I've tested this lens a few times and part of me really wants to like it but I just can't seem to pull the trigger. I recently sold off my 35FLE thinking that would push me over the edge, but it hasn't. I much prefer the cleaner and more detailed look I get from the 35APO (resolving power) and frankly the background blur I get from the 35APO is somehow softer than what Im seeing from the Noctilux. Now don't get me wrong the noct has shallower DOF but overall I just prefer the softer but yet more structured backgrounds I get from the 35APO. I think the SLAPO lenses ruined me bc I've gone back to Canon/Nikon/Sony/Hasselblad and I really cannot shake the SLAPO look, the only lenses that deliver that in a sense are the 35/50 APO M lenses (and they just skate by mostly bc of their small size).
One thing that I do see with the 35Noct is an almost preset like character that is hard to describe (almost as if Leica bakes in higher contrast/crushes the curve a bit via 6-bit plus the lenses natural vignetting) that subtle "look" somewhat has me wanting to buy one to test it in more lighting conditions/scenarios but I really don't see the point especially when you consider the size and the fact that even stopped down it doesn't do what the 35APO does at f/2. Besides I've had so many more QC issues with Leica and a lot of really bad customer service issues where I just don't feel like supporting them beyond what I already own (and I've mostly sold off all my Leica gear).
I MUCH prefer my 75Noctilux out of all the sub-Summilux lenses Leica makes. I feel its sharper and resolves finer details way better, plus has far more character without getting messy. And colors feel better/almost the best I've seen in a lens (near SLAPO glass level). This is just what I see in my files I haven't looked at an MTF chart in years. It's definitely the one lens that I would say has the best mix of vintage feel and near perfect modern capabilities. YES I hate the size and weight tho!
Been spending a lot of time with modern and vintage cinema glass, and the Zeiss Nano prime 35mm lens has me really curious about the 35 OtusML to the point where I'm probably going to pick that lens up and give it a good run before I possibly circle back to the 35Noct.
stgrove wrote:
I wonder how this lens performs/renders compared to the VM 35/1.2 IV? More or less character?
From what I have seen, I would say the 35/1.2 has much more character. Makes sense given the CV 35/1.2 is less corrected in terms of CA, resolution and contrast.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
From what I have seen, I would say the 35/1.2 has much more character. Makes sense given the CV 35/1.2 is less corrected in terms of CA, resolution and contrast.
Thanks. I, of late, have decided that Leicas pricing formula has left me behind in most respects so I will remain satisfied with my VM 35/1.2.
When a Hasselblad MF camera costs less than an SL3 and WAY less than an M something is astray to me. With all the software available today like Gigapixel the small form factor APS-C XT-5, which is AF and has IBIS BTW, can perform about like an M and if needed one can have 4 XT-5 bodies for the price of an new M and its tiny AF lenses have always performed very well.
stgrove wrote:
Thanks. I, of late, have decided that Leicas pricing formula has left me behind in most respects so I will remain satisfied with my VM 35/1.2.
When a Hasselblad MF camera costs less than an SL3 and WAY less than an M something is astray to me. With all the software available today like Gigapixel the small form factor APS-C XT-5, which is AF and has IBIS BTW, can perform about like an M and if needed one can have 4 XT-5 bodies for the price of an new M and its tiny AF lenses have always performed very well.
Just MHO.
I’m not in the market for the Noct. I do have a CV 35/1.2iv I used on film where light gathering really matters. TBH, I am not really a fan of the CV 35/40/50 line or the new Noct. Good to have options for different preferences.
I would still like to see a comparison between the Lab 35/1.2 and the Sigma 35/1.2 versus the Noct 35/1.2.
