Jono you ask a great question ... and probably the only question that matters after all of the quibbling about this and that. Bottom line is that I like lenses that I can't wait to put on the camera again and again ... lenses that surprise me over and over again because they reveal subtle nuances that make me smile (extremely unscientific and unmeasurable for sure).
I felt it as soon as I looked at my first images from the 75lux/combination ... but, am uncertain as to whether or not I feel it with the CV50. The lens is a fantastic bargain, sharp as can be wide open and stopped down. But, in some respects, I feel rather take-it-or-leave-it about the lens. I like my lenses to have a little more micro-contrast and saturation and the CV50 just leaves me a little cold.
Perhaps I have to spend more time with it, bump up the contrast and saturation to suit my taste in post processing ... or forget how my Noctilux images made me feel before I sold it several years ago.
I think your observations are spot on Kurt. This is a great low light lens to extend usage of a M8 or M9 into lower ambient light situations ... and as such is a terrific bargain ... more than worth the money.
Yet it feels like there is something missing ... and your micro contrast observation may well be it.
When I look at shots done either with the Nocti 1.0, 0.95 or 75/1.4 the OOF areas have some subtile shaped character to them ... and this is also true for the front OOF areas that can be just as important as what's going on behind the subject.
When I look at your VC shots (and those from the VC 35/1.2 I used to have), the OOF areas tend to feel a bit like Photoshop blur was used ... they appear a bit featureless. It's all quite subtile, but if subtlety is what shakes your tree, you'll instinctively know when it's missing. Personally, I doubt any processing technique is going to change that.
-Marc