Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

kenoh

macrumors 604
Jul 18, 2008
6,507
10,850
Glasgow, UK
Thanks. I couldn't see Leica on the floor plan so I guess they aren't exhibiting this year. But I'll keep an eye out for a M10 for you!

Oi! What about me!?!?
[doublepost=1489736048][/doublepost]
Why, thank you.

A pity that they don't seem to have a planned presence at the show - I would have liked to have heard some feedback on the M10.

I had a play with an M10 yesterday with a Noctilux strapped on it....

Liked it. Liked it a lot but the Noctilux seriously blocks the finder. The viewfinder is nice, slightly better than on M9 just enough to feel an upgrade.

Obviously the screen is streets ahead of the M9 and the buttons are really quite intuitive.

Weight and size is not something that bothers me but it doesn't feel as much of a house brick as the 240.

IQ wasn't something I could reliably judge as I had my rose tinted glasses on and was too focused on groping some Leica p0rn - I had left my objectivity at home.


Waiting list is long enough now that might as well just wait for a few months then revisit it.

The Noctilux.... Ooooo... Smooth, silky, heavy, too rich for my blood. I am not one of the 1% who can draw out this bad boys qualities so no point. I tried focusing at 0.95. Might have been better if I had just shut my eyes and guessed - they weren't letting me out of the shop with it so just close up shots.

Will go back in at some point and have another play.
 
Last edited:

Scepticalscribe

macrumors Haswell
Jul 29, 2008
65,123
47,511
In a coffee shop.
Oi! What about me!?!?
[doublepost=1489736048][/doublepost]

I had a play with an M10 yesterday with a Noctilux strapped on it....

Liked it. Liked it a lot but the Noctilux seriously blocks the finder. The viewfinder is nice, slightly better than on M9 just enough to feel an upgrade.

Obviously the screen is streets ahead of the M9 and the buttons are really quite intuitive.

Weight and size is not something that bothers me but it doesn't feel as much of a house brick as the 240.

IQ wasn't something I could reliably judge as I had my rose tinted glasses on and was too focused on groping some Leica p0rn - I had left my objectivity at home.


Waiting list is long enough now that might as well just wait for a few months then revisit it.

The Noctilux.... Ooooo... Smooth, silky, heavy, too rich for my blood. I am not one of the 1% who can draw out this bad boys qualities so no point. I tried focusing at 0.95. Might have been better if I had just shut my eyes and guessed - they weren't letting me out of the shop with it so just close up shots.

Will go back in at some point and have another play.

Ah: Sigh. A M10 and a Noctilux?

Bliss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kenoh

Scepticalscribe

macrumors Haswell
Jul 29, 2008
65,123
47,511
In a coffee shop.
And better than 20:20 vision to focus accurately at f0.95 ;)


In all seriousness, I agree - bliss.

0.95 without live view is a skill in and of itself.

Anything I have read about the Noctilux suggests that it is a superb lens at other apertures, too. (Well, it would want to be, at that price).

However, I find that the summiluxes (f1.4) are not really a massive issue; do you both really find that the 0.95 is that challenging? Or, have either of you ever used - or handled - or laid eyes on - the older Noctilux, the f1.0?
 

kenoh

macrumors 604
Jul 18, 2008
6,507
10,850
Glasgow, UK
Anything I have read about the Noctilux suggests that it is a superb lens at other apertures, too. (Well, it would want to be, at that price).

However, I find that the summiluxes (f1.4) are not really a massive issue; do you both really find that the 0.95 is that challenging? Or, have either of you ever used - or handled - or laid eyes on - the older Noctilux, the f1.0?


I have tried a f1.2, a f1.0 and now the 0.95 Noctilux. As you know I already own and love the 35 and 50 Summiluxes.

The 1.2 is more soft and dreamy. It is lovely but a lens I would ultimately be frustrated with due to the sharpness of the Summiluxes. F1.0 was OK, classic rendering, nice to use but cost wise, again I would just put the negligible difference to it to get the 0.95.

The 0.95 is OK at other apertures but the Summiluxes and crons are better from f1.4 and below apparently so I would likely only use it at f stops bigger than 1.4.

My issue at 0.95, is that the short distances I got to try it at (indoors in the shop), I think my own lack of shooting skill i.e. sway, slight tremor in my hands, breathing not controlled meant that I am maybe being too critical of the focusing difficulty. I would guess with practice and not being rushed it will get easier but not lux easy.

What I will say though is that it picks up a lot more light than the Summiluxes. I mean more than the obvious aperture difference suggests. The transmission level of the glass is incredible.
 

Scepticalscribe

macrumors Haswell
Jul 29, 2008
65,123
47,511
In a coffee shop.
I have tried a f1.2, a f1.0 and now the 0.95 Noctilux. As you know I already own and love the 35 and 50 Summiluxes.

The 1.2 is more soft and dreamy. It is lovely but a lens I would ultimately be frustrated with due to the sharpness of the Summiluxes. F1.0 was OK, classic rendering, nice to use but cost wise, again I would just put the negligible difference to it to get the 0.95.

The 0.95 is OK at other apertures but the Summiluxes and crons are better from f1.4 and below apparently so I would likely only use it at f stops bigger than 1.4.

My issue at 0.95, is that the short distances I got to try it at (indoors in the shop), I think my own lack of shooting skill i.e. sway, slight tremor in my hands, breathing not controlled meant that I am maybe being too critical of the focusing difficulty. I would guess with practice and not being rushed it will get easier but not lux easy.

What I will say though is that it picks up a lot more light than the Summiluxes. I mean more than the obvious aperture difference suggests. The transmission level of the glass is incredible.

Fascinating.

How would the f1.0 Noctilux compare with the summiluxes - given what you have said about the quite striking difference between the 1.4 summiluxes and the 0.95 Noctilux.
 

kenoh

macrumors 604
Jul 18, 2008
6,507
10,850
Glasgow, UK
Fascinating.

How would the f1.0 Noctilux compare with the summiluxes - given what you have said about the quite striking difference between the 1.4 summiluxes and the 0.95 Noctilux.

So I think and remember this is limited experience I am only talking about my personal observations and you know I am far from qualified to make judgements.

The f1.0 to me is not as sharp as the f0.95 but there are two camps of Noctilux followers. Those in the classic Leica glow f1.2 camp and those in the modern f1.0/f0.95 camp. The 1.0 and the 0.95 both are more modern and have better (subjective view) coatings.

The f1.0 is closer to the 0.95 in draw than to the f1.2. It is sharper than the f1.2 but retains some of that classic look that the f1.2 used to produce. My challenge is that when you are talking that sort of price point, internally I am wired to say why spend that on an old one when I can spend a little more and get the latest one.

Again as I say you know I am not an expert, I have had a play with them but not used them enough for you to put too much weight to my points. You really need to try one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe

Padaung

macrumors 6502
Jan 22, 2007
470
104
UK
Anything I have read about the Noctilux suggests that it is a superb lens at other apertures, too. (Well, it would want to be, at that price).

However, I find that the summiluxes (f1.4) are not really a massive issue; do you both really find that the 0.95 is that challenging? Or, have either of you ever used - or handled - or laid eyes on - the older Noctilux, the f1.0?


I've not used the Noctilux myself, the most exotic I've used is the 1.4 Summilux. I've seen shots taken with the Noctilux at 0.95 and the DoF looked wafer thin!

Yes, I'd hope it was amazing at apertures other than 0.95 too :)
 

Scepticalscribe

macrumors Haswell
Jul 29, 2008
65,123
47,511
In a coffee shop.
Well, @kenoh - in common with your good self, I love my two summiluxes (35mm and 50mm) - they are stunning lenses, beautifully built, ultra portable and wonderful in low light; re the Noctilux - I would love to try it, but I daresay that the used market for the older models might be a more promising avenue for exploration.

Any reviews I have read suggest that they are outstanding lenses - but, again, at that price (even used), they would want to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kenoh

Apple fanboy

macrumors Ivy Bridge
Original poster
Feb 21, 2012
56,894
55,831
Behind the Lens, UK
Set up done. Tomorrow the fun begins!
IMG_3193.JPG

Here's one from a little earlier.
[doublepost=1489774138][/doublepost]
IMG_3194.JPG

[doublepost=1489774177][/doublepost]
IMG_3195.JPG

[doublepost=1489774217][/doublepost]
IMG_3196.JPG
 

kenoh

macrumors 604
Jul 18, 2008
6,507
10,850
Glasgow, UK
Set up done. Tomorrow the fun begins!
View attachment 692611
Here's one from a little earlier.
[doublepost=1489774138][/doublepost] View attachment 692613
[doublepost=1489774177][/doublepost] View attachment 692614
[doublepost=1489774217][/doublepost] View attachment 692615

That's a great setup! Best stand I have worked was at the HIMMS healthcare conference in New Orleans. As a pull to get traffic to the stand we had fresh coffee and Begnets (the N'Orlins doughnut things). Man no worries standing there all day with coffee and sugar hits on hand...

I hope it is a successful show AFB. Our pipeline needs some work so I am working on ideas at the moment. Hard to come up with new unique ways of ringing a customer and asking them if they are wanting to buy anything!
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.