The flaring here is interesting, and honestly it looks a bit off to me.
I would normally expect the flare to project in the opposite direction relative to the light source, but this pattern seems reversed from what I’d anticipate. I haven’t personally shot the 75 Noct, so I can’t say definitively, but the behavior doesn’t look normal to my eyes.
It could be something with element alignment or an internal reflection issue, but at this price point I’d at least want it checked. If this were my copy, I’d be a little concerned.
I would expect flare not as pronounced as this but in this direction-
Looking in the first photo at the whirl effect in the lower two corners, I think it could also derive from a decentered lens element. Something is definitely off here. If it was a used lens you got, it might have been dropped or something.
retrofocus wrote:
Looking in the first photo at the whirl effect in the lower two corners, I think it could also derive from a decentered lens element. Something is definitely off here. If it was a used lens you got, it might have been dropped or something.
thanks for the feedback guys. i bought it used and it was just CLA'd in last month. I had a suspicion that it wasn't fully up to standards once I received it. But after seeing this strange cast, which is in almost every backlit photo, I figured something was truly wrong.
Unfortunately I'm just going to return it so I can get out of the middle of whatever the issue is. That's way too much money to spend on a dysfunctional lens.
luminorsubm wrote:
thanks for the feedback guys. i bought it used and it was just CLA'd in last month. I had a suspicion that it wasn't fully up to standards once I received it. But after seeing this strange cast, which is in almost every backlit photo, I figured something was truly wrong.
Unfortunately I'm just going to return it so I can get out of the middle of whatever the issue is. That's way too much money to spend on a dysfunctional lens.
Wouldn't be surprised if it was sold exactly for this reason.....avoiding time+money needed for repair. Let somebody else taking care of it who hopefully doesn't see the defect soon.....as usual. You got a lemon.
Desmolicious wrote:
They do hand sign those cute little quality inspection cards. That counts for something, right?
Yeah but I think that they account for 10% of the price because a Leica branded inspection card is a collectible.
Well, at least, the Noctilux does not scratches film
pmeheut wrote:
Yeah but I think that they account for 10% of the price because a Leica branded inspection card is a collectible.
Well, at least, the Noctilux does not scratches film
I get one film scratching comment a week, and it’s only Monday so will not use it up yet.
RustyRus wrote:
The flaring here is interesting, and honestly it looks a bit off to me.
I would normally expect the flare to project in the opposite direction relative to the light source, but this pattern seems reversed from what I’d anticipate. I haven’t personally shot the 75 Noct, so I can’t say definitively, but the behavior doesn’t look normal to my eyes.
It could be something with element alignment or an internal reflection issue, but at this price point I’d at least want it checked. If this were my copy, I’d be a little concerned.
I would expect flare not as pronounced as this but in this direction- ...Show more →
Your example is also what I would expect, but I was just browsing Bastian's review of the VM 50/1.0 and its 'rainbow' flare characteristics are similar in shape/direction to that posted by the OP with the 75/1.25.
That's not to say that the Noctilux's flare isn't concerning. A lot of that flare is quite strange.
