ftllens wrote:
If the 1.2 is a clean 1.2, then I expect anyone who can buy it to do so. Probably getting to the optical limits within volume constraints now without some advance step like curved sensors + metamaterial paradigm shifts.
And the f/0.7 35mm would definitely be a museum and it was! A redditor shared a photo of the Zeiss f/0.7 36.5mm setup at the Kubrick exhibit years ago and it's quite massive.
Wow, literally museum material!
Based on the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton, it is hard to produce a truly clean 35mm f/1.2 in a compact form, assuming by clean you mean very low axial CA. The Nokton has 4 aspherical surfaces.
If it's going to be over $15,000, it'll be hard (for me at least) to justify over my tried-and-true 35mm 'lux. I appreciate that going brighter than f/1.2 creates design constraints that are tough to overcome, but that kind of money for less than a stop of extra light-gathering (optical complexity notwithstanding) wouldn't make much sense to me unless there's something about the f/1.2's wide open character that is really compelling.
Still owning the CV 35/1.2 Version II which is a bit more bulky but otherwise a great performance when either f/1.2 is required for shallow DoF or in dim light situations. I have since taken more close-up shots wider open with this lens than I used it in dim light. Not one of my often used M-lenses (I prefer actually my f/2 and f/2.4 lenses at 35 mm range), but I keep it in my stable since the price/quality ratio of this lens is excellent.
"This new M lens features an f/1.2 maximum aperture, 10 elements in 5 groups (including 3 aspherical elements and a floating element), a 50cm minimum focus distance, 49mm filter thread, 5cm length, and 416g weight. Shipping starts on January 29, 2026.
Leica usually makes announcements at 9am EST. It seems that the Leica Noctilux M 35mm f/1.2 ASPH lens will be announced later today.
This post is still being updated – refresh this page for the latest version.
Leica Noctilux M 35mm f/1.2 ASPH lens sample photos:"
As a comparison to the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton IV:
Leica on the left, Voigtlander on the right
Weight: 416 g vs 300 g
Minimum focus distance: 0.5 m vs 0.5 m
Optical design: 10 elements in 5 groups vs 9 elements in 7 groups
Aspherical elements: 3 with a floating system vs 2 double sided, no floating system
Filter size: 49 mm vs 52 mm
Length: 50 mm vs 51.8 mm
I see a massive design issue that I immediately experienced with the 21 Lux design: the aperture ring is directly beside the focusing ring and appears the tactile experience will be such that it will be very difficult to distinguish between the two. The 35/1.2 also appears to lack a focusing tab (or did I miss it?). Same situation with the 21 Lux (and 24 Lux). The benefit of a focusing tab is that it keeps the focusing finger away from accidentally moving the aperture ring.
This design is not unusable with bare fingers, but also not ideal. IMO it's a disaster with gloves.
I'm also not a fan of the very short telescoping built in hood style. I much prefer the compact rectangular metal hoods that were common before the recent close focus redesigns.
But no worries, I won't be getting this lens any time soon.
rscheffler wrote:
I see a massive design issue that I immediately experienced with the 21 Lux design: the aperture ring is directly beside the focusing ring and appears the tactile experience will be such that it will be very difficult to distinguish between the two. The 35/1.2 also appears to lack a focusing tab (or did I miss it?). Same situation with the 21 Lux (and 24 Lux).
It's not unusable with bare fingers, but also not idea. It's a disaster with gloves.
I'm also not a fan of the very short telescoping built in hood style. I much prefer the compact rectangular metal hoods that were common before the recent close focus redesigns.
But no worries, I won't be getting this lens any time soon. ...Show more →
I don't think it has a focusing tab either, just like the Nokton. The proximity of the aperture and focus rings caught my attention as well. I can see myself accidentally touching the focus ring while changing aperture, which wouldn't be ideal. With gloves on, that would probably be even more noticeable. The built-in hood is here to stay for modern designs, although I also prefer the older style (square hoods)
The website no longer exists, but there was an online shop some years ago called Leica Goodies that sold a range of interesting and quite inexpensive accessories.
I acquired their "Steer" accessory and still use it with the 21 Lux. It basically wrapped around the focusing ring (or any ring it could mount to) and made it larger in diameter, thus making it easier to grip and turn.
The current alternative would probably be to buy a glue-on focusing tab (which would be hilarious for a ~$10k lens).
Below is the 'Steer' on the 21 Lux:
A closer look at the 21 reminded me why it was so difficult to focus without interfering with the aperture setting. The aperture ring is directly beside the focusing ring, like the 35/1.2, but is larger in diameter. Therefore it is very easy to accidentally touch and move when searching for the focusing ring while looking through the camera. It appears the new 35/1.2's focusing ring might be slightly smaller in diameter than the focusing ring, but it's difficult to tell. If so, it could somewhat mitigate this problem, but if it is slightly narrower, it is only minutely so. I still think it is a bit of a design oversight.
rscheffler wrote:
The website no longer exists, but there was an online shop some years ago called Leica Goodies that sold a range of interesting and quite inexpensive accessories.
I acquired their "Steer" accessory and still use it with the 21 Lux. It basically wrapped around the focusing ring (or any ring it could mount to) and made it larger in diameter, thus making it easier to grip and turn.
The current alternative would probably be to buy a glue-on focusing tab (which would be hilarious for a ~$10k lens).
A closer look at the 21 reminded me why it was so difficult to focus without interfering with the aperture setting. The aperture ring is directly beside the focusing ring, like the 35/1.2, but is larger in diameter. Therefore it is very easy to accidentally touch and move when searching for the focusing ring while looking through the camera. It appears the new 35/1.2's focusing ring might be slightly smaller in diameter than the focusing ring, but it's difficult to tell. If so, it could somewhat mitigate this problem, but if it is slightly narrower, it is only minutely so. I still think it is a bit of a design oversight....Show more →
I have the same product for my 24 Lux, it works really well.
If it's under 10k, then it will definitely end up being a looonng waiting list again like the 35 APO and 75 1.25. have to rely on the FM VIPs to maybe get one in the secondary market.
Looks to be smaller at least shorter than the Zeiss ZM 35mm f/1.4 which also took 49mm filters. I am happy with my pre-FLE Summilux Asph and the tiny pre-A but am interested in this Noctilux. I had the Nokton and thought f1.2 made a noticeable difference but it wasn’t important to my photography enough to deal with the size.
