The Noctilux 0.95 is in the house!!

THIS IS JUST A QUICK -N-DIRTY FIRST IMPRESSION POST – A FULL BIG REVIEW WILL BE COMING SOON!! I will also have comparisons with the old Noctilux, so look out for that, SOON!

UPS just arrived and delivered the Leica Noctilux F0.95 50mm lens! All I can say is WOW, the build on this thing is amazing. It is larger than the old F1 Noct but the Aperture ring is sooooo smooth and silky. So much nicer in use. Also, it is easier to focus. It only arrived MINUTES ago so I only snapped a few shots around the house. From my first look It has the feel of the 50 Lux ASPH 1.4 more than the classic noct. I did ONE quick hand held comparison between the two just to see if I could see any huge difference. This is a $10,000 lens after all!

f95leaves

f1leaves

For now, this is ALL you get and it really doesn’t tell you much does it? In this image, both lenses are sharp wide open and the bokeh looks similar. I will be shooting BOTH of these lenses in NYC in a few days, during the day AND at night. Should be fun, and I am sure both will shine. I predict the new version will be easier to use, and give more brilliant results but will it retain that Noct magic or will it lose it to gain perfection? I can already tell you it is built better and OMG, it is…well, I will wait for the review.

My 1st impression after holding the lens? Man, I wish I was rich. Old used F1 Noct, $5-6k – New Noct $10k. Is it worth the $4-$5k more than the old one, used? That is what I want to find out so check back soon for my full review of BOTH lenses in ONE big mega review with loads of samples!

UPDATE!!! OK, I lied. I have one more comparison for you. Both shots wide open with each lens. Which image is from which lens? Can you tell? You should be able to as I can see the differences for sure. BUT which one do you prefer? #1, or #2? Both have ZERO sharpening and are untouched.

YOU MUST CLICK ON THE IMAGE FOR THE LARGER SIZE…

sidebysidewideopenWhen you click on the image you will see larger versions plus the real 100% crops. Leave a comment and let us know what you prefer. #1 or #2, and why. This will be all I am posting with the lens until next week during my NY trip.  I will update the site from my hotel room with some cool real time live updates, so that should be pretty cool! In my full review I will have plenty of REAL images and I can not wait for this one!

UPDATE 12/05 – Most of you were correct! The 1st image above was from the .95. The lower image was from the F1. Both were shot wide open at .95 and 1. But, I have some MUCH better comparisons that I shot last night and these new ones show the differences between these two lenses more clearly. I have one with OOF highlights, one that shows the differences in bokeh and depth of field and another with color differences more apparent.

I will have all of the new comparisons in the huge review that will be up soon. It may be up as soon as Wed, or as late as Friday. When I get excited about a lens or camera I tend  to get really involved in the review so expect this one to really have a ton of samples!

18 Comments

  1. Hey David,

    The Noct .95 is identical to the 50 Lux ASPH if not a bit better in color and contrast. I shot this lens at F2, F2.8 and F4 during the day and its results are spectacular. BUT this lens feels like 4 lux’s taped together on the M9. Its big, heavy and slower to focus.

    Comparing the Lux and Noct would most likely show either a tie from 1.4 on or the Noct would have a SLIGHT advantage.

    Thanks! BTW, the review of the lens is now up!

  2. I echo Dan’s and Thorsten’s wish for a comparison 0.95 vs 50 lux. The vignettes, especially. Also if you get a chance it’d be good to know your impressions of the Noctilux stopped down during daytime use.

  3. If Noctilux 0.95 will be like Summilux 50 1.4 asph, or behave just like the lux, I believe a lot of photographers will consider buying the 0.95.

  4. Hey guys, thanks for all of the comments. Been shooting these lenses today more and cant wait to show all of the results.

    Alex, I will not be getting the new Noct. I would need to trade my F1 noct and add another $4k. That is just not going to get by Mrs. Huff 🙂

  5. In the top one the cherub looks like it is made of bronze, in the second the colour is so warm it could almost be carved out of wood. The colour differentiation between the sculpture and the case also appears more pronounced in the first photo, so my guess would be that this is the result of a more technically advance lens (better coatings?) so my choice is number one: 0.95, number two 1.0. Thanks Steve – are you going to trade in the f1.0 plus the car this time?

  6. I guess that #1 is the 0.95..

    BUT: I like #2 somewhat better I think…

    But they are both nice in their ways; is #2 slightly out of focus?

    Can’t wait for the review…

    And i can’t wait till I get the f1 Noct (on it’s way…)

    M

  7. Tough one. I like #1 better, because it appears to isolate the subject better, which is one of the reasons I’d like to use a very fast lens. But is it a $4000 difference (whether #1 is the 0.95 or not)? I dare to say no and would choose a Voigtlander Nokton 1.1 for this purpose. For daily use a 1.4 lux asph would already be great and is more practical to use since it blocks less of the finder.

  8. Interesting. Without having read the other’s comments this is what I see:

    (a) Color in #2 is warmer. Hard to tell what’s better.

    (b) In the crops #1 shows more detail, look at the nail of the ringfinger – #1 wins.

    (c) In #2 the foremost part of the image (belt’s seam) is so much sharper that I would even suppose a larger range of DOF. Did Steve take the shots with identical aperture 1.0? Or is the comparison between 0.95 and 1.0 we don’t know. If it’s blur at the outer range of the image: #2 wins.

    (d) The background’s bokeh changes from the outer corner to the middle and this change is much less in #2: #2 wins.

    Button line:
    From (a) and (b) my suggestion is: #1 represents the new Nocti. But (c) is really confusing me.

  9. I prefer #1 after all. At a first glance I liked it more, a little bit hesitating after watching the larger sizes, but #2 seems a little bit “better” in sharpness, color rendition and has a more “3D effect” for me. #2 is slightly to reddish for my taste. So I bet, 0.95 Noctilux is #1.

  10. If the 0.95 has the the sharpness and perform like the 50 1.4 asph, it will be a killer lens. i believe it will be the new benchmark to beat in 50 mm category.

  11. the second is the 0.95. Less vignetting, and the colours appear more neutral. May be the bottle of wine I just drank has something to do with this…Jag

  12. Exactly what was on my mind. Was just this second looking at an italian dealer with 6-7 Noctilux 1.0 in stock, and then there’s the new one.

    One of each. Naah!

    The real test I guess is in low light with sparkling bokeh hightlights in the background.

    But my guess is the the top one is the 0.95 because of the more narrow DOF and the better 3D randering of the face. But what I actually looked for was bokeh, and I prefer the top one which I first guessed had to be the bokeh of the 1.0 (which I would think was softer bokeh).

    That said, 3D look is interesting and bokeh is very interesting. Pixelpeek sharpness of a Noctilux is not that important. Though interesting enough.

  13. this is really tough. I’d say that #1 is the 0.95. the depth of field appears to be less to my eye…however I have to say that although #1 also looks sharper around the face I think I prefer number #2. can’t wait to see some more images.
    Cheers, Peter Bender

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. My feet to the fire - Leica User Forum

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.