philip_pj wrote:
63.3 degrees AOV gives us 35.09mm for Noct 35/1.2, compared with 54.7 degrees 41.82mm for the CV '40'mm f1.2, by my calc s/w anyway. 35/2 APO is a true 35.65mm; Viltrox's 35/1.2 (E/Z) is a true 34.86. All based on manufacturer data.
rsolti13, what apertures did you use for the Noct images in your series at 16/6 and 16/12, pls?
16/16 sees the 35/2 APO rush off the focal plane (left side), fast fade is very common with APOs. That's the smooth steady fade Leica re talking about. Less prone to UV too, more vibrant and slightly warmer colors.
You're a more patient customer than me! I don't know where you're based but in the UK and EU in the first 30 days the item either works as described or can be exchanged for a new one or full refund at the customers preference. So for me, they would either need to give me a loan copy while mine was being recalibrated, exchange or my money back.
Clearly that does depend on supply but it doesn't seem too bad over here at the moment.
I agree with your overall analysis however in general.
MidlandsInnit wrote:
You're a more patient customer than me! I don't know where you're based but in the UK and EU in the first 30 days the item either works as described or can be exchanged for a new one or full refund at the customers preference. So for me, they would either need to give me a loan copy while mine was being recalibrated, exchange or my money back.
Clearly that does depend on supply but it doesn't seem too bad over here at the moment.
I agree with your overall analysis however in general.
Normally I would, but it’s almost impossible to find at the moment. In talking with another user that has the Noctilux, their build date was 70 days after mine, their serial number is exactly 43 after mine. 43 copies made in 70 days. Good luck finding a replacement for a while
I would love to see a heads to head with the zeiss distagon. I know there is that 1.4 vs 1.2 but I am not one who believes there is much difference in bokeh between the two when subject is close.
If I had tbe noctilux I would do it but since I don't, if there is a respected fm member that has one, I am willing to send my distagon for a few days so you can compare.
Im guessing if it's favorable you may return the noctilux if within return period after comparing the two.
😆😆😆
Jorge Torralba wrote:
I would love to see a heads to head with the zeiss distagon. I know there is that 1.4 vs 1.2 but I am not one who believes there is much difference in bokeh between the two when subject is close.
If I had tbe noctilux I would do it but since I don't, if there is a respected fm member that has one, I am willing to send my distagon for a few days so you can compare.
Im guessing if it's favorable you may return the noctilux if within return period after comparing the two.
😆😆😆
I understand where you’re coming from and I also have the Zeiss and the fourth version of the 35mm Nokton. I just canceled my order for the Noctilux because I realized that if I have to work hard at deciding which one is the better lens; for almost $10,000 I’m willing to keep the one that comes out as the loser. If I used the fast 35mm lenses that I have as a priority over my APO and f/3.5 Color-Skopar, then a more thorough consideration would be reasonable, but this isn’t the case.
bwcolor wrote:
I understand where you’re coming from and I also have the Zeiss and the fourth version of the 35mm Nokton. I just canceled my order for the Noctilux because I realized that if I have to work hard at deciding which one is the better lens; for almost $10,000 I’m willing to keep the one that comes out as the loser. If I used the fast 35mm lenses that I have as a priority over my APO and f/3.5 Color-Skopar, then a more thorough consideration would be reasonable, but this isn’t the case.
A very reasoned approach. I couldn't agree more on the Color-Skopar f/3.5. That is a really great lens with an unmatched size to performance ratio.
for the time being I've decided on a different direction for initially wanting the nocti 35. To me and admittedly I could be wrong, from 2 and beyond I think the nocti 35 is basically just like my cron 35 APO, and has zero character/vintage look compared to my 35 steel rim reissue (or even my lux 50 pre asph v2). I was only interested in the nocti 35 for even less depth of field and greater subject separation from background by shooting f1.2.
So just for fun I ordered the Voigt 40/1.2 version 2 that Fred speaks highly of, thinking it may scratch that itch for a f1.2. He says it has good center sharpness wide open (as compared to the Voigt 35/1.2) which is what I've been looking for, and of course it's way smaller/lighter than the nocti 35. It's arriving Wednesday and I'll see how I like it especially low light conditions. And if I don't love it I'll get rid of it.
If I didn't already have the cron 35 APO, then for sure I'd get the 35 nocti.
brick33308 wrote:
for the time being I've decided on a different direction for initially wanting the nocti 35. To me and admittedly I could be wrong, from 2 and beyond I think the nocti 35 is basically just like my cron 35 APO, and has zero character/vintage look compared to my 35 steel rim reissue (or even my lux 50 pre asph v2). I was only interested in the nocti 35 for even less depth of field and greater subject separation from background by shooting f1.2.
So just for fun I ordered the Voigt 40/1.2 version 2 that Fred speaks highly of, thinking it may scratch that itch for a f1.2. He says it has good center sharpness wide open (as compared to the Voigt 35/1.2) which is what I've been looking for, and of course it's way smaller/lighter than the nocti 35. It's arriving Wednesday and I'll see how I like it especially low light conditions. And if I don't love it I'll get rid of it.
If I didn't already have the cron 35 APO, then for sure I'd get the 35 nocti....Show more →
If you want to feel good about your decision, search for this lens on Matt Osborne’s feed on Flickr, or find it via his YouTube review of the lens. His portraits with the lens will reassure you that this lens can be very sharp when at f/1.2-1.4.
Go to his main Flickr page and search from there using the terms: 35mm Nokton v3
Jorge Torralba wrote:
I would love to see a heads to head with the zeiss distagon. I know there is that 1.4 vs 1.2 but I am not one who believes there is much difference in bokeh between the two when subject is close.
If I had tbe noctilux I would do it but since I don't, if there is a respected fm member that has one, I am willing to send my distagon for a few days so you can compare.
Im guessing if it's favorable you may return the noctilux if within return period after comparing the two.
😆😆😆
I really like the Distagon rendering, but like most 3rd party lenses, the feel and build of native Leica lenses is a big part of the experience. The Zeiss is large and also has this odd barrel design like rest of the Zeiss M line. It just doesn't feel harmonious mounted on the M body.
bwcolor wrote:
If you want to feel good about your decision, search for this lens on Matt Osborne’s feed on Flickr, or find it via his YouTube review of the lens. His portraits with the lens will reassure you that this lens can be very sharp when at f/1.2-1.4.
Go to his main Flickr page and search from there using the terms: 35mm Nokton v3
I agree with him, the 35 is an excellent lens. I own both of the new 35 & 40 (V4 & V2 respectively) Nokton lenses and for my small sample size, the 35 is as sharp or sharper across the frame and has less fringing. I also own the E mount 40 and it is a slightly worse performer than the two newer M mount lenses, on the respective systems (A1 & M11).
Got mine, but have not yet cut the seal on the box. Deciding if I keep it or send it back. I have 2-3 days to make my mind up.
I have the VM 35/1.2. Do I need the Leica variety is the question? Is this lens so very rare that it might become a true collectors lens? They cannot make them very fast it seems- from mid November to end of January.
That said, I do not buy lenses because they might become collecters pieces. I buy lenses to use with the exception of one lens I own.
stgrove wrote:
Got mine, but have not yet cut the seal on the box. Deciding if I keep it or send it back. I have 2-3 days to make my mind up.
I have the VM 35/1.2. Do I need the Leica variety is the question? Is this lens so very rare that it might become a true collectors lens? They cannot make them very fast it seems- from mid November to end of January.
That said, I do not buy lenses because they might become collecters pieces. I buy lenses to use with the exception of one lens I own.
Very wise approach. The Leica 35/1.2 Noct is a regular production lens, so it's very unlikely to become a true collectible. Leica can make more, even if production is slow. -- That said, Leica will almost certainly release special editions of this lens down the road.
A good reality check is the Leica 50/2 Summicron APO. The silver version retails north of $10k, yet one recently sold here on FM for around $4k. That tells you everything about how "collectible" modern regular production lenses tend to be once the initial hype fades...So the right reason to keep it is simple. Buy it if you love the performance, the correction, the rendering, and you actually want to use it.
Well put Fred. More and more that is my take as I am liking older lenses that seem way less clinical than the more modern lenses. Some have appreciated considerably, but the main purpose of owning a lens is to use it.
Some very good lenses I own seem to go back on the camera more than the recent releases made by any M lens manufacturing company.
Are you allowed to open the seal and see if it has any calibration issues? If it doesn't front/back focus and you don't decide to keep it, then it would be snatched up quickly on the marketplace here.
I still don't really understand how the noctilux actually draws to be honest. It just takes a couple of waist-up portrait shots at a few different apertures in an average setting like a kitchen and without any carefully orchestrated lighting - but after all these initial preview/reviews I still don't really know.
With the relatively similar focal length MF glass that I have - Distagon 35/1.4 and 40/1.2 Nokton - there is a significant difference in the final image for those sorts of shots.
The nokton (40 E mount - I don't have experience with the 35 unfortunately) gives a sharp, smooth and very clean look. It looks more realistic than the distagon. Nothing fancy, just solid and clean. Very smooth background. When the subject matter is brilliant, this is a nice choice for a quality, clean, realistic photo. When the subject/pose/lighting isn't quite as good, it might be a bit boring but still clean and good quality.
The distagon isn't clean, but it is sharp. The background blur isn't always smooth but the images have style to them. There's something more there, it does some heavy lifting and often produces a really appealing result. It's very snazzy and I think that's the perfect word for it.
Sometimes you may want to tidy up a little in the background - but it's a pretty easy fix in most of the shots I've taken so far where I noticed something distracting, and worth the small effort when required.
There isn't a chance in hell that I'd pay $10K for a lens without knowing exactly what I'm getting, but I understand people that are excited to find out for themselves and can afford to. Some people may feel that way about the distagon or nokton, and I understand it and I certainly found out a lot more after picking them up. Different tolerances for different folk.
But it's around (or possibly even more) than the combined value of all my current manual focus lenses (at the prices I got them) which provide so much variety, different focal lengths, purposes, enjoyment.
I'd want to know exactly where it sits. And even then xD. So I don't blame you at all for not cutting it open yet. Might be some self-preservation kicking in Which I could also do with some more of after last year's wild lens adventure joyride.
Maybe less smooth than the nokton, a little more than the distagon, some of the snazzle, some of the cleanness? Like a bit of the good parts of both..which does sound pretty good. But I don't know what I'm talking about so..
stgrove wrote:
On the way back. If you break a seal it is used.
I've never returned a new Leica lens or body to a Leica store. Once it's opened, they won't give you a full refund? Thinking back, I bought the Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux Steel Rim brand new, and the focus rotation was sticky and the rangefinder wasn't aligned. I had to send it all the way to Leica Germany...definitely a rough experience.After almost a month, they gave me a new one which was perfect though.
Which I could also do with some more of after last year's wild lens adventure joyride.