Perhaps the time has come to finally take the plunge on a 50mm Noctilux, either an F1.0 v3 or v4 or the F0.95. But I keep having this recurring thought that I'm insane for spending that kind of money on a lens, especially one with as many "flaws" as a Noctilux.
I've tried/owned just about every other Leica 50 and 35 except the APOs and have consistently wanted to try a Noctilux, particularly the F1.0 variant. But I worry that the lack of sharpness will leave me wanting, as I'm using it on modern digital (Leica SL3-S) as well as film (Leica MP). For film, I'm obviously less worried. But with digital, will I be disappointed? Would I be happier with a more modern lens like the 50 Summicron APO that will give me perfect sharpness? For anyone that's used a Noctilux on digital, are the results satisfying or is the lack of sharpness/contrast a distraction?
If you're willing to put an effort to using them, why not? Often Noctiluxes don't get too much use on M-bodies after the initial honeymoon period because of larger size and weight, but you have an SL body, so should work well. Both f0.95 and f1 v4, the ones I have experience with on digital M, are lovely and render differently but beautifully. Get them used and sell them after 6 months or so if you don't like them, consider the difference as education fee.
jigesh wrote:
If you're willing to put an effort to using them, why not? Often Noctiluxes don't get too much use on M-bodies after the initial honeymoon period because of larger size and weight, but you have an SL body, so should work well. Both f0.95 and f1 v4, the ones I have experience with on digital M, are lovely and render differently but beautifully. Get them used and sell them after 6 months or so if you don't like them, consider the difference as education fee.
These were some of my additional thoughts exactly! Okay, good to know I'm on the right track. Thank you.
I have a 0.95, as well as the 1966 replica of LLL, I like them both and when I acquired both there was a honeymoon period where I overused the lens, especially the 0.95 because of its cost to get my use of it. It takes a while and I think most get disappointed when they realize it is not a particularly good general use lens, it is special and can be amazing when the right subjects and light are chosen. People and portraits of course, but it is also a great lens for flowers and plants, scenery and such not so great, if I am going to stop to way down why bother using it. So in the drawer it goes and it comes out less frequently rather then trying to get my use out of expensive lens. I guess I can view it as if I had a really exotic car I could drive it to the grocery store and not exceed 20-25 mph but do I really want to get it out of the garage for that. The lens is exotic, it can be wonderful to melt the background for the right subject, it is massive on a M, and it is best to treat it as special and take it out for the right reasons and use a summicron or summilux or something as that general lens. On the flip side a 50 apo summicron is the most general wonderful lens I have not only small but it is a lens for mostly all purposes except for when the 0.95 is special.
finnphotos wrote:
Perhaps the time has come to finally take the plunge on a 50mm Noctilux, either an F1.0 v3 or v4 or the F0.95. But I keep having this recurring thought that I'm insane for spending that kind of money on a lens, especially one with as many "flaws" as a Noctilux.
I've tried/owned just about every other Leica 50 and 35 except the APOs and have consistently wanted to try a Noctilux, particularly the F1.0 variant. But I worry that the lack of sharpness will leave me wanting, as I'm using it on modern digital (Leica SL3-S) as well as film (Leica MP). For film, I'm obviously less worried. But with digital, will I be disappointed? Would I be happier with a more modern lens like the 50 Summicron APO that will give me perfect sharpness? For anyone that's used a Noctilux on digital, are the results satisfying or is the lack of sharpness/contrast a distraction?...Show more →
Entry Price = Exit Price
Buy a Noctilux for $6K. Shoot with it for a month, or a year. Sell it for $6K.
I've owned the 35 f/1.2, the 50 f/1.2, the 50 f/1.0 (V4, my least favorite), and the 50 f/0.95. In most cases I kept them for years, and trying all four cost me maybe $300 total.
If what you pay to get in equals what you get when you get out, why wouldn't you try it?
Buy a Noctilux for $6K. Shoot with it for a month, or a year. Sell it for $6K.
I've owned the 35 f/1.2, the 50 f/1.2, the 50 f/1.0 (V4, my least favorite), and the 50 f/0.95. In most cases I kept them for years, and trying all four cost me maybe $300 total.
If what you pay to get in equals what you get when you get out, why wouldn't you try it?
Excellent point. Interested why the 1.0 was your least favorite? I've often heard the opposite.
Also, I should have bought your copy when you listed it the other day. I saw it sold already!
finnphotos wrote:
Perhaps the time has come to finally take the plunge on a 50mm Noctilux, either an F1.0 v3 or v4 or the F0.95. But I keep having this recurring thought that I'm insane for spending that kind of money on a lens, especially one with as many "flaws" as a Noctilux.
I've tried/owned just about every other Leica 50 and 35 except the APOs and have consistently wanted to try a Noctilux, particularly the F1.0 variant. But I worry that the lack of sharpness will leave me wanting, as I'm using it on modern digital (Leica SL3-S) as well as film (Leica MP). For film, I'm obviously less worried. But with digital, will I be disappointed? Would I be happier with a more modern lens like the 50 Summicron APO that will give me perfect sharpness? For anyone that's used a Noctilux on digital, are the results satisfying or is the lack of sharpness/contrast a distraction?...Show more →
I have used the Noct 50/1 extensively on digital. If you are happy with the lens depends entirely on your taste. Given the lenses you have mentioned, I do not think you will be happy.
Personally, it is my first or second favorite lens of all time. But I don’t have high expectations (at all) for well corrected glass Not do I prefer modern lens’ draws unlike most of the people here on FM.
The Noct 50/1 offers surprisingly high contrast and sharpness (centrally at f1) but only relative to older lenses. Against modern glass it’s not impressive.
Everybody makes decisions differently, but I personally don’t care how many flaws or how well-corrected a lens is, I only care about if I enjoy the images.
Have you considered trying the CV 50/1? It offers a lot of of the same strengths and weaknesses of the Noct’s but in a smaller cheaper package that you can drop 1k on and not 5k. Buy intelligently used and you offload it if you decide it’s not your jam.
It has much more modern contrast and flair resistance and no SA while still offering ultra-shallow DOF and light gathering in a (relatively) small package. After trying that lens, you’ll probably have a pretty good indication if you would prefer an even more vintage draw in a Noct 50/F1 or if the CV 50/1 is at your “character threshold” with its FC and Axial and such.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I have used the Noct 50/1 extensively on digital. If you were happy with the lens depends entirely on your taste. Given the lenses you have mentioned, I do not think you will be happy.
Personally, it is my first or second favorite lens of all time. But I don’t have high expectations (at all) for well corrected glass nor do I like modern draw unlike most of the people here on FM.
The Noct 50/1 offers surprisingly high contrast and sharpness (centrally ant f1) but only relative to older lenses but against modern glass it’s not impressive.
Everybody makes decisions differently, but I personally don’t care how many flaws or well corrected a lens is, I only care about if I enjoy the images it producers.
Have you considered trying the CV 50/1? It offers a lot of of the same strengths and weaknesses of the Noct’s but in a smaller cheaper package. It has much more modern contrast and flair resistance and no SA while still offering ultra-shallow DOF and light gathering in a (relatively) small package. After trying that lens, he’ll probably have a pretty good indication. If you would prefer an even more vintage draw in a Noct 50/F1 or if the CV 50/1 are at your “character threshold” with its FC and Axial and such....Show more →
I think this is very much the logical solution. Try something cheaper with similar qualities and see if I like it. Unfortunately, I'm not great with the logical solution to camera purchases most of the time lol. Especially considering resale value of the Noct, I'm tempted to just jump in head first and see how it goes. But perhaps the 0.95 would be a good compromise as well? Appreciate your thoughts!
finnphotos wrote:
I think this is very much the logical solution. Try something cheaper with similar qualities and see if I like it. Unfortunately, I'm not great with the logical solution to camera purchases most of the time lol. Especially considering resale value of the Noct, I'm tempted to just jump in head first and see how it goes. But perhaps the 0.95 would be a good compromise as well? Appreciate your thoughts!
For me, I’d either buy a Noct 50/1 or CV 50/1. I think the CV 50/1 has the modern look of the Noct 50/.95 in a much more attractive package. The Noct 50/1 files feel different from both.
V2 of the Noct 50/1 is my favorite. After that I’d get a v3.
finnphotos wrote:
Excellent point. Interested why the 1.0 was your least favorite? I've often heard the opposite.
Also, I should have bought your copy when you listed it the other day. I saw it sold already!
The handling on the 50 f/1.0 V4 was just plain awful for me. Hanging off my shoulder, it felt like it was flopping around and I was going to break it. I never get that with any of my other Leica lenses wether that be real or not- Its my thing. I really value usability, and I want a lens I can run around a city or town with. The 50 f/1.0 just wasn't for me.
I've also shot the Voigtländer 50 f/1. It's cool and does all the things, but it's not a Leica lens in look or haptics. I get that the difference isn't worth $5K to most people, but I value it.
Again, it comes back to entry and exit. It's your money, spend it how you want. But in my opinion, everyone who shoots Leica should play around with the Noctiluxes!
I used the 0.95 for street photography and the 1.0 only for portraits. But lately, I’ve swapped them for the Summicron 50/2 and Summarit 50/1.5. And carrying my bag has become much easier
As for the Noctilux, it hardly gets used anymore. A classic story.
If you are questioning it then my guess is you'll also be disappointed.
Is there a way you can try it out for a time first? Rent or borrow?
There's a really neat Analoginsight youtube video where he always wanted a 50mm Summilux (pre-Asph) but was hesitant. He got the opportunity to borrow one on a trip and (spoiler) decided against buying it. The reasons he stated in the end were the ones he had nagging him in the back of his mind before he got a chance to use it.
kiaora wrote:
If you are questioning it then my guess is you'll also be disappointed.
Is there a way you can try it out for a time first? Rent or borrow?
There's a really neat Analoginsight youtube video where he always wanted a 50mm Summilux (pre-Asph) but was hesitant. He got the opportunity to borrow one on a trip and (spoiler) decided against buying it. The reasons he stated in the end were the ones he had nagging him in the back of his mind before he got a chance to use it.
Your comments are interesting and much appreciated. I wish there was. Unfortunately due to the retail price, the cost to rent is so high. I think I'd be better off buying it and selling it if I don't like it. I think it'd be cheaper in overall cost.
