The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Leica Noctilux 0.95 Unplugged

ashwinrao1

Active member
Kristian, pardon my language, but these are bleepin' fabulous...Truly amazing, impressive, and most importantly, inspiring work. Leica should hire you to promo this lens, but heck, they can't make enough as is. I seem to remember you selling this lens & your M9, but do you have it/them back now?
 

leicashot

New member
Kristian, pardon my language, but these are bleepin' fabulous...Truly amazing, impressive, and most importantly, inspiring work. Leica should hire you to promo this lens, but heck, they can't make enough as is. I seem to remember you selling this lens & your M9, but do you have it/them back now?
Thanks Ashwin, I now have a M9-P and my favourite 35/1.2 so I'm back in the game. I can't believe I went about 6 months without a Leica M for the first (and only) time in 18 years of using M.

I doubt Leica would ever hire me, they have enough people helping them already, plus they kinda hate me over on the Leica forum....which is fine by me.

Hope you're well mate, and I take it you're still loving and using yours all the time!?
 

NB23

New member
All very nice.
But many of these could have been shot with the f1 Version, as well as the Nokton f1.1 and they would be the same.

You probably are trying too hard to oversell the f0.95.
 

leicashot

New member
All very nice.
But many of these could have been shot with the f1 Version, as well as the Nokton f1.1 and they would be the same.

You probably are trying too hard to oversell the f0.95.
You just don't give up do you?!

These pics could have been taken with any lens and looked great, but they certainly would NOT have looked the same...or maybe better if 'you' took the pictures?

Now thats the last bit of attention you're getting from me.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
I just saw this thread and the pictures - I must say I am overwhelmed. As an owner of a 1.0 Nocti I am now desperately looking for the 0.95 version. This lens in the right hands really rocks!
 

GMB

Active member
I just saw this thread and the pictures - I must say I am overwhelmed. As an owner of a 1.0 Nocti I am now desperately looking for the 0.95 version. This lens in the right hands really rocks!
I had more or less the same reaction. These are really great shots. Congratulations to the photographer who took them. What I find most interesting is the broad range of the shots that show the qualities of the 0.95.

I also agree that the same shots could not NOT have been taken with the f1 (which I own), notithstanding the fact that shots with the model, the light, and the location with the f1 or the LUX 75, or the [fill in your favorite lens] would have been great as well.

And finally, I do not for a second have the illusion that if I were to "upgrade" to the 0.95 I would be able to post something similary any time soon.

Anyway, I most inspiring thread and thanks to leicashoot for posting them.

Georg
 

jonoslack

Active member
Peter, Georg
Sure, these shots would have looked different with the f1 Nocti - but the wide open ones wouldn't have looked that different, and the stopped down shots wouldn't have looked that different from a 50 'lux asph.
Sure - there are differences between the f1 Nocti and the f0.95 wide open (I've had both),and stopped down the 0.95 is much much better . . . but stopped down you may as well use a 50 'lux.

these shots are surely what they are because of Kristian's skills, not because of the difference between the f1 and the f0.95 nocti (indeed there's plenty who'd say that the older lens has more character (not me however)).
 

leicashot

New member
Peter, Georg
Sure, these shots would have looked different with the f1 Nocti - but the wide open ones wouldn't have looked that different, and the stopped down shots wouldn't have looked that different from a 50 'lux asph.
Sure - there are differences between the f1 Nocti and the f0.95 wide open (I've had both),and stopped down the 0.95 is much much better . . . but stopped down you may as well use a 50 'lux.

these shots are surely what they are because of Kristian's skills, not because of the difference between the f1 and the f0.95 nocti (indeed there's plenty who'd say that the older lens has more character (not me however)).
Jono, I agree that these aren't better because I used a 0.95 over an f/1. They would have been just as nice, only slightly softer, shooting wide open. But I believe the look would have been very different shot with the f/1 and that was also a strong point I made. The f/1 signature wide open is vastly different to the 0.95. If it wasn't any different, it's better to own the f/1 and Summicron for less than a Noct 0.95.

The f/1 creates a lot of distortion in the out of focus areas and the added extra vignetting can create a surreal look, swirly in some situations when tilting down or up, especially with foliage. The 0.95 is highly corrected and minimal in this area, ensuring that out of focus objects are represented accurately. With the f/1 you can almost shoot anything and make it look a little artsy, but not so with the 0.95. Just look and compare Flickr images from both lenses and you can see an immediate difference.

The f/1 has the 'Noct' look whereas the 0.95 is really just a faster Summilux ASPH with more isolating ability. That's probably the best way to describe the difference, IMHO :)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Peter, Georg
Sure, these shots would have looked different with the f1 Nocti - but the wide open ones wouldn't have looked that different, and the stopped down shots wouldn't have looked that different from a 50 'lux asph.
Sure - there are differences between the f1 Nocti and the f0.95 wide open (I've had both),and stopped down the 0.95 is much much better . . . but stopped down you may as well use a 50 'lux.

these shots are surely what they are because of Kristian's skills, not because of the difference between the f1 and the f0.95 nocti (indeed there's plenty who'd say that the older lens has more character (not me however)).
As I said Jono - if the 0.95 is in the right hands it is a winner.

But I also assume tat the lack of focus shift, which can be a pain in the 1.0 version, is contributing to the number of keepers.

So this combination is a winner!

WRT character: if people define character as a combination of optical flaws, then this is up to their liking. I for me (as you) prefer best and most advanced state of the art optical design and less flaws (character) resulting from this ;)
 

leicashot

New member
As I said Jono - if the 0.95 is in the right hands it is a winner.

But I also assume tat the lack of focus shift, which can be a pain in the 1.0 version, is contributing to the number of keepers.

So this combination is a winner!

WRT character: if people define character as a combination of optical flaws, then this is up to their liking. I for me (as you) prefer best and most advanced state of the art optical design and less flaws (character) resulting from this ;)
Yes the 0.95 has little 'character'. What people may see as character is just the effects of super shallow depth of field. This is where the f/1 shines as it's optical flaws are what it's so famous for.

The 0.95 although improved optically is necessarily better. Those that love the f/1 for it's character may be disappointed when using this lens. It really does take more work to make images 'pop' than using the f/1. Also, i might add that the 0.95 is very difficult to make flare. Some of the images above suffer from internal reflections caused by the use of a filter, not from sun flare. Also, I compared a high quality MRC filter from B+W and Leica and both are almost identical when shooting into the light, in the way they cause internal reflections. This is evident in the shot above with the girl in pink sitting on the pool table.
 

NB23

New member
Can you explain why all these sets show a drastic difference in image character between them?

The fist set certainly looks like if it was shot with the f1 version (according to its mythical internet explanation) while posts #3, 4 and 5 really look like Nokton shots ("clinical" according to the internet myths).

I will have to believe you when you say that all were shot with the same lens. But there is clearly a difference in character between the shots which really contradicts what you are trying to say about the f0.95. Can you explain why?
 

leicashot

New member
Can you explain why all these sets show a drastic difference in image character between them?

The fist set certainly looks like if it was shot with the f1 version (according to its mythical internet explanation) while posts #3, 4 and 5 really look like Nokton shots ("clinical" according to the internet myths).

I will have to believe you when you say that all were shot with the same lens. But there is clearly a difference in character between the shots which really contradicts what you are trying to say about the f0.95. Can you explain why?
This I can respond to. The first set of shots were shot in the rain, literally. The inside shots , especially side on to the horse were taken through bars in a horse stall, creating a slightly softer effect. Thats pretty much it.

No contradiction taking place, just different conditions to which the lens is operating as normal. The end results are merely an effect of the conditions, not the lens changing character.
 

ashwinrao1

Active member
Thanks Ashwin, I now have a M9-P and my favourite 35/1.2 so I'm back in the game. I can't believe I went about 6 months without a Leica M for the first (and only) time in 18 years of using M.

I doubt Leica would ever hire me, they have enough people helping them already, plus they kinda hate me over on the Leica forum....which is fine by me.

Hope you're well mate, and I take it you're still loving and using yours all the time!?
Oh, Kristian...your images iwth that Nokton tempted me such that I found a chrome one...actually, I am the original owner, but the 2nd owner sold it back to me....So now I have this glorious lens, and time will tell if I can make it sing anywhere close to what you have done with it!

Best,
Ashwin
 

leicashot

New member
Great to hear Ashwin. Keep in mind it isn't as sharp or contrasty wide open as the Summilux ASPH but the rendering will hook you!

You are more than capable enough to make this lens sing, so go take her to school!
 

D&A

Well-known member
+1 to both of Kristian's statements! I would just add that although one can get some interesting shots (and rendering as Kristian mentioned) with the VC 35mm f1.2 shot wide open, there is a significant increase in sharpness and contrast, simply by stopping down to f1.4 . It's at that aperture that the lens is somewhat of a closer match to the 35mm f1.4 Lux asph (except where it places the subject within the depth of field), in comparison to shots taken with it at f1.2. The lens is also fairly affected by the quality and type of light when used at the wider apertures...and in my opinion, uts significantly more so than either version of the 35mm f1.4 Lux asph lenses. So this too will have an impact on images taken with it.

Dave (D&A)
 
Last edited:

ashwinrao1

Active member
Thanks, Kristian, you are too kind. I am looking forward to seeing a new rendition. Bokeh seems a bit different, more classic, and I am considering pairing this part time with my rigid cron 50 for a nice chrome kit ;).

Dave, good to hear, and thanks for the advie. Given that I have the lovely 35 lux FLE II, I will have a nice comparison, and hope to use the lens wide open and at 1.4, so here's to hoping that my copy sings at those focal lengths. My primary use will be low light work, so sharpness may not be as much of an issue in those conditions....

Thanks again, guys!
 
Top