roger_michel Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 does anyone have any experience with this lens?? i have been very surprised by it nice performance. it is a cheap ($300) noctilux as far as i can tell -- and very well made. i have heard there is much sample to sample variation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diego_k. Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 I had one, did´nt like it at all. Even at F4 found it quite soft, and mine at least had visible distortion.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_michel Posted October 25, 2003 Author Share Posted October 25, 2003 thanks. i've read all the comments in the archives. my impression is that some people really like, some don't at all. i think part of the problem is that many people who don't like it have never used a noctilux and so are not prepared for how BAD superfast lenses are wide open compared to slower lenses, including the noctilux. they compare the results to summilux or cron performance. the other problem is that many people actually try to use it stopped down. you buy these lenses for full aperture, and they rise or fall based on full bore performance. finally, i think a lot of people are too quick to call superfast lenses "low contrast." yes, they are low contrast. but they are also generally used in poor light conditions where the scene contrast is VERY low. this exacerbates the contrast problem. always remember to take this into account. finally, canon in the old days had huge QC problems IMO. there is SO much sample to sample variation. diego -- i know you are very experienced. so these comments don't apply to you. i want to thank you VERY much for posting the image. i see exactly what you mean. my noctilux does the same thing. apart from the distortion, i like the image very much!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diego_k. Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 ****diego -- i know you are very experienced.**** Really? first notice I get ;) Anyway, part of what your saying is true, I tried it out as an allrounder lens, and as such there are better alternatives. I found out that even at night, with normal ilumination I can get away with an F2 lens and Iso 800, so im not the avalible darkness kind of guy either. Steve seems to be quite happy with his 1.2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_michel Posted October 25, 2003 Author Share Posted October 25, 2003 it's because of p3200 and 800 speed color films that the world has become satisfies with f2/f2.8. slow films of years ago really forced the old time lens designers to put their thinking caps on. one interesting note: the T stop of the canon 1.2 is now orse than 1.2 and maybe a little better. the T stop of the noctilux is a little worse than 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shambrick007 Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 "canon in the old days had huge QC problems IMO. there is SO much sample to sample variation."<p> Probably explains why my Canon 85/1.9 is such a good performer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 Many times users rangefinders are off a tad; and the faster glass such as an F1.2 are not accurately focused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 Here is a shot done one year ago; at Halloween; 1/25 sec @F1.2; using tmax400 and a Zorki 3C. The shadows scan with abit of noise. A Noctilux on a Leica M3 is easier to focus; the faster F1 lens will fill the shadows more. When one runs out of film speed; faster glass helps alot. Many people buy faster glass; and dump it on an uncalibrated body; are are dissapointed; and then the lens gets resold. The Noctilux and Canon F1.2 both are always being resold; like revolving doors. Many are also put off by the lack of compactness; and greater weight. If you can live with an F2 lens; and dont do super dark available light; then you will be happy and should avoid the faster products; which require better camera alignment; to get peak performance.<BR><BR><A HREF=http://www.ezshots.com/members/tripods/images/tripods-349.jpg target = "_blank"> <IMG SRC=http://www.ezshots.com/members/tripods/thumbs/tripods-349-thumb.jpg BORDER=0></A> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen_w. Posted October 25, 2003 Share Posted October 25, 2003 Si Diego, I like my 1.2 Canon. It is soft wide open, but the main problem is the lighting in the tapas bars: makes everything in the picture yellow. At more "normal" apertures it performs quite well. The best part is that it is quite compact. Plus, at $200 it is my hazardous duty lens (read shirt tail cleaning). Roger, don't pay $300, they're availible at $200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_michel Posted October 25, 2003 Author Share Posted October 25, 2003 as for the price, it is dead mint AND complete with the very rare shade and original front thread-less UV filter as well as original caps and case. if you follow the recent prices of these things, $300 it is quite a bargain. indeed i could probably sell the filter shade caps and case for close to $300 and get the lens for free. the weak dollar has pushed dollar prices of used stuff very high (plus mint complete examples of this lens almost never come along -- you could watch ebay for a year to spot one). in any event, i couldn't have overpaid by more than $300 :>)!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 The infinity lock bugs me abit; I may remove mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djl251 Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 For 300.00 I would rather have the 50mm 1.4 Canon LTM. That is a sharp lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay_. Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 The C/V 35/1.2 price should be dropping even more now that everyone who worhips at Erwin's feet will be selling theirs or not buying one. But the cheapest Noctilux substitute is a Summicron and some fast film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsbc Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 Roger likes to know that 50mm F1.2 is worth that much - I may sell mine! I got the lens as a freebie with a Canon P (for $300), but turned out it came with filters and shades etc. It was my first ebay buy and maybe little bonuses like this would be the first step to financial ruin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 Here my 50mm F1.2 Canon cost about 240 bucks; via ebay. It has a small dent in the ring; and has a 55mm filter attached; that is almost locked on.<BR><BR>The comments that people get with this lens are mixed.<BR><BR>Usually a F2 Summicron will work with fast film; but when the light drops one may want to use faster glass. With a Noctilux; tonight I shot a event for fun at 1/25 at F1; with asa 800 Fuji print film. With a Summicron; the exposure would have been about 1/5 second; at F2. My M3 is easy to hand hold at 1/25; compared to 1/5 second; this is why I use faster glass; when one runs out of asa and light. Using a Summicron is OK; if one can use a decent exposure. I was shooting a pre Halloween event; without flash; in a darker arena area. I shot the event last year with the canon 50mm F1.2; and also a F2 summicron. The summicron is alot sharper wide open; but has either vast underexposure at 1/25 second; or blured shots that are well exposed at 1/5 second. The F1.2 Canon fills the shadows more; the Noctilux at F1 has a special quality that I like. <BR><BR>Focus with the F1.2 or F1 are both critical; I believe many of these lenses get dumped due to rangefinders being a tad off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted October 27, 2003 Share Posted October 27, 2003 Canon 50mm F1.2; Summicron latest @F2; Russian Industar-50 @F3.5 Note the Industar is quite good wide open at F3.5; the canon is soft at F1.2; the Summicron is great at F2. This means Jay would be happier with the Russian lens; over the Canon :)<BR><BR><IMG SRC=http://www.ezshots.com/members/tripods/images/tripods-211.jpg><IMG SRC=http://www.ezshots.com/members/tripods/images/tripods-209.jpg><IMG SRC=http://www.ezshots.com/members/tripods/images/tripods-210.jpg><IMG SRC=http://www.ezshots.com/members/tripods/images/tripods-213.jpg> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now