Love your Summilux shots, in general. Hate to say that they are more ‘inspiring’ than those of your Noctilux shots, in my eyes. (expect the Dad, the bird and the boy on the grass shots…they are so unique)
Is it because of the flexibility summliux give(0.7m close focus)? Or the lighter weight.
Or the Noctilux is limited to a number scenes.
May be just my personal taste issue. Hope you don’t mind.
(well, I still do enjoy my Noct 0.95 very much despite the Summilux is very attractive to me as well. Shooting a Noct 0.95 is really like playing an olympic game — Strength, technique, speed, Eye sight…you need to have them all)
I don’t mind at all, Sam. I don’t know the answer, except to restate that if I had to pick just one of the two, I’d pick the 50 ‘lux ASPH for its versatility and extreme competence.
However, whenever I’ve parted with the Noctilux, I always miss some quality about it, that, in certain shots (like the ones you mentioned, and also some others) is simply wonderful.
Thanks for your appreciation of this shot.
As a follow-up, Sam, I’m just curious about what you (and any others who want to comment) think of these recent Noctilux 0.95 images:
What I’m specifically interested in is whether you see a quality in the rendering that you believe is unique, and which *may* not have been present had these been taken with the 50 ‘lux ASPH.
I’m constantly asking myself the same question. I believe I have an answer… it’s the follow-up question to it (not posed here) that I have more trouble answering 🙂
Peter.
Same here Peter.
It is a question for you and it is a question I constantly asking myself as well.
(as a Noct .95 user)
Some say “A good photo is created by the eyes of photographer, not by the gear. One can shoot a good photo with just an iPhone”. It is true for a *good* photo, but it is not true for an *exceptional* photo.
Simply because we all know that GEAR DOES MATTERS, for photographers spending 10, 20 years in photography, we all know .
What lens/cameras/film/digital back an individual photographer ends up/gel with for the rest of his life, depends on WHAT he shoots, HOW he shoots and WHAT he story needs to tell.
Paolo Roversi gel with 8×10 Polaroids.
Nick Knight gel with medium mega pixels.
Cartier gel with Leica 35mm.
Rinko Kawauchi gels with Rolleiflex.
What they gel with, what they shoot most, how they shoot and their post production create their own *unique* style.
There are many reasons for my feeling, not just the lens. Your subject (families) is one of the key reasons, I suppose.
I just have one camera and one lens. I spend one month with the Noct 0.95 and M-E. I do experience the same way. One out of a hundred photos, I got a WOW.
What a harsh lens!
(To supplement, the Mandler Noctiluxs always WOW so many people with the boken. I did not choose it because the photos are tinted by the Mandler-Noctilux boken.)
Excellent answer Sam!
Although some of my choices would have differed, we generally agree. Thank you for taking the time.
But whatever the lens (and I tend to prefer the lux backgrounds to the noct’s) this captures that special relationship between light and subject that so characterizes your best work, here H is not so much illuminated by the light as held gently within it, as if it were hands and she a small bird… assuming, of course, that small birds had such long hair :-).
Hi Greg
You’re very astute, as I often look for this quality of light, but its present for only brief periods each day, and some days not at all (especially in the winter months here).
To the point of Sam’s question above, it would have been interesting to have taken this shot at the same time with my Noctilux, to see how different/similar the rendering would have been.
Very poetic description by the way. Thank you.
Peter.
Hi Peter,
Well since you asked, with respect & humility and the caveat we are generally talking about wide open versus wide open use of each lens: My eyes generally find the Lux more pleasing, when large aperture / subject isolation is chosen AND the background is greater than, say, a foot or two from the subject. I find the Noct pleasing / good when subject isolation is chosen / wanted where the back ground is very close. When the Noct is used with distant backgrounds I find the rendering too 3d, too digital, too contrived. If the Noct is used with film the film does help cut down the hard edge / 3d ‘pop’ a bit but it still typically winds up too hard edged for me – with larger subject / background differences.
So with regard to your shots above, Cat Eye, True Portrait and Free as a Bird all benefited from the Noct’s abilities to separate ‘close from close’ with regard to subject and background (with the possible exception of Free as a Bird where there was probably a large subject / background depth but obviously everything worked together to produce an absolute brilliant image). All the other images would have had a softer, easier transition to background (bokeh) if the Lux had have been used.
(Laughing to myself)..So yes I would keep ‘it’, but would keep it for specific and envisioned portraiture shots where I had control of subject and background depths. Where I could ensure I was getting the benefits from its’ strength to create an image that would be truly unique – but not overdone so that the wow factor became lost.
It’s precisely for portraiture that this lens haunts me, when I don’t have it.
Some people actually covet it for the 3D effect you eschew Jason… I think it conjures up a medium format quality for them, although I agree with you – in digital it’s a little too pronounced. Although I don’t dislike it, it’s definitely less of a priority for me.
I think this is one of your most beautiful photographs! I like her expression, it seems (and probably is) so natural and spontaneous!
Thank you Bea.
Believe it or not, I think this to be among your finest works. It is spontaneous and memorable, as well as well composed, executed, and presented. Not to mention the fact that you rarely do the “portrait” orientation…
Say what you like about the lens…this is a moment you will look back on (and treasure…) forever.
M.
You’re right, I rarely shoot in portrait orientation.
I’m a little surprised that this is one of your favourites… I guess I’m probably not the best judge since many of my shots are personal and hence I’m biased.
Thanks Mark.
For me in the lens discussion, I much prefer the Lux. I find the bokeh rendering of the Noct generally too harsh and at times jaggered, though feel Jason summed it up well. I have seen some fantastic images with the Noct from you Peter, of course. Though once that background becomes more distant I find the rendering starts to become too harsh. It’s not a lens I am drawn to though to be fair I don’t have the skills to give it the respect it deserves.
The Lux is just such a solid all rounder at 50mm.
Good to see you back into the swing of things with this image Peter.
“back into the swing of things”… Well, I’m just doing what I’ve always been doing, and at the end of the year, I’ll end up with a few favourites.
All this talk about the 50 ‘lux ASPH being favoured over the Noctilux… it makes one wonder why any of us own it. My reasons were stated above, but of course it’s ultimately a personal call.
Thanks Andrew.
Hi Peter
I must apologise now I’ve read that again and how it sounds! I have just subconsciously thought, when seeing this image and it has your signature written all over it!
Family, composition and all the other attributes you bring to photography.
I think given the week of the family fair images I found the subject matter was not as engaging for ME (can’t stress that enough), and my personal thoughts/feelings didn’t become activated (excluding The Throw and the football images).
In hindsight it’s a bit of foot in mouth on my part!!
I am being very open and frank here, so apologise in advance if this comes across the wrong way. Just my brain said to me….now this is a Peter Prosophos image!!
So I guess on that note it’s interesting to see what drives some people over others in the emotional engagement of photography.
I can’t wait to see to what else unfolds over the coming months and have no doubt the top picks for 2013 will be superb. They are steadily building.
Regards
Andrew
No need to explain anything Andrew, you’ve always been a gentleman.
I will say the Fun Fair images were an assignment that involved photographing as many people as possible in the midday sun, so it’s not surprising that they weren’t consistent with my style… I would normally avoid that light.
This is a very nice shot indeed. And the discussion above makes me very happy to have just bought the 50 Summilux myself!
Prosophos 
Hi Peter,
Love your Summilux shots, in general. Hate to say that they are more ‘inspiring’ than those of your Noctilux shots, in my eyes. (expect the Dad, the bird and the boy on the grass shots…they are so unique)
Is it because of the flexibility summliux give(0.7m close focus)? Or the lighter weight.
Or the Noctilux is limited to a number scenes.
May be just my personal taste issue. Hope you don’t mind.
(well, I still do enjoy my Noct 0.95 very much despite the Summilux is very attractive to me as well. Shooting a Noct 0.95 is really like playing an olympic game — Strength, technique, speed, Eye sight…you need to have them all)
I don’t mind at all, Sam. I don’t know the answer, except to restate that if I had to pick just one of the two, I’d pick the 50 ‘lux ASPH for its versatility and extreme competence.
However, whenever I’ve parted with the Noctilux, I always miss some quality about it, that, in certain shots (like the ones you mentioned, and also some others) is simply wonderful.
Thanks for your appreciation of this shot.
As a follow-up, Sam, I’m just curious about what you (and any others who want to comment) think of these recent Noctilux 0.95 images:
https://prosophos.com/2013/06/13/h/
https://prosophos.com/2013/06/12/son-mother-daughter/
https://prosophos.com/2013/05/24/brothers/
https://prosophos.com/2013/05/17/angelic/
https://prosophos.com/2013/05/09/soccer-girl/
https://prosophos.com/2013/01/26/batboy/
https://prosophos.com/2012/12/12/cats-eyes/
https://prosophos.com/2012/12/10/true-portrait/
https://prosophos.com/2012/12/02/free-as-a-bird-2/
What I’m specifically interested in is whether you see a quality in the rendering that you believe is unique, and which *may* not have been present had these been taken with the 50 ‘lux ASPH.
I’m constantly asking myself the same question. I believe I have an answer… it’s the follow-up question to it (not posed here) that I have more trouble answering 🙂
Peter.
Same here Peter.
It is a question for you and it is a question I constantly asking myself as well.
(as a Noct .95 user)
Ignoring ergonomics, brands, history, weight, solely from image:
I find the below photos are *exceptional* and *unique*:-
https://prosophos.com/2012/12/02/free-as-a-bird-2/
https://prosophos.com/2012/10/10/father-figure/
https://prosophos.com/2012/10/07/poolside-glitter/
https://prosophos.com/2012/10/05/cheeky/
https://prosophos.com/2013/05/17/angelic/
(I think it very difficult to have these pictures without the Noct.95)
I find the below photos are “good”. I do notice the rendering different from the Lux, personally, I think they can be achieved, say, by a Canon 50 1.2LII, with proper post production. (For wedding, I use a lot of 50L. Hope you don’t mind.)
https://prosophos.com/2013/06/13/h/
https://prosophos.com/2013/06/12/son-mother-daughter/
https://prosophos.com/2013/05/09/soccer-girl/
https://prosophos.com/2012/12/10/true-portrait/
Some say “A good photo is created by the eyes of photographer, not by the gear. One can shoot a good photo with just an iPhone”. It is true for a *good* photo, but it is not true for an *exceptional* photo.
Simply because we all know that GEAR DOES MATTERS, for photographers spending 10, 20 years in photography, we all know .
What lens/cameras/film/digital back an individual photographer ends up/gel with for the rest of his life, depends on WHAT he shoots, HOW he shoots and WHAT he story needs to tell.
Paolo Roversi gel with 8×10 Polaroids.
Nick Knight gel with medium mega pixels.
Cartier gel with Leica 35mm.
Rinko Kawauchi gels with Rolleiflex.
What they gel with, what they shoot most, how they shoot and their post production create their own *unique* style.
So, to me, I see many *Peter* pictures from your Lux pictures. I feel the below Lux pictures are very “Peter” and exceptional, that I can’t help but looking at it so long.
https://prosophos.com/2012/07/09/poolside/
https://prosophos.com/2012/07/28/the-pulley-system-part-1/
https://prosophos.com/2012/07/29/chasing-the-ball-revisited/
https://prosophos.com/2012/08/26/her-path-revisited/
https://prosophos.com/2012/08/28/descending-night/
https://prosophos.com/2012/08/29/windswept/
https://prosophos.com/2012/10/18/end-of-summer-part-3/
https://prosophos.com/2012/11/17/jump-at-night/
https://prosophos.com/2013/01/22/the-pulley-system-part-2/
https://prosophos.com/2012/11/29/wow/
https://prosophos.com/2013/02/27/rock-pool-lounging/
https://prosophos.com/2013/03/12/breakfast/
https://prosophos.com/2013/06/22/rapunzel/
There are many reasons for my feeling, not just the lens. Your subject (families) is one of the key reasons, I suppose.
I just have one camera and one lens. I spend one month with the Noct 0.95 and M-E. I do experience the same way. One out of a hundred photos, I got a WOW.
What a harsh lens!
(To supplement, the Mandler Noctiluxs always WOW so many people with the boken. I did not choose it because the photos are tinted by the Mandler-Noctilux boken.)
Excellent answer Sam!
Although some of my choices would have differed, we generally agree. Thank you for taking the time.
But whatever the lens (and I tend to prefer the lux backgrounds to the noct’s) this captures that special relationship between light and subject that so characterizes your best work, here H is not so much illuminated by the light as held gently within it, as if it were hands and she a small bird… assuming, of course, that small birds had such long hair :-).
Hi Greg
You’re very astute, as I often look for this quality of light, but its present for only brief periods each day, and some days not at all (especially in the winter months here).
To the point of Sam’s question above, it would have been interesting to have taken this shot at the same time with my Noctilux, to see how different/similar the rendering would have been.
Very poetic description by the way. Thank you.
Peter.
Hi Peter,
Well since you asked, with respect & humility and the caveat we are generally talking about wide open versus wide open use of each lens: My eyes generally find the Lux more pleasing, when large aperture / subject isolation is chosen AND the background is greater than, say, a foot or two from the subject. I find the Noct pleasing / good when subject isolation is chosen / wanted where the back ground is very close. When the Noct is used with distant backgrounds I find the rendering too 3d, too digital, too contrived. If the Noct is used with film the film does help cut down the hard edge / 3d ‘pop’ a bit but it still typically winds up too hard edged for me – with larger subject / background differences.
So with regard to your shots above, Cat Eye, True Portrait and Free as a Bird all benefited from the Noct’s abilities to separate ‘close from close’ with regard to subject and background (with the possible exception of Free as a Bird where there was probably a large subject / background depth but obviously everything worked together to produce an absolute brilliant image). All the other images would have had a softer, easier transition to background (bokeh) if the Lux had have been used.
(Laughing to myself)..So yes I would keep ‘it’, but would keep it for specific and envisioned portraiture shots where I had control of subject and background depths. Where I could ensure I was getting the benefits from its’ strength to create an image that would be truly unique – but not overdone so that the wow factor became lost.
It’s precisely for portraiture that this lens haunts me, when I don’t have it.
Some people actually covet it for the 3D effect you eschew Jason… I think it conjures up a medium format quality for them, although I agree with you – in digital it’s a little too pronounced. Although I don’t dislike it, it’s definitely less of a priority for me.
I think this is one of your most beautiful photographs! I like her expression, it seems (and probably is) so natural and spontaneous!
Thank you Bea.
Believe it or not, I think this to be among your finest works. It is spontaneous and memorable, as well as well composed, executed, and presented. Not to mention the fact that you rarely do the “portrait” orientation…
Say what you like about the lens…this is a moment you will look back on (and treasure…) forever.
M.
You’re right, I rarely shoot in portrait orientation.
I’m a little surprised that this is one of your favourites… I guess I’m probably not the best judge since many of my shots are personal and hence I’m biased.
Thanks Mark.
For me in the lens discussion, I much prefer the Lux. I find the bokeh rendering of the Noct generally too harsh and at times jaggered, though feel Jason summed it up well. I have seen some fantastic images with the Noct from you Peter, of course. Though once that background becomes more distant I find the rendering starts to become too harsh. It’s not a lens I am drawn to though to be fair I don’t have the skills to give it the respect it deserves.
The Lux is just such a solid all rounder at 50mm.
Good to see you back into the swing of things with this image Peter.
“back into the swing of things”… Well, I’m just doing what I’ve always been doing, and at the end of the year, I’ll end up with a few favourites.
All this talk about the 50 ‘lux ASPH being favoured over the Noctilux… it makes one wonder why any of us own it. My reasons were stated above, but of course it’s ultimately a personal call.
Thanks Andrew.
Hi Peter
I must apologise now I’ve read that again and how it sounds! I have just subconsciously thought, when seeing this image and it has your signature written all over it!
Family, composition and all the other attributes you bring to photography.
I think given the week of the family fair images I found the subject matter was not as engaging for ME (can’t stress that enough), and my personal thoughts/feelings didn’t become activated (excluding The Throw and the football images).
In hindsight it’s a bit of foot in mouth on my part!!
I am being very open and frank here, so apologise in advance if this comes across the wrong way. Just my brain said to me….now this is a Peter Prosophos image!!
So I guess on that note it’s interesting to see what drives some people over others in the emotional engagement of photography.
I can’t wait to see to what else unfolds over the coming months and have no doubt the top picks for 2013 will be superb. They are steadily building.
Regards
Andrew
No need to explain anything Andrew, you’ve always been a gentleman.
I will say the Fun Fair images were an assignment that involved photographing as many people as possible in the midday sun, so it’s not surprising that they weren’t consistent with my style… I would normally avoid that light.
This is a very nice shot indeed. And the discussion above makes me very happy to have just bought the 50 Summilux myself!
Cheers,
Thomas
http://www.wordpress.thomasveyre.com
A really beautiful image with loads of character.
Thank you Guy.
Peter,
I think you’re one fo the best “eyes” to evaluate a lens I could ever meet. As for the samples you listed, If I may I would highlight 3 of them that show off the noct’s peculiar rendering IMO:
https://prosophos.com/2012/12/02/free-as-a-bird-2/
https://prosophos.com/2013/05/09/soccer-girl/
https://prosophos.com/2013/05/24/brothers/
Not to say they’re also superb images — as much as “rapunzel”.
When painting one should pick up the best brush for his purpose…