p>

<p>This is an exciting new product from VC. I don't see myself buying a Noctilux any time soon, but it will be natural to compare the Nokton to the Noctiluxes, the Canon f0.95, and the Canon f1.2. What did you mean by a learning curve focusing the lens? And you will have to tell us if it's a lens you can be comfortable carrying around for extended periods shooting. Have fun! :-)</p>

[frederick_muller]

<p>By the way, Alex ... can you say how big this lens is relative to the 35mm f1.2 Nokton?</p>

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

<p>Would be interested in knowing which apertures you shot at, Alex. Obviously the guy in the olive t-shirt is wide open. The test will be if you can make those classic tiny-depth -of-field shots, as well as acceptable ones at 5.6, etc. BTW--what is the conversion factor on the m8?</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Fredrick, the 50/1.1 is more compact and lighter than the 35/1.2. </p>

<p>Jack, I shot everything at f1.1.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>If you go to the images on my Flickr site and click on All Sizes you'll have an idea of the sharpness of this lens wide open.</p>

<p>With the narrow depth of field focusing is tricky. It is made more difficult, of course, when the subject is not completely stationary. Taking all factors into consideration, including possibly camera shake, the sharpness is remarkable. I have nothing to compare this lens to in my experience except the Canon 50/1.2, which it blows away. I've never owned or used a Nocitlux 50/1, the Nikon 50/1.1, the Canon 50/0.09, or the current Nocilux 50/0.09.</p>

<p>It balances well on the M8 and does not block too much of the finder. It also goes well with my Zeiss Ikon ZM and RD-1s.</p>

<p>On the M8 I have not found the "tunnel vision" that super fast 50s are said to be prone to. Vignetting has been cut out by the M8's crop factor. At full frame it will probably appear. I'll be shooting 1600 ISO black and white film on my ZI and we'll see.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Thanks, Alex, even in the smallish JPEGs some qualities are visible. I'm not seeing any alternate larger views tho'.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Here's Sawako looking professorial (f1.1). Click on the image and then go to Original to see it blown up.</p>

<p><a title="L1002023 by Alex Es, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3232/3671293071_37041a2828_b.jpg" alt="L1002023" width="1024" height="683" /></a></p>

<p>When you come to a set on Flickr, click on the thumbnails, then go to All Sizes. You get everything from small to super large.</p>

[gadge]

<p>Hi Alex,<br>

I dont see the all sizes options when looking at your pictures. I do see the option when looking at my own pics on Flicker though. Weird!</p>

<p> </p>

[mohir_ali]

'...the 50/1.1 is more compact and lighter than the 35/1.2.'

 

How is this possible? I had a Noct', I know not f1.0, but at 1.1, optics and math's would make the 50 at least bigger than the 35, which I also had.

[mawz]

<p>The 35 needs more complex optics, so it's larger (but thinner) than the 50.</p>

[derek_stanton2]

<p>I also only see the one size on your flickr page, even after adding you as a contact. Maybe it's there if you add ME as the contact? If you're able to see "All sizes," maybe you've not enabled some option on your ACCOUNTS page > Privacy and Permissions?</p>

<p>http://www.flickr.com/account/prefs/downloads/?from=privacy</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>I see what you mean Derek. Anyone want to be my contact? Anyway, here is a shot of my friend Graeme at f1.1.</p>

<p><a title="L1002007 by Alex Es, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3392/3672093882_2cdba9b83b_b.jpg" alt="L1002007" width="1024" height="683" /></a></p>

[derek_stanton2]

<p>Working for me now, Alex. Thanks.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Great Derek. You are welcome!</p>

[peter_n1664876959]

<p>Nokt + M3 + color film: http://www.flickr.com/photos/33482157@N07/sets/72157620761968680/</p>

[joe_thornton]

<p>Who's selling this lens? I cannot find it anywhere.</p>

[vivek iyer]

<p>Peter N: Pics in that link show interesting OOF highlights. Reminds me of the Sigma 30/1.4.</p>

<p>Lots of coma, etc.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Joe: Cameraquest and Photovillage are selling it. </p>

<p>I am waiting for Erwin Putts to write about this lens and compare it to the old and new Noctiluxes.</p>

[peter_n1664876959]

<p>I just want to clarify that the pics in the link I posted above at Jun 30, 2009; 06:40 p.m. are not mine.</p>

[joe_thornton]

<p>Thanks Alex, I see it now.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Glad to hear it Joe!</p>

[frederick_muller]

<p>Hmmm I think I've seen worse coma. Again, this looks like a darned interesting lens ... I'm getting tempted. Darn.</p>

[victor_rubin1]

<p>As to where the Nokton can be purchased, I strongly recommend Joseph Yao a physician in Hong Kong who is a member of the Leica Users Group, and represents Voigtlaender. His prices are great and he can be reached at joseph@yao.com. Not only is he a teriffic guy, but he works hard to make things wonderful. Bests: vroger<br /> </p>

[derek_stanton2]

<p>Mine just arrived today, from Cameraquest.</p>

<p>I was shocked and dismayed to find that it was not packed in a black lacquered, satin-lined display case.</p>

<p>Other'n that, it's looks and feels pretty wonderful. It's built to the same standard as the 35/1.2, which to me seems as good or better than the Leica lenses i've owned. The aperture clicks are lovely. Focus is smooth and not too long in the 'throw.' It's a little bit shorter than the 35/1.2 and a little bit fatter. </p>

<p>On the Zeiss Ikon, there is close to no intrusion into the 50mm viewfinder frame at infinity, and only a small bit at the near range. Either way, it was so negligible that i didn't even think about it at first and had to go back to look for it when i started writing this. </p>