I'd kinda like to see how this lens compares to the Nikon 50mm 1.2. It's a very highly regarded manual focus lens that can be had for about $300. I manual focused for ALONE time. Autofocus definately spoiled me, but lenses that have a super shallow DOF usually need a little adjusting anyways.
Yeah I mean the AIs. The Noct is a very expensive beast. Probably because it was handmade. The AIs is a very sharp lens that is not all that expensive.
And I do believe I have the honor of posting the first requisite foolish-use-of-narrow-DOF-on-the-nearest-cat/dog/gerbil photo:
It's a big boy, but nicely proportioned with the MKII:
Unfortunately, I have a ton of work to get done today so I probably won't have time to play with it until later in the week. Have a RollerGirls bout this weekend thankfully, which should put it through its paces.
I will say right off the bat that I don't think focus speed is going to be an issue for me. The speed is pretty much unremarkable - not fast, but not slow. Seems about on par with the 35L, but not as fast as the 85/1.8 which is exceptional imo. I haven't used either of the 85/1.2s so I can't draw a direct comparison there.
rockitman wrote:
I'm starting to get excited about this lense. Did you (Sam) ever own the 50 1.4 ? Any thoughts on a comparo between the two ?
I did. Wasn't really a fan of it due to the dated build quality, softness wide open, inconsistent focusing and the horrible interference banding it would induce in the 20Ds I owned at the time. Unfortunatley I don't have one to compare the f/1.2 to, but I sold my f/1.4 to a friend locally so I'll try to borrow it for comparisons at some point.
It's so nice to have a prime with that confidence-instilling resistance while attaching the lens to the body due to the rubber seal... And if it hasn't been clarified already, the front element does not rotate, although it does move in/out in the housing, like so:
However, the manual does (incorrectly) indicate that the lens "rotates" and recommends that you use a filter. The rotate part is clearly wrong, but it sounds like it's recommended to use a filter since water could enter as the lenses barrel is moving during focusing.
The front element looks small relative to the size of the lens.
They should have gone for f1.0
I'd love to see more bokeh pictures as I'm a little bit concerned about the rings around highlights.... well, who am I kidding, I doubt I will be able to resist anyway....
Thanks for the pics Sam and congrats. I wonder why there haven't been any indepth reviews of this lens yet, from all these test sites. I would have thought that they would have got copies before anyone else.
Well, in my limited shooting around the house, I can't honestly say I'm bowled over by the image quality of this lens yet. It is pretty soft at f/1.2, as would be expected but it also suffers pretty significant CA wider than f/2.8. The real test will be this weekend shooting a RollerGirls bout, but I'm pretty dubious at this point.
I hope you didn't lose any work and are able to upload the content again.
And if it hasn't been clarified already, the front element does not rotate, although it does move in/out in the housing, like so:
