rscheffler wrote:
The 1.5m f/1.4 and f/2.8 graphs seem odd, almost like they might be reversed. Or at that distance there actually is some slight focus shift impacting central sharpness at f/2.8...? It wouldn't be the first time Leica mixed up the graphs.
I don't think the graphs are mixed up because the lower frequency lines (5, 10, & 20) lp/mm look higher (especially in the periphery) in the f/2.8 graph. I think your second speculation of focus shift or perhaps field curvature are affecting the performance at f/2.8. I think we can expect this lens based on these MTFs to have good microcontrast wide open, but that it won't improve close up until you stop down to f/4.
To me that is a good thing for portraiture. I don't particularly like microcontrast to be too high in portraits and the level we see here are about what I like. It should work well for portraits at that 1.5M distance from f/1.2 to f/2.8 at least the way I like to shoot. What does not look quite so good is the that the outer mid frame looks to show some weakness close up, so for some the sharp center may not extend far enough for their tastes and that does not improve much if at all even at f/2.8.
As you look at these charts keep in mind these are really precise measurements. I find that I don't see differences with my eyes even when magnified at 100% with a 40 or 60 MP sensor of 5% or really even 10% contrast difference at 40 lp/mm (it is a little easier to see differences at lower frequencies). So do keep in mind that MTF can measure differences that are not really visible to the eye even with pretty close examination.
setting aside the physical differences (weight/size/focus tab), is the 35 noctilux simply a cron 35 APO with a wider f1.2 aperture?
or asking that question another way: again setting aside physical differences, is the 35 noctilux capable of producing any image that the cron 35 APO can produce?
I always keep in mind that MTF graphs are interesting and can give a general idea of lens performance across the image field, but there's no universal standard.. Each company publishes MTF data based on its own criteria. Some charts are simulated, others are based on measurements from an actual sample lens, and so on. Still, they can be a useful way to compare lenses, especially when the data comes from the same manufacturer.
That said, MTF only tells part of the story. Some of my favorite lenses do not have impressive MTF graphs at all. And while I do want high resolution and contrast in certain lenses (for specific applications), most of the time that's not what I'm chasing. Some of the lenses I enjoy most are technically pretty terrible on paper, but what really matters is the image they produce.
Yes agree. In my opinion it's how well that lens works with ones photographic statement and does it achieve and ultimately fit ones overall visual signature.
Optically I think it's perfect [for me], but the focus throw worries me. I didn't keep the 35 APO due to its super long throw. I couldn't find any official literature on the throw from 0.7 to INF either.
I actually don't zone focus but I'm pretty proficient at snapping WO with the FLE and that was impossible with the APO with subjects that move along Z axis with any range of natural cadence.
I think the Apolux 35 will be great on my M12 with eye detect auto capture.
ftllens wrote:
I think the Apolux 35 will be great on my M12 with eye detect auto capture.
Already calling it Apolux?
It would be great to see an independent review showing the actual axial CA correction...maybe it really is as good as the Leica reviewers and promoters claim.
Even the early, hand-picked Leica reviewers aren't calling it APO-level performance. Here's a quote from Jonathan:
"Like the other Noctiluxes, it is possible to get Chromatic Aberration in very high contrast situations. In addition the lens is slightly prone to flare; vices to which the APO Summicron is less subject (but flare is still possible). Stopping down quickly reduces the problem with CA (it’s almost gone by f2.8)."
brick33308 wrote:
that goes back to my prior inquiry: other than size/weight/no focus tab, is the 35 noctilux just a 35 APO that can open up to f1.2?
another way of asking: is there any image quality/appearance of the 35 APO wide open that the 35 noctilux can't create?
Based on what I've seen, the 35mm f/1.2 Noct at f/2 should give a look similar to the f/2 APO. A few things to note:
- The Noct will be at f/2, so the aperture won't be perfectly rounded like the 35mm f/2 APO wide open. You'll see the geometric shape of the blades (an 11-sided hendecagon).
- The APO Cron shows almost no axial CA. The Noctilux isn't quite that clean, though early reports suggest it's low for a fast lens. (Meaning axial CA can still appear on high-contrast edges)
- For absolute corner resolution and contrast at f/2 or stopped down further, the APO has the edge, though both lenses should perform very well. It really depends on how demanding your application is.
In general shooting, without obsessing over the bokeh ball shapes, I would say images will be similar (both at f/2), with smooth rendering, high resolution + contrast, especially around the center.
If you really want the Noctilux for its blur and extra speed but also value the qualities of the APO, consider pairing the Noct with the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO. That way you won't be missing much, though it is a more expensive option.
therefore, for my purposes and to my eye, the 35 nocti is basically a 35 APO that's capable of opening up to f1.2.
I'm still not thrilled about the lack of a focus tab, but I suspect I'll get use to that.
Finally, according to chatGPT, excluding the negligible weight of the front and rear caps of the 35 nocti which are included in the published weight of 416g, and adding the 14g weight of the B+W clear filter I would attach to the 35 nocti, the weight increase over the 35 APO is about 110g. I'm not sure how I'll feel about that. chatGPT suggests I attach with tape/rubber band 5 AA batteries to the hood of my 35 APO which should approximate the weight I'd feel with the 35 nocti attached to my camera.
brick33308 wrote:
therefore, for my purposes and to my eye, the 35 nocti is basically a 35 APO that's capable of opening up to f1.2.
I'm still not thrilled about the lack of a focus tab, but I suspect I'll get use to that.
Finally, according to chatGPT, excluding the negligible weight of the front and rear caps of the 35 nocti which are included in the published weight of 416g, and adding the 14g weight of the B+W clear filter I would attach to the 35 nocti, the weight increase over the 35 APO is about 110g. I'm not sure how I'll feel about that. chatGPT suggests I attach with tape/rubber band 5 AA batteries to the hood of my 35 APO which should approximate the weight I'd feel with the 35 nocti attached to my camera. ...Show more →
I don't remember where I saw it but a video showed that the Leica 35/1.2 Noct weighted at just 366 grams with the rear cap on.
As to other differences from the APO, I doubt the APO has reduced MTF at close range as much, as it is f2. The Noct goes from 68% to 50% (40 lpmm) moving focus from infinity to 1.5m (p11), but only at f1.2.
It's hard to find portraits from the APO. At infinity, the APO is 90% of fine detail at f2. Not made for people work, it seems. The Noct will be much kinder to skin, if that matters.
philip_pj wrote:
How sensitive are you to focus throws? This one is reported as 'similar' to the APO 35/2, which is 270 (or 300) degrees. So a tab is out, most likely.
For comparison, Voigtlander's Nokton 35mm f/1.2 III (VM mount) has a focus throw of approximately 130 degrees.
Also, what matters most focusing with a RF camera is the focus throw from about 0.7 m to infinity...and I don't know the exact numbers for these lenses. My older Noctilux lenses, like the 50/1, have a very long focus throw, which I neither particularly love nor dislike.
This is a great discussion that brings a lot to light about these lenses. but when you think about it, it's also quite sad. We are all so focused on specs, nit picking this number is slightly better than that number and so on. When in reality what really counts is are you satisfied with the photos you take. In the end, there is no denying the new noct will be amazing. But, will it be noticeably amazing? Will the voigtlander, Nikon, Zeiss or other decent glass check the boxes? For me the zeiss checks all the boxes and i am happy with my results. Is the rendering from any of the other lenses satisfactory for you? For me the voigtlander and zeiss rendering is more than satisfactory for me. Is there CA on these lenses? well, photoshop, lightroom and photolab address that. so no big deal for me. Would it be nice to own the noct and others? Well, duh.. But i need to stop chasing rainbows.
Both Kevin Fickling and Noctigirl are saying 366 grams- but they might be using the same scale. All the Leica literature says 416 grams.
I’m sure we’d all appreciate anyone with a copy and accurate gram scale to measure the weight of the lens with front and rear caps off…with thanks in advance.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I don't remember where I saw it but a video showed that the Leica 35/1.2 Noct weighted at just 366 grams with the rear cap on.
it is roughly equivalent to holding 9 U.S. quarters. Maybe thats a lot for some but for me it seems trivial. But i guess around the neck for hours on can be a problem.
it is roughly equivalent to holding 9 U.S. quarters. Maybe thats a lot for some but for me it seems trivial. But i guess around the neck for hours on can be a problem.
We just want the actual measured weight because there are conflicting reports. Whether the difference matters or not is subjective.
Jorge Torralba wrote:
This is a great discussion that brings a lot to light about these lenses. but when you think about it, it's also quite sad. We are all so focused on specs, nit picking this number is slightly better than that number and so on. When in reality what really counts is are you satisfied with the photos you take. In the end, there is no denying the new noct will be amazing. But, will it be noticeably amazing? Will the voigtlander, Nikon, Zeiss or other decent glass check the boxes? For me the zeiss checks all the boxes and i am happy with my results. Is the rendering from any of the other lenses satisfactory for you? For me the voigtlander and zeiss rendering is more than satisfactory for me. Is there CA on these lenses? well, photoshop, lightroom and photolab address that. so no big deal for me. Would it be nice to own the noct and others? Well, duh.. But i need to stop chasing rainbows.
And remember the best camera in the world is .... ?
The one you have with you when you take that memorable picture....Show more →
Honestly man- The amount you post about new lenses and what’s coming out etc- It’s a bummer you call it sad when someone else does it.
We all enjoy photography for different reasons- You clearly enjoy your Voigtlander lenses, checking out new ones etc. Don’t put somebody else down for deciding between 2 lenses.
Jorge Torralba wrote:
This is a great discussion that brings a lot to light about these lenses. but when you think about it, it's also quite sad. We are all so focused on specs, nit picking this number is slightly better than that number and so on. When in reality what really counts is are you satisfied with the photos you take. In the end, there is no denying the new noct will be amazing. But, will it be noticeably amazing? Will the voigtlander, Nikon, Zeiss or other decent glass check the boxes? For me the zeiss checks all the boxes and i am happy with my results. Is the rendering from any of the other lenses satisfactory for you? For me the voigtlander and zeiss rendering is more than satisfactory for me. Is there CA on these lenses? well, photoshop, lightroom and photolab address that. so no big deal for me. Would it be nice to own the noct and others? Well, duh.. But i need to stop chasing rainbows.
And remember the best camera in the world is .... ?
The one you have with you when you take that memorable picture....Show more →
It looks like you've found the best choices for you (thanks for the sample blw). I have my own preferences too, but I still think it's worth talking about the new lens, including the MTF and other aspects, since it may help others make better decisions.
I totally agree that people should buy the lens they can afford and that they're happy with, both in performance and rendering, regardless of what a chart or anyone else says.
brick33308 wrote:
therefore, for my purposes and to my eye, the 35 nocti is basically a 35 APO that's capable of opening up to f1.2.
I'm still not thrilled about the lack of a focus tab, but I suspect I'll get use to that.
Finally, according to chatGPT, excluding the negligible weight of the front and rear caps of the 35 nocti which are included in the published weight of 416g, and adding the 14g weight of the B+W clear filter I would attach to the 35 nocti, the weight increase over the 35 APO is about 110g. I'm not sure how I'll feel about that. chatGPT suggests I attach with tape/rubber band 5 AA batteries to the hood of my 35 APO which should approximate the weight I'd feel with the 35 nocti attached to my camera. ...Show more →
39mm Leica lenses are hard to beat man-
It’s why my 35 cron sits on my camera more than my 35 Lux- I would guess that would be the same pairing it against the Noctilux-
