So, I was fortunate to find a new Noctilux in stock, and I jumped on it. Today I did a comparison of the Noctilux to the Voigtlander f/1.1 in my front yard. It's not a scientific test, but it is a controlled test. I was a little over a meter from the brick pillar in the shots. Note that the right side of the images is OOF at a distance; this was intentional to demonstrate differences in bokeh.
Here is a comparison image made of crops from both lenses. The best thing to do is select "All sizes" from above the image, then choose "Original" and look at the huge file in detail.
The Nokton holds up amazingly well, considering it costs almost 1/10th. The Leica appears to have slightly more resolution wide open for a couple of stops, and the boke is smoother, which some might prefer (including me). Other than that, there really isn't much difference.
How about some other tests, like focusing close with tree branches against a bright sky in the background, and perhaps some portrait shots. A Christmas tree in the background of something, with all its lights on might also be interesting.
carstenw wrote:
The Nokton holds up amazingly well, considering it costs almost 1/10th. The Leica appears to have slightly more resolution wide open for a couple of stops, and the boke is smoother, which some might prefer (including me). Other than that, there really isn't much difference.
How about some other tests, like focusing close with tree branches against a bright sky in the background, and perhaps some portrait shots. A Christmas tree in the background of something, with all its lights on might also be interesting.
Indeed, my observations exactly. I will try to do a few more tests this weekend, but I have decided that the Nokton will go to offset some of the expense of my Noctilux.
Thanks for posting these. Fascinating to go through them and compare.
I like the look of the Leica below f/4, which is where this lens would get most of its use.
But have to admit that I likely only prefer the Leica as I can see it side by side with the Nokton - it really looks pretty good and on its own would likely be just fine.
Yakim Peled wrote:
IMHO the Leica is disappointing. For 10K I'd expect more.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Yakim, could you elaborate on what "more" this lens could give and what was disapointing in it? IMHO I like the Nokt better, but not 10X better. \
Jhapeman, thanks for the test, I have been keeping my eye on the CV since it was anounced; is the difference in size and weight between the two siginificant to choose one over the other on that aspect aloone?
Yes, the Voigtlander is definitely a great deal. To be honest, I was hoping the Leica would be a bit sharper or otherwise pack a bit more punch to make it easier to swallow the price tag.
As for size and weight, the Nokton is definitely smaller and more manageable. Mind you, its still a huge lens compared to most M-mount lenses, but its substantially smaller and lighter than the Noctilux. Size and weight:
On my copies, the focus ring of the Nokton is also much smoother. BTW, focus success with these lenses is much higher if you use the 1.4x magnifier. You lose some of the wider view of the rangefinder field, but you can get precise focusing to hit the narrow DOF just right.
dasrocket wrote:
Yakim, could you elaborate on what "more" this lens could give and what was disapointing in it? IMHO I like the Nokt better, but not 10X better.
I'd expect more sharpness in the edges and less CA when the lens is wide open. And to think this is on M8, not M9.....
This puzzles me a little. One of the advantages of shooting at a wider aperture is to achieve a narrower DOF. If you upgraded your M8.2 to an M9, all your lenses would be 'upgraded' in the same way - you would achieve a more blurred background with the same lenses just by increasing sensor size and getting a little closer to your subject to achieve the same framing.
If resolution of the lens is important to you, then why not upgrade your sensor by getting the M9 and making the most of all your lenses? Perhaps you have one on order but if not, it seems odd to me to spend that much on one lens rather than upgrading to the M9.
Finally, before you make any final decisions about which lens to keep, why not test them on a full-frame sensor (assuming you will upgrade eventually). There might be a surprise waiting in the corners which the M8.2 missed.
foto-z, nothing to be puzzled about. I'd love an M9 right now, but they are impossible to find and there are LONG waiting lists. Also, RF lenses are a bit more limited than SLR lenses due to the close-focus restrictions of the RF itself. Generally you are going to be restricted to either 1m or 0.7m close focus.
I got the 50/0.95 not just for narrow DOF, but also for low-light shooting indoors and at night. In that case its not about background blur at all.
Finally, I didn't see any value in waiting until the M9 finally came to decide on which lens to keep. The sharpness of the lens on center--which matters most to me--and the bokeh are not going to change with sensor size. Also, I don't see how the FF will reveal any new items or trends that aren't already quite obvious in the corners of the 1.3x crop of the M8.2. I tend not to get consumed with far-corner performance on FF anyway; when shooting wide open in real-world conditions, the odds of the corners being in the plane of focus as my subject are vanishingly small.
