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!

Please discuss ad nauseam, 50mm Noct vs Lux

Photojazz

Member
I know the Lux is no slouch. Pardon my lack of knowledge, but I think the 50mm is the only noctilux, is that a fact? Obviously, there are quite a few focal length summiluxes, that I do know...

For purposes of comparison, please discuss which l50mm ens you prefer, and why, and on which camera? Examples welcome! If there are specific situations where you prefer one over the other, expand? Do you use a magnifying viewfinder of some sort with noct or lux?

For a while, I will live vicariously through your shots and learn. My 35mm Cron and 90mm cron, will be my collection for a while.

Thanks.
 

bradhusick

Active member
The modern 0.95 noct is nearly identical in performance and image quality to the modern summilux from f/1.4 to f/22. The noct of course offers f/1 and f/0.95 and both are just a bit softer but only a tiny bit. The older f/1 noct is quite "dreamy" at f/1 and then sharpens up as you close down. If you have the budget for the noct, it's fantastic - like shooting with a nigh vision scope in color. It offers shooting situations that no other lens can offer. It's also great to use with an ND filter in the daytime to get super shallow depth of field. I carry 3X and 6X NDs.

The 50 lux ASPH is perhaps the sharpest 50 ever made, so you can't go wrong there either. You just get nearly 2 stops more light with the 0.95 noct.

I am sure others will chime in and there's lots of good write-ups on the web, including Erwin Puts.
 

Photojazz

Member
Thanks for the info Brad. I am very new to Leica at the rangefinder level, other than messing around at low end levels with Vlux cams and such. So, just trying to gather perspectives of those here, and personal experiences. I'll investigate some searches as well when time comes, that's not now other than learning...
 

C_R

Member
I have an 1998 Noctilux, the f:1.0. Dont have the 50 Lux but I think we can believe Erwin Puts, saying it is "the best standard Leica Lens" for him, probably one of the best lenses ever made.

http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/lenses/lenses/page57.html

I prefer the Noctilux 1.0 nevertheless, and just love the simultaneous sharp and dreamy look wide open.

Some of my shots with the Noct 1.0:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/38068178@N08/tags/noctilux/

It really shines when it comes to portrait photography, IMO.







http://www.carstenranke.com
 

bluebook

Member
Well--I am not qualified to discuss between Noct vs Lux. But I can tell you that my 50 Rigid Cron is sharper than my 50 Lux E46 at f/2.

Rigid Cron f/2 (100% crop)


Lux f/2 (100% crop)


Lux f/1.4 (100% crop)
 

Photojazz

Member
Wonderful images Carsten. Thanks for sharing those.

You know, I should not have eliminated the Cron from this discussion as well, to me a 2.0 lens is a pretty fast lens, and with Leica quality. Well...
 
Last edited:

woodyspedden

New member
I have seen many photos from the Noct and you have many creative possibilities with it.

However I did have the opportunity to demo it and for my tastes the balance of the system is way off. The M bodies were not designed for that much weight hanging out front. Consequently it is harder to work with IMHO. So I would tend towards the Lux and use software to create the dreamy looks. It seems that once you get to f 1.4 and beyond the images are super sharp from both lenses.

Woody
 

C_R

Member
Thank you :) All wide open - in this small web size you can only evaluate the quality of resampling, not the original ! I dont downsize with CS3 and bicubic, I use a program with the Lanczos algorithm, and resharpen the result in LAB color (smart sharpen for the L channel)
 
Beautiful photos Carsten. I really didn't appreciate my Noctilux until after I sold it. I made the mistake of pixel peeping at 100% on screen and couldn't appreciate the drawing of the lens. It wasn't until after I sold the lens when I made some large prints of Noctilux photos that my heart sank because thats when I knew I screwed up by selling it. Lesson learned - don't judge a photo solely on 100% screen images.

If I all my money wasn't tied up in the S system, then it would have a M9 and f0.95 Noctilux and some other summiluxes.
 

C_R

Member
Jono and Mark, thank you :)

Because this thread is about Nocti versus Lux: I find it sometimes very hard to focus when the main subject is not centered. The Noctilux has severe field curvature, and what you focus in the center is not sharp in the periphery.
The Lux is almost free of optical aberrations, so to say. A clear advantage for this lens. But when you have learnt to live with the Nocti´s shortcomings it is a wonderful lens
 

Photojazz

Member
Carsten, this is a serious concern I have for use of the extremely thin depth of field with the noctilux on rangefinder. Nailing focus of anything centered would be hard enough but off center frame, I am worried it could be a crap shoot. You obviously are doing very well with it.

I am not sure I can ever justify the cost of the new noctilux. 10 grand, well, that's not small change. I did see a used one priced less. Probably very difficult to find though. When I see what I can get with a 1K 90mm Cron, it makes justification that much harder. yes, two completely different animals, I know.

Let me ask you this, if you are shooting a portrait off center, can you for purposes of framing center frame focal point, then shift camera back to original framing, how close are you at that point to correct focus? I've tried this approach a little bit.

Bluebook, thanks for the comparison, if I'd thought, I'd added Cron to original comparison, but I cannot edit it now of course. (bummer)

Consider your Cron comparison quite welcome here... I can immediately see that the Cron's sharpness center frame is a pretty fair tradeoff for the less creamy bokeh for many subjects. that's not saying the lux isn't great either, for some subjects, it's characteristics would be very nice indeed. Tough quandry for sure if one wants 1 lens only at focal range. But I am beginning to see, that may not be ideal.
 

bradhusick

Active member
The best thing to do is find someone nearby with a Noct and give it a try. It has a nearly legendary status and that's not due entirely to its astronomical price. That said, the 50 lux asph is a legendary lens itself and is about 1/3 the price of the Noct.
 

Photojazz

Member
Thanks Brad, unfortunately, I don't know any Leica fans in my area, it's a less than stellar photographic community on high end and shops. Mark is pretty close, a couple of hours away, but he has an S, not an M cough...
 

robsteve

Subscriber
The best thing to do is find someone nearby with a Noct and give it a try. It has a nearly legendary status and that's not due entirely to its astronomical price. That said, the 50 lux asph is a legendary lens itself and is about 1/3 the price of the Noct.
Brad has probably summed it up better than I could in his post above.

You don't mention whether your current lenses are the current generation or not, or if you are referring to the current 50mm ASPH. If you have the current 35mm ASPH and 90mm APO, you would probably be happy with a 50mm Summilux ASPH. An older Noctilux would probably be disappointing if you are into pixel peeping or if you rangefinder is not spot on.

As Carsten has shown above, with accurate focus and the benefits of digital processing, the older Noctilux can produce some stunning images.

Over the years when asked the question about Noctilux or Summilux, I have replied I always preferred to have two 50mm lenses, the 50mm Summicron and then the Noctilux when I need the speed. If you can have only one, you probably want to just get the 50mm Summilux ASPH, which on it own gives stunning image quality. The better higher ISO performance of the M9 almost negates the higher speed of the Noctilux. Unless you really need the speed or the artistic drawing of the Noctilux, the Summilux ASPH is the way to go.

Here are a couple of my M8 Noctilux shots. The first two are a demonstration of how sharp it can be at F1 when focused properly and shot a low ISO (160). This are also near the close focus limit, where the lens is its least sharp. Sharpening courtesy of Jack Flesher's sharpening actions. I found that Noctilux images are best processed with a lower contrast and then using Jacks's Local Contrast sharpening action to create the sharpness and contrast. Very little if any of the Detail sharpening action is used.






If you click on this link it will bring up a gallery image that you then click on to get a very large image to show that at further distances the Noctilux is quite sharp and holds its contrast when shot into stadium lights.



Robert
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
And some folks like the look of the Noct.
Me, I strongly prefer the look of the Lux.
-bob
 
Top