NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Nikfuson on November 01, 2019, 21:22:03
-
Ok, back with more techie stuff. First plane of focus at ca. 2m. Pretty flat!
-
Bokeh at min focus distance (0.5m). We're still talking f/0.95.
I can't spot any concentric pattern.
-
No bloomy 0.95 aberrations either.
-
First shot outdoors (1m), second one indoors (with 100% crop) at the same distance. There is a bit of LoCA but nothing I would be bothered with, say like the LoCA found with the venerable neo-noct 58/1.4G.
-
I found with the Noct files I have played around with so far that the RAW engine used had significant impact on the outcome, including the handling of colour aberrations. So, which one did you use?
-
I ran these through ACR and Photoshop. I’ve left all corrections at zero.
-
CNX-D removes much more of the colour nasties.
-
NX-D also has the proprietary WB coefficients. ACR just approximates them. you could try to use a colorchecker profile to correct if you don't wish to use NX-D.
-
Weather permitting, any chance you could get some well focused star images, say 3 second exposures wide open and slightly stopped down in 1/3 stop steps? ::)
-
I ran these through ACR and Photoshop. I’ve left all corrections at zero.
The lens is not known in ACR yet? For the Z 50/1.8S I had to de-select the Lens Profile Corrections which was on !! Very nasty.
-
I am trying to provoke the optical results to see what’s in there. But the green purple haze is actually easy to remove, even in ACR. There is already a lens profile in the raw file that ACR recognises. Will see if I can borrow the lens for a couple of days to do more «photography» in addition to boring testing.
-
Great results so far, good luck with the 'Photography' ;)
-
Here’s one example; ISO 1600, f/0.95, 1/100s.
Snapbridge to iPhone and PS Express. Quick and dirty job.
-
Here to try and illustrate the bokeh transition and the sharpness (f/0.95). Twas a bit windy so leaves moved a bit.
Funny how Adobe interprets aperture below f/1 ;D
-
I see the sharpness as adequate for an aperture below 1.
-
Thanks great to see! Looking forward for more ;)
-
Jpegs straight from camera.
Both at f/0.95, 1/60s and ISO1600.
-
Bokeh at f/1.0 and 2.2.
-
Best to keep the lens wider than f/2 or perhaps f/1.8 to get circular bokeh balls, then. I'm a little disappointed that aperture blades should cut into the highlights this early when stopping down the lens.
Of course, focused distance also has a bearing, thus what distance was the lens set to?
-
Quite surprising the 11 aperture blades are that visible, they are supposed to be rounded,,,
-
Best to keep the lens wider than f/2 or perhaps f/1.8 to get circular bokeh balls, then. I'm a little disappointed that aperture blades should cut into the highlights this early when stopping down the lens.
Of course, focused distance also has a bearing, thus what distance was the lens set to?
This is at closest focus distance, i.e. 0.5m.
-
Here's at f/1.4
-
OK, so how is the behaviour towards infinity focus for these highlight balls?
Must say this is NOT the appearance I had expected from a lens in this class and price bracket.
-
OK, so how is the behaviour towards infinity focus for these highlight balls?
Must say this is NOT the appearance I had expected from a lens in this class and price bracket.
Sorry, I have only a series of near towards far at f/0.95. But will give this a go the next time I get my hands on it.
-
Yes, please do. Personally I'm too tied down with writing up papers at present to spend time chasing after the Ultra-Noct just now.
-
Nikon raised stellar expectations for this lens
It appears as if it might fail to fulfill this expectations in all aspects
Thanks Nikfusion for providing these samples
-
Second round of testing commences tomorrow, with more «photography» type shots 😊
-
Bokeh at f/1.0 and 2.2.
Interesting, the lens has 11 aperture blades. This is a first for Nikon as far as I can remember. Other Nikkors have 7 or 9.
Even rounded aperture blades start to show a polygonal shape when stopped down far enough, but depending on the geometry of the blades some retain a rounded opening for longer than others. In the pictures at f/2.2 the lens is already closed down over 2 stops - nearly 2 1/2 stops. The Noct is over a stop faster than any other current Nikkor you should expect the polygonal shape to start appearing at correspondingly wider apertures. On the other hand, it has 11 aperture blades, so the shape should be more rounded than lenses with fewer blades, and you would expect the designers to take great care on this feature, especially with this sort of lens.
Feel free to send me you serial number for my Nikon database :)
Question: the lens appears to have two filter rings, one around the front element, and a larger one on the front rim of the focus ring - I'm guessing the larger has 95mm thread and is for the hood?
-
Interesting, the lens has 11 aperture blades. This is a first for Nikon as far as I can remember. Other Nikkors have 7 or 9.
Even rounded aperture blades start to show a polygonal shape when stopped down far enough, but depending on the geometry of the blades some retain a rounded opening for longer than others. In the pictures at f/2.2 the lens is already closed down over 2 stops - nearly 2 1/2 stops. The Noct is over a stop faster than any other current Nikkor you should expect the polygonal shape to start appearing at correspondingly wider apertures. On the other hand, it has 11 aperture blades, so the shape should be more rounded than lenses with fewer blades, and you would expect the designers to take great care on this feature, especially with this sort of lens.
Feel free to send me you serial number for my Nikon database :)
Question: the lens appears to have two filter rings, one around the front element, and a larger one on the front rim of the focus ring - I'm guessing the larger has 95mm thread and is for the hood?
Useful info Roland. As I get the lens tomorrow to continue my trials I'll send you the serial. I suspect the outer threads are for the hood but will of course check and post accordingly.
-
Interesting, the lens has 11 aperture blades. This is a first for Nikon as far as I can remember. Other Nikkors have 7 or 9.
Even rounded aperture blades start to show a polygonal shape when stopped down far enough, but depending on the geometry of the blades some retain a rounded opening for longer than others. In the pictures at f/2.2 the lens is already closed down over 2 stops - nearly 2 1/2 stops. The Noct is over a stop faster than any other current Nikkor you should expect the polygonal shape to start appearing at correspondingly wider apertures. On the other hand, it has 11 aperture blades, so the shape should be more rounded than lenses with fewer blades, and you would expect the designers to take great care on this feature, especially with this sort of lens.
Feel free to send me you serial number for my Nikon database :)
Question: the lens appears to have two filter rings, one around the front element, and a larger one on the front rim of the focus ring - I'm guessing the larger has 95mm thread and is for the hood?
According to the preview of DPReview TV, your assumption of two threads seems to be correct (0:40~, 1:54~ and 2:30~):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-uoDcKxjAM
FWIW, the Nikkor-O a.k.a. CRT Nikkor has 11 aperture blades. :)
-
Some other shots for anyone's evaluation.
-
To sum up so far;
The lens is sharp and almost flat field.
Focus peaking is easiest on Z7 with the higher resolution focus peaking.
The Bokeh wide open is amazing and so is also color transitions.
Like other super fast lenses it doesn't like harsh or hard light.
Some CA issues that can be cured in post processing.
11 blades was not enough to mask the aperture blades in close up out of focus highlights.
Shoot it wide open ;D 8)
-
Riccitalks (Nikon UK) with photos taken with Mega-Noct from out in the wild
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srn9KHz3nrY&fbclid=IwAR2ACrpmHbebcT8uKcDX3zHZYX3mUHzyfk_gudJ1j4mo1M6sl0-FUnLQgTk
-
....
FWIW, the Nikkor-O a.k.a. CRT Nikkor has 11 aperture blades. :)
The other that I know of is the 105/4 bellows, also has 11 bladed aperture.
Also doesn't produce a fully circular pattern.
side note: I have a Schacht Novoflex 135/4.5 bellows lens too, has 16 blades, and does produce an almost perfect circular pattern(can only just detect that it's not fully circular).
-
105mm f/4 Bellows lens; 12 blades like many EL-Nikkor.
The range finder lenses also has 10. 12, 16 blades and there abouts,,,
Always the data is on Ronalds pages http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html (http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html)
Except for the Noct-Nikkor Z ;)
-
Ok, took longer than I thought so will only have time to share a couple of images, both at f/0.95.
First one is focused on the white doors on the building to the left. Amazingly I have almost zero sharpening applied (ACR).
Second one is actually two images focused near and far.
-
Couldn't resist to post a "killer" (in a slightly negative aspect for the lens)
Again at full opening.
Actually not bad for such a ultra fast lens.
-
And here at f/1.4
-
Hmm. More coma than I had expected at f/0.95. However, stopping down apparently helps mitigate this issue, so in the end, at f/1.2 I guess the new Ultra-Noct easily beats the old venerable Noct 58/1.2 thanks to a much flatter field.
-
105mm f/4 Bellows lens; 12 blades like many EL-Nikkor.
The range finder lenses also has 10. 12, 16 blades and there abouts,,,
Always the data is on Ronalds pages http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html (http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html)
Except for the Noct-Nikkor Z ;)
Looking at my own ancient (1959) 13.5 cm Bellows-Nikkor, I counted as many as 15 blades, a truly circular opening
Ciao from Massimo
-
Always the data is on Ronalds Roland's pages http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html (http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html)
Except for the Noct-Nikkor Z ;)
Added now, along with 24/1.8 S :)
Need to find some pictures too.
Haven't added the Z DX lenses yet :o
-
Hmm. More coma than I had expected at f/0.95. However, stopping down apparently helps mitigate this issue, so in the end, at f/1.2 I guess the new Ultra-Noct easily beats the old venerable Noct 58/1.2 thanks to a much flatter field.
Yes, same observations here. The lens is not perfect - But that was apparently not possible,,, Conclusion must be that stopping down is needed for night photography - What a pity, I had truly hoped Nikon had managed to eliminate Coma on this Noct - their Z flagship lens.
But OK, they came very close and the overall performance and appearance is just stunning - and the lens is still in stock in Copenhagen,,,, 8)
-
The decision to make the new Noct a flat-field performer to the maximum extent possible would make coma correction extremely difficult. We have to assume the lens now exhibits the balance deemed the best by the optical engineers. With a lens this ultrafast, stopping down 1-2 stops is not a big penality anyway.
-
The decision to make the new Noct a flat-field performer to the maximum extent possible would make coma correction extremely difficult. We have to assume the lens now exhibits the balance deemed the best by the optical engineers. With a lens this ultrafast, stopping down 1-2 stops is not a big penality anyway.
An additional problem when it's really dark is the framing of the photo, wide open an f/0.95 lens would let a lot of light in and solve the problem, not a big deal if the actual shot is at 1.2 or 1.4
Ciao from Massimo
-
Focusing near infinity at night is not as easy as it may sound. It takes a mere "breath" on the focus ring to get from hit to miss (and vice versa). This is something I will try to improve on tonight.
-
So, there is no fixed infinity stop then?
-
So, there is no fixed infinity stop then?
Mechanical infinity is beyond ∞ with optical somewhere between. This can be to acomodate for the very slight physical change in the structure with temperature changes.
-
It seems it was a very good idea that Nikon added the tripod mount for precise focusing with the very slim depth of focus and to retain image sharpness - BTW how is the stability of the tripod mount?
-
It seems it was a very good idea that Nikon added the tripod mount for precise focusing with the very slim depth of focus and to retain image sharpness - BTW how is the stability of the tripod mount?
The stability is sufficient as it balances the setup (lens/camera) very well.
-
Hope this works for you; here's a video of the focus scale from infinity to minimum focus distance.
https://youtu.be/Hkb3VN3fiD0
-
A few close-ups of the lens:
-
Any thoughts about the old Noct f/1.2, which is not well corrected for aberration. I wonder if I should sell mine? Any reason I should keep it? Of course, I have not tested the new one, which did NOT arrive Saturday as it was supposed to. Getting it today.
-
Looking very much forward to your findings on the new Z Noct!
The 'old' Noct-Nikkor is quite a lot of money to have sitting around given you excel in APO-lenses as your main focus,,, but the new Z Noct will not fit F-mount!
-
Looking very much forward to your findings on the new Z Noct!
The 'old' Noct-Nikkor is quite a lot of money to have sitting around given you excel in APO-lenses as your main focus,,, but the new Z Noct will not fit F-mount!
I am using my D850 and D810 less and less all the time. I have a great old NOCT 1.2 copy, but I probably should sell it. And I should remind myself that a lens like the 100mm Leica Elmarit R is a very fine lens that I converted, like this shot here with the adapter and Z7.
-
I am using my D850 and D810 less and less all the time. I have a great old NOCT 1.2 copy, but I probably should sell it. And I should remind myself that a lens like the 100mm Leica Elmarit R is a very fine lens that I converted, like this shot here with the adapter and Z7.
amazing, Michael how you manage to outperform yourself with every new shot. I am sure the 0.95/58Z will be in very good hands...
-
OK, time to adjust my impression on the gull wings at fast openings, here at f/0.95.
And a better view of the blur circles at f/0.95 and f/1.2.
-
Landscaping at 0.95.
-
Gorgeous blur circles looking like smarties :)
-
The first photo from the 0.95-NOCT. Wide Open. The lens was scheduled to arrive last Saturday, which is why I had these flowers…fresh. Since then, the flowers went south. So, that’s the explanation for the flowers demise, which flowers are now finishing up.
The lens is MASSIVE. And so far, the only thing I am not happy with is that the helicoid turns a little stiff. Is this true for other users? It moves the lens on the tripod a little more than I would like. The bokeh is exceptional.
This is a stacked image, using Zerene Stacker.
-
Lovely picture Michael!
Yes, the helicoid is on the stiff side but tonight when I shot some stars I found it to be an advantage, not easy to knock focus off.
-
Couple of additional shots, both at 0.95.
-
Good to see from the work of Sten and Michael that it seems an exceptional Nikkor after all.
It is the second Z Nikkor with a dedicated control ring; I tried to use the dedicated control ring on the 24-70/2.8Z for aperture control but didn't like it at all. Click-less and too fast made it more or less unusable for me, ymmv. I find the oled display more or less useless too, because it switches off quickly after camera startup, and has to be switched on in case one needs it.
Btw over here in The Netherlands the 58/0.95 is available at the biggest two internet stores for tomorrow delivery...
-
These are all amazing, no coma in the star images! Wow :)
We have a winner 8)
Tiny bit of purple fringing that's all, very nice!
-
very appealing pics. In addition, working out has now become superfluous. Would be nice if it were possible to change the resting arm :)
-
Couple of additional shots, both at 0.95.
Wow, now you are photographing, Sten!
-
From the last image with the colorful lights hanging over the street, it's quite obvious that the Coma gets more and more pronounced as you move away from the focus plane. At the focus plane there are no visible Coma.
The images of the distant city lights was focused at a different distance than the lights, so shows Coma.Very useful test images, thanks Sten!
-
The first photo from the 0.95-NOCT. Wide Open. The lens was scheduled to arrive last Saturday, which is why I had these flowers…fresh. Since then, the flowers went south. So, that’s the explanation for the flowers demise, which flowers are now finishing up.
The lens is MASSIVE. And so far, the only thing I am not happy with is that the helicoid turns a little stiff. Is this true for other users? It moves the lens on the tripod a little more than I would like. The bokeh is exceptional.
This is a stacked image, using Zerene Stacker.
Thank you for the image Michael! We see the lens is extremely sharp. And the Bokeh is wonderful. IMHO there is a very unnatural transition between sharp and unsharp, along the left stem as it continues down and away from the focus plane, looks very artificial. But ok the lens works as advertised ;) One can also see from Stens video that the focus ring is on the stiff side,,, a design choice,,, probably not adjustable but who knows.
-
Here’s an image showing the transition of focus.
-
Great report, Sten. Thanks a lot for all your work on this.
-
@Erik: I guess the unusual transitions stem from the stacking choices, Michael made....
"painting fucus" as he calls his method
-
Frank , it's how the stacking software chooses it should look. Not the lens
-
To get a more "natural" transition into the more unsharp parts of the image with the stacking approach, one probably has to run a deeper stack with unevenly spaced frames front and rear. Otherwise the transition is painfully obvious.
The main issue with this approach is that the overall number of frames must be increased to avoid blurry zones within the planned depth of field, caused by non-contiguous sampling. What the Ultra-Noct gives with one hand it takes back with the other. No shortcuts here I'm afraid.
-
Landscaping at 0.95.
Very nice,
thanks for all the testing, Sten.
-
To get a more "natural" transition into the more unsharp parts of the image with the stacking approach, one probably has to run a deeper stack with unevenly spaced frames front and rear. Otherwise the transition is painfully obvious.
The main issue with this approach is that the overall number of frames must be increased to avoid blurry zones within the planned depth of field, caused by non-contiguous sampling. What the Ultra-Noct gives with one hand it takes back with the other. No shortcuts here I'm afraid.
That’s true, we have to decide on a layer-step that will be fine-enough not to intrude. However, there are other things to consider as well. As an example, if the subject is spherical, that step-size has to vary, getting smaller (closer) as we step through a sphere. This makes stacking by motors difficult, since I know of no machine that can decide when to narrow or expand the step-size. As you say, “no shortcuts here,” yet, by the same token, nothing different IMO either from what we are used to stacking with many of the fine and exotic lenses. Of course, we can always set the motorized step to very, very fine. Yet, I still do a lot of what I call Short-Stacks, just a few shots to highlight this or that tip of a leaf or flower and not put the subject through such a large stack. Agreed, there is no free lunch.
The value of this lens, if I decide I like it (LOL), is that the bokeh possible at 0.95 can be punctuated with areas in the frame we want in very sharp focus. In other words, we can paint focus where we want it and as wide as we want rather than just one razor-sharp layer.
This does lend (at times) an other-world (or science-fiction) look or cast to the image, but it is one, for the most part, I like.
-
So far, so good. I very much like the 95-NOCT. It is a little like having a built-in focus rail because of the long focus throw, but we should keep in mind that the now classic Cosina Voigtlander 125mm APO Lanthar has a focus throw or about 630-degrees and the Leica 100mm Elmarit R is some 720-degrees, while the new NOCT95 has only about 360-degrees. So, the focus throw is not THAT long.
For focus stackers, this new NOCT95 is (seemingly) a perfect lens for focus stacking, due to the speed (and sharpness) of the lens wide-open. It is WAY expensive, but probably replaces my need for a number of other fine lenses, if I would sell them, which I probably won’t. LOL. I might sell my NOCT f/1.2 which is a very good copy.
This is a studio lens unless you want to haul it around, which I probably will (with a clear filter) next spring, but mostly I will not. As for all the extra bells and whistles on the lens, they mean little to me. The ability to rotate the barrel from horizontal to vertical does mean a lot, a great deal.
So, here are a couple of shots made in the very early morning light, with my eagerness to check the lens out. I believe I have got the general hang of it. I like it a lot.
-
The first Iris example really shows off the superior qualities of this lens. Also, due to the orientation of the main subject in the frame, the rather abrupt transition from extreme sharpness into total unsharpness is more or less masked, to the benefit of the visual outcome.
-
The first Iris example really shows off the superior qualities of this lens. Also, due to the orientation of the main subject in the frame, the rather abrupt transition from extreme sharpness into total unsharpness is more or less masked, to the benefit of the visual outcome.
I agree, but the second has more potential because of the interesting background angles. I am just doing proof-of-concept shots, but I have that proof now and will be more careful. LOL.
-
So, here are a couple of shots made in the very early morning light, with my eagerness to check the lens out. I believe I have got the general hang of it. I like it a lot.
I really like the second image. Very beautiful.
-
I am getting to know this lens and liking it a lot. The bokeh is wonderful for my purposes and the lens is just remarkable as we hoped.
-
Michael, I've missed seeing some of your fantastic images, the lens seems made for you
-
I very much like the 95-NOCT. It is a little like having a built-in focus rail because of the long focus throw, but we should keep in mind that the now classic Cosina Voigtlander 125mm APO Lanthar has a focus throw or about 630-degrees and the Leica 100mm Elmarit R is some 720-degrees, while the new NOCT95 has only about 360-degrees. So, the focus throw is not THAT long.
The focus throw in isolation does not give you the full story, you also need to consider how close the lens focuses and the diameter of the focus ring. Compare these lenses:
Lens / Close focus / Magnification / Focus throw / Diameter
Z 58/0.95 Noct / 0.5m / 1:5.2 / 330° / 102mm
AI 58/1.2 Noct / 0.5m / 1:6.7 / 230° / 74
AIS 58/1.2 Noct / 0.5m / 1:6.7 / 140° / 74
AIS 55/2.8 Micro / 0.25 / 1:1.9 / 310° / 64
The Z Noct and 55 micro have similar focal length and focus throw, but their focus action is entirely different, the 55 micro focuses much faster for a given movement in the focus ring. To get to the 1:5.2 magnification, the 55 micro focuses to about 0.4m with a focus throw of roughly 120°. In other words the focus throw to the same magnification is about 3x shorter than the Z Noct. Also, the barrel of the Z Noct is nearly twice as wide as the 55 micro, which means a 1mm movement of the focus ring turns roughly half the angle as the 55 micro. Put these together and you find that the Z Noct focuses about 5x slower than the 55 micro for the same linear movement of the focus ring.
It's clear to see why the Z Noct is good for focus stacking due to the very long/slow focus throw.
If we do a similar comparison with the AI Noct, the new lens focuses about 2x slower, and about 3x slower than the AIS Noct. Note that all the Nocts all focus to the same distance, but the new lens achieves higher magnification so that throws my calculations out a bit but you get the general idea.
In comparing to the Cosina Voigtlander 125mm and 100mm Elmarit R the best way to compare the focus throw is to see how far you need to turn the focus ring to achieve the same magnification. No doubt you will find the Z Noct has a much longer focus throw, even though the total focus action of the macros is longer.
-
Thanks. Makes perfect sense. My only complaint so far is that the helicoid turns a little stiff. Will send you my serial number.
-
An example at f/5.6.
More samples later.
-
The bokeh is wonderful for my purposes and the lens is just remarkable as we hoped.
Absolutely agree !
Perhaps the bokeh is the main factor of this lens (and the sharpness as well), at least in my taste.
Also the night lanscapes delivered by Nikfuson are amazing with the burst of lights.
-
Thanks. Makes perfect sense. My only complaint so far is that the helicoid turns a little stiff.
That may be due to the size and weight of the lens. The specs make no mention of internal or rear focusing so I assume it is unit focusing, so that is a lot of glass to move. Hopefully it loosens up with use. It might be worth trying to rig up some sort of focus tab or lever on the lens, similar to the screw-in focus handles supplied with the 1000/11 reflex - it would give you a bit more leverage on the focus ring giving you easier and finer control.
-
I am getting to know this lens and liking it a lot. The bokeh is wonderful for my purposes and the lens is just remarkable as we hoped.
Michael,
I am always amazed at the images you create, no matter what lens you use. Looking forward to more from the new Noct.
-
A few more at full throttle.
-
Michael! 1186 is stunning...
-
A few more at full throttle.
Nikfuson, These are definitely not the average test shots! Beautiful images, and I really like the one of the dog.
-
LoCA test at f/0.95, 1.4 and f/2.8 on a knife's edge so to speak.
-
Finally a human portrait...not total cooperation from the model's side ;D
-
Nice. I got an itch to grab my old 58/1.2 again, though I know I'll never get such clarity.
By the way, could somebody provide comparative shots of Nocts at f/1.2 - f/1.4? just curious.
-
The portrait is really fine wow.
-
Finally a human portrait...not total cooperation from the model's side ;D
It is the age group ... they are so beautiful but cannot feel it
lovely shot
-
Nice portrait indeed !(natural)
I guess you slightly stopped down ?
-
Nice portrait indeed !(natural)
I guess you slightly stopped down ?
Nope, 0.95 here.
-
Ok !
I would expect less DOF, but probably the model is distant enough.
Thanks for all these interesting tests !
Cheers, Francis.
-
Lovely picture and girl Sten!
-
The portrait is really fine wow.
Yes, great !
Did you use a kind of light?
-
Yes, great !
Did you use a kind of light?
Thanks,
there is a small led panel to my lower left.
-
Nope, 0.95 here.
Wow for the technical quality. .... but: 8000€ for a great lens? Plus some thousands for a fitting body? I am not sure. I cannot afford it now, but even if, would I want it?
My house project sucks money currently...
-
I'd rent one if I needed to shoot at f/1.4 and have super [optically]clean images. Normally, if I shoot at f/1.4 or f/2 I am expecting and counting on aberrations and flaws. I'm much more of an f/8-11-16 photographer anyway.
-
Wow for the technical quality. .... but: 8000€ for a great lens?
.
Intersting price differences once again -official price is nearly 9000 € here in Austria
-
Intersting price differences once again -official price is nearly 9000 € here in Austria
Wolfgang: 8999€ is the official list price in DE too
-
The .95 Noct is such a special lens (takes low light photography to another dimension) that every serious photographer ought to have one. It being MF only is not much of a downside and achieving focus at wide apertures is certainly possible (perhaps a little practice is needed).
But then there is the price...so the upcoming 50/1.2S COULD be an, extremely more affordable, subsitute.
+ stellar optical performance
- stellar price
nags: weight, small amount of LoCA and perhaps the control ring which could do with being a liiiiitle more tactile.
-
I agree on the must have but the lens is way beyond any serious consideration financially, so i content myself with the 105/1.4, 200/2 and a few more extraordinary lenses i managed to have picked along the way, thanks ;)
-
Some more comments on the NOCT95. This is a heavy lens (4.4 lb./2000g) with a 4” wide barrel. The tripod foot that is built into the lens is just secure enough to avoid shake, but not quite as secure and stable as I wish. It’s OK.
The stiffness of the helicoid is my only complaint (so far) with this lens and I am going to install one of my focus-pulling gears on it with a lever and see it that helps. I have my doubts. The problem is with stacking 100 images and turning that helicoid which disturbs the camera a tiny bit with each shot, after which it returns (hopefully) to where it was before. LOL. Perhaps it will loosen up with use.
The build is all I could hope for and more. Optically, the colors seem fine and although some reviewers say it is not as highly corrected (APO) as we might prefer, so far, its APO quality is good enough for my work. It’s aperture collar (and whatever) works but I see no use for it so far. As for all the buttons, digital-windows, etc. on the lens, they don’t bother me, but neither do I find them helpful for my kind of work.
IMO, you will need a solid tripod for this lens, at least for focus stacking. I will use an RRS tripod, with either the Arca C1 Cube or the Burzynski “Protec” ball head on it. The unremovable tripod foot on the NOCT lens, as mentioned, is OK, not as sturdy as it could be. I mounted an Arca quick release plate on the foot and the stability of the foot is not quite as unmoving as I would like for stacking images. It is just inside of the limit that I would complain about, so I am not quite complaining.
The hood allows for a clear filter to be mounted within it but, because the lens moves, it will not allow external filter holders to be mounted except in a very limited range of motion. This will be a serious problem for some photographers.
The bokeh is probably the best I have ever used, with its 11 blades and very fast aperture, smooth and subtle.
As someone who stacks focus, this is a perfect lens because it allows me to shoot wide open and have a lovely out-of-focus background. Then, using the very narrow slice of focus at f/0.95, I can paint focus on objects in the foreground, stacking layers of focus to create whatever I want to be in perfect focus. Since it is 58mm, this additional wideness allows for subjects with considerable context surrounding them. I wish it were a macro lens since it is already quite flat, but we can’t have everything. I am glad it can do what it does.
This lens does NOT take extensions well at all, although I don’t have an extension available to me that is ultra-thin. If you know of one, let me know, but even then, it would be like painting graffiti on a Ferrari.
In summary, the lens is for me a keeper. I will use it for much of my in-studio work and when spring arrives, slap on a clear lens, and take it outside, but not too far because of its weight.
I would like to hear from other users with their experience of this lens.
-
is it 11 or 12 blades?
-
11
-
sorry, 11 blades.
-
I wonder if anyone noticed the 58/0.95 lens has an entrance pupil of 61mm, which is almost exactly the same as an 85/1.4 lens. Obviously the angle of view is different but the ability to separate a subject from the background should be similar...
-
I agree on the must have but the lens is way beyond any serious consideration financially, so i content myself with the 105/1.4, 200/2 and a few more extraordinary lenses i managed to have picked along the way, thanks ;)
it appears to be a fine lens (despite two known downsides - aperture pattern visible when not fully stopped down and once again as Michael said a not optimal tripod support) furthermore there are a lot of promising pics here. There are more expensive lenses out there (like the fast supertele gallery) so the Z-Noct is not outstanding in this aspect but 5x mm just isnt my favorite focal range. I consider the 200/2 which has also superior bokeh more useful, so I think for 58 mm the old Noct will do it for the upcoming future.
i would wish for an exchangeable tripod foot btw
-
I don't have the technical knowledge of many of the photographers here (read probably all), I'm curious however why Nikon chose this particular focal length for such a fast lens, any ideas?
-
As for the NOCT95, there is not a lot of reason to use this lens for high-aperture images. The moment I lose the bokeh, there is still the sharpness, but I have many sharp lenses for high-aperture shooting. I am sure different photographers will have different ways of using this lens.
IMO, wide-open is the only way (or most usual) way I will use the NOCT95. The ability to separate a subject from a background bokeh is what this lens is made for, as far as my work goes (portraits of flowers). It would be ideal for product photography, where a more subtle tone needs to be established. In-the-studio work (products) is made for a lens like this and a certain style of portrait photography would also make sense.
Since I specialize in close-up nature photography (with very little macro), I will use this lens to provide context because of the 58mm focal length. And I will use it wide open for the bokeh, and then paint focus on foreground subjects by stacking focus. This lens seems ideal for that recipe.
Here is an image with just three stacked shots, using f/5.6, just to see how that goes. It is OK, but without the incredible bokeh wide-open, many other lenses would suffice.
-
I don't have the technical knowledge of many of the photographers here (read probably all), I'm curious however why Nikon chose this particular focal length for such a fast lens, any ideas?
I believe it is more difficult to implement high quality at wide apertures in wide angle lenses, though the 28/1.4 AF-S is excellent (but not f/0.95 ...). 58mm may have been chosen out of tradition (the original Noct was a 58mm f/1.2). A shorter lens probably will be very challenging to make at f/0.95 or faster. 58mm is a good choice for 1/2 body or full body portraits; my favorite for full body is 45mm. It's quite traditional to use a fast normal lens for low light photography. At longer focal lengths such a wide aperture is probably not needed as e.g. the 105/1.4 and 200/2 render very blurred-out backgrounds (though the 105/1.4 hopefully will have less pronounced cats' eyes in a Z mount implementation of the future) in typical situations, and a 105mm f/0.95 would be impractical and very heavy indeed.
I don't know what Nikon's plans are but I suspect they will offer some fast wide angle primes for Z. This is an area where I think the Z would have a significant advantage. They have also suggested they may make faster than f/0.95 lenses.
-
Here is another test, this time with a three-dimensional statue, in the case the great Mahasiddha Tilopa of the Mahamudra lineage of Tibetan Buddhism. This is a stacked image, but only of a few layers, highlighting specific parts of the statue, leaving the rest to be bokeh of one kind of another.
-
That may be due to the size and weight of the lens. The specs make no mention of internal or rear focusing so I assume it is unit focusing, so that is a lot of glass to move. Hopefully it loosens up with use. It might be worth trying to rig up some sort of focus tab or lever on the lens, similar to the screw-in focus handles supplied with the 1000/11 reflex - it would give you a bit more leverage on the focus ring giving you easier and finer control.
I tried a follow-focus ribbed lens cog, one that has a little lever on it. The lever is not worth messing with, but the cog itself is a help, The cog is like a little lever.
Also, here is another statue from Nepal, this one of the Mahasiddha Naropa. The second rupa is the Mahasiddha Saraha.
-
The iris looks amazing, Michael!
By the way, I wonder if the reciprocity between the aperture and shutter speed is kept at the apertures wider than f1.2... If I understand correctly, the reciprocal failure kicks in when the lens is faster than f1.2 because of the limitation of the speed of the micro lenses on the sensor...
-
The iris looks amazing, Michael!
By the way, I wonder if the reciprocity between the aperture and shutter speed is kept at the apertures wider than f1.2... If I understand correctly, the reciprocal failure kicks in when the lens is faster than f1.2 because of the limitation of the speed of the micro lenses on the sensor...
Not sure i understand. Please explain if you have time. I tent to shoot wide open
-
Not sure i understand. Please explain if you have time. I tent to shoot wide open
My question was directed to anyone who has the hands-on experience with the Neo-Noct, but I would appreciate if you would perform a test to make sure of this aspect of the optical wonder.
Theoretically and practically, the relationship between the aperture setting and the shutter speed for the same exposure value is constant. For example, 1/2000sec.@f1.4=1/1000@2.0=1/500@2.8, etc. That is obvious. But, because the physical opening (the speed) of the microlenses image sensor is said to be f1.2, the same relationship won't apply when the attached lens is faster than f1.2.
You may want to refer to this review of a budget 50mm/f1.1 lens by Christopher Frost:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRt2mNFxdDI
-
Interesting question. Film has reciprocity failure in low light with long shutter speeds - the sensitivity declines so even longer shutter speed is required to obtain a proper exposures, and color shifts can also occur.
I haven't heard of this with digital sensors. Maybe in theory in very bright light there is a limit to how fast the sensor can count photons? If so, it could occur even with slower lenses (or smaller apertures) if light was very bright (strong flash, direct sunlight) and in such cases there is more chance the sensor would be overloaded.
Could the microlenses limit the amount of light reaching the sensor when a very fast lens is used? Sensors work best when light is more or less collimated and strikes perpendicular. For a pixel near the centre of a sensor behind an f/1.0 lens, peripheral light will strike the sensor at about 63° so the efficiency of the sensor could be less. This effect could become even more pronounced towards the edges of the sensor as the light bundles become less perpendicular. If so, I would also expect to see color shifts towards the sides at very wide apertures, such as occurs when very wide non-retrofocus lenses are used. Has anyone observed this? Note that the last element of the Z Noct is concave (negative) which tends to collimate light, so it appears the designers at least attempted to minimise this effect.
-
My question was directed to anyone who has the hands-on experience with the Neo-Noct, but I would appreciate if you would perform a test to make sure of this aspect of the optical wonder.
Theoretically and practically, the relationship between the aperture setting and the shutter speed for the same exposure value is constant. For example, 1/2000sec.@f1.4=1/1000@2.0=1/500@2.8, etc. That is obvious. But, because the physical opening (the speed) of the microlenses image sensor is said to be f1.2, the same relationship won't apply when the attached lens is faster than f1.2.
You may want to refer to this review of a budget 50mm/f1.1 lens by Christopher Frost:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRt2mNFxdDI
That makes no sense.
The sensor only knows how many photons fall on it.
The claim that it is saturated at f/1.2 and can not accept any more light is crazy.
It may be true with a certain light level, but the image would be completely overexposed.
The same could be true with any aperture given bright enough light.
-
Interesting question. Film has reciprocity failure in low light with long shutter speeds - the sensitivity declines so even longer shutter speed is required to obtain a proper exposures, and color shifts can also occur.
I haven't heard of this with digital sensors. Maybe in theory in very bright light there is a limit to how fast the sensor can count photons? If so, it could occur even with slower lenses (or smaller apertures) if light was very bright (strong flash, direct sunlight) and in such cases there is more chance the sensor would be overloaded.
Could the microlenses limit the amount of light reaching the sensor when a very fast lens is used? Sensors work best when light is more or less collimated and strikes perpendicular. For a pixel near the centre of a sensor behind an f/1.0 lens, peripheral light will strike the sensor at about 63° so the efficiency of the sensor could be less. This effect could become even more pronounced towards the edges of the sensor as the light bundles become less perpendicular. If so, I would also expect to see color shifts towards the sides at very wide apertures, such as occurs when very wide non-retrofocus lenses are used. Has anyone observed this? Note that the last element of the Z Noct is concave (negative) which tends to collimate light, so it appears the designers at least attempted to minimise this effect.
Maybe "Leica M" rings a bell...
-
Interesting discussion here ...
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61063848
and in the references cited therein.
-
The question at dpreview is stated as: "I understand that the sensors micro lenses have an effective working aperture of about F2 or smaller. Does this imply that the sensor will not fully see/record all of the light from super speed lenses such as the Leica F1 noctilux ..."
My sense is that the aperture of the microlenses is not greatly relevant. Their job is simply to collect the light focused on them by the lens, and pass it down to the sensor. If the lens in front has a very fast aperture, the intensity of light focused on the microlenses may be greater, but they should still do their job the same as with a slower lens. Put it this way: imagine two sensors where the physical depth of the pixel is the same, the microlenses cover the same percentage of the surface but one has twice as many pixels as the other. The microlens on the high-res sensor is one stop slower than the microlens on the low-res sensor, yet both sensors have the same overall light-gathering ability regardless of the lens put in front.
As discussed earlier, the angle of incidence may be greater with very fast lenses which may reduce the efficiency of the microlenses, but that is not closely related to the aperture of the microlenses themselves.
-
That makes no sense.
The sensor only knows how many photons fall on it.
The claim that it is saturated at f/1.2 and can not accept any more light is crazy.
It may be true with a certain light level, but the image would be completely overexposed.
The same could be true with any aperture given bright enough light.
I'd still interested to make sure if the f0.95 Z Neo-Noct allows 1+ stop faster shutter speed than an f1.4 lens, say the f1.4 F Neo-Noct. That should give the answer to the matter of the speed of on-sensor microlenses at the same time.
Some say that the aperture index of Kamlan 50/1.1 lens is inaccurate, which should affect the accuracy of the measurement of reciprocity. The aperture index of Neo-Noct should be way more accurate.
If the f0.95 speed doesn't allow the expected faster shutter speed, the wide opening won't be too beneficial for the astro-photography, for example.
-
I'd still interested to make sure if the f0.95 Z Neo-Noct allows 1+ stop faster shutter speed than an f1.4 lens, say the f1.4 F Neo-Noct. That should give the answer to the matter of the speed of on-sensor microlenses at the same time.
Some say that the aperture index of Kamlan 50/1.1 lens is inaccurate, which should affect the accuracy of the measurement of reciprocity. The aperture index of Neo-Noct should be way more accurate.
If the f0.95 speed doesn't allow the expected faster shutter speed, the wide opening won't be too beneficial for the astro-photography, for example.
Difference between f/0.95 and f/1.4 is 1 1/6 of a stop - between f/1 and f/1.4 is 1 stop.
That the micro-lenses on the sensor should have any impact on the difference between individual lenses is IMHO not valid in real life shooting - This I have never seen on Leica M shooting f/0.95, f/1, f/1.1 and f/1.2 together with f/1.4 - No uneven exposure compensation needed at all!
What has substantial impact is variance in coatings, glass quality, amount of glass elements, quality of grinding/casting of lens elements and optical formula, all have impact on vignetting and the final amount of light hitting the sensor or film.
T-stop comes up here as the ultimate solution for the lens itself. The re-housing of Noct-Nikkor for 'Cinema lenses' is quite common there it is labeled 58mm T1.3
That a camera body should be labeled Nikon Z7 T1.2 is not making any sense to me at all IMHO.
Also I have never ever seen these fast lenses not following the aperture values and also never seen any substantial difference between ISO values in Leica M or Nikon digital bodies 8)
-
The relative exposure values for my Repro-Nikkor 85mm f/1 is f/1: 0 EV, f/1.4: +1 EV, f/2: +2 EV and so forth on each and every Nikon camera I have used it with. No additional adjustments are required.
-
Difference between f/0.95 and f/1.4 is 1 1/6 of a stop - between f/1 and f/1.4 is 1 stop.
That the micro-lenses on the sensor should have any impact on the difference between individual lenses is IMHO not valid in real life shooting - This I have never seen on Leica M shooting f/0.95, f/1, f/1.1 and f/1.2 together with f/1.4 - No uneven exposure compensation needed at all!
What has substantial impact is variance in coatings, glass quality, amount of glass elements, quality of grinding/casting of lens elements and optical formula, all have impact on vignetting and the final amount of light hitting the sensor or film.
T-stop comes up here as the ultimate solution for the lens itself. The re-housing of Noct-Nikkor for 'Cinema lenses' is quite common there it is labeled 58mm T1.3
That a camera body should be labeled Nikon Z7 T1.2 is not making any sense to me at all IMHO.
Also I have never ever seen these fast lenses not following the aperture values and also never seen any substantial difference between ISO values in Leica M or Nikon digital bodies 8)
Thank you, Erik, for the confirmation from your real-life experience! So, the issue was an urban myth!
The relative exposure values for my Repro-Nikkor 85mm f/1 is f/1: 0 EV, f/1.4: +1 EV, f/2: +2 EV and so forth on each and every Nikon camera I have used it with. No additional adjustments are required.
When I initially posted my question, I thought about the Repro Nikkor. However, the "f1.0" value of the 85mm Repro is an imaginary one when it would be focused at infinity. So, I intentionally ignored it. The same should go with Heligons: one can use it only at very close distance and the effective aperture should not be that astonishingly fast. Also, Heligons don't have aperture blades, which makes it impossible to compare the shutter speeds at various aperture settings.
-
No more imaginary than any lens
-
I'd still interested to make sure if the f0.95 Z Neo-Noct allows 1+ stop faster shutter speed than an f1.4 lens, say the f1.4 F Neo-Noct. That should give the answer to the matter of the speed of on-sensor microlenses at the same time.
I noticed that many lenses seem to under-expose when shot wide open (I especially noticed this when shooting slide films). Mechanical vignetting is highest wide open, so even if the centre of the image is exposed correctly, the outer regions could be under-exposed.
Closing down one stop will reduce the aperture in the centre. However, in lenses with high mechanical vignetting (especially zooms and fast lenses) the corners are hardly even "touched" by closing the aperture one stop, they were effectively stopped down already. So the average exposure is less than one stop different from wide open. This would account for why the shutter speed is often less than one stop different between wide open and closed down one stop, we don't need to blame micro-lenses for that :o
-
A sensor is a detector that will give a brighter image output if brighter light is presented to it.
Whether I open up the lens aperture from f/1.4 to f/0.95 OR keep the aperture at f/1.4 and dial up the brightness of the light by 1 1/6 stops shouldn't matter.
The light intensity presented to the sensor has increased by 1 1/6 stops in either case.
-
My question was directed to anyone who has the hands-on experience with the Neo-Noct, but I would appreciate if you would perform a test to make sure of this aspect of the optical wonder.
Theoretically and practically, the relationship between the aperture setting and the shutter speed for the same exposure value is constant. For example, 1/2000sec.@f1.4=1/1000@2.0=1/500@2.8, etc. That is obvious. But, because the physical opening (the speed) of the microlenses image sensor is said to be f1.2, the same relationship won't apply when the attached lens is faster than f1.2.
You may want to refer to this review of a budget 50mm/f1.1 lens by Christopher Frost:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRt2mNFxdDI
This is certainly not the case when I use my Canon f0.95. It is f0.95 as read by the camera.
-
Interview in Chinese with the designers of the 58mm f0.95S Nikkor. This is part II following previous about design of the Z-Mount
Google Translate renders distinctly garbled prose but it's readable
https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&pto=aue&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=zh-CN&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://info.xitek.com/allpage/attitudes/202005/06-345705.html&usg=ALkJrhhw_-0hQpbZZZ05rrIA-X5d3pW0aw
EDIT: this link works much better
https://info.xitek.com/attitudes/202005/06-345702.html#artPos
some western photo media sites have also picked up this interview - https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/the-monster-nikon-z-58mm-f095-s-noct-could-have-been-even-bigger
-
Very interesting insight, A big ring motor SWM, wow yes that would have made it huge :o
-
fyi - I don't see this cited above
https://www.nikon.com/about/technology/rd/pdf/nrr_vol2_2020_02_e.pdf
-
fyi - I don't see this cited above
https://www.nikon.com/about/technology/rd/pdf/nrr_vol2_2020_02_e.pdf (https://www.nikon.com/about/technology/rd/pdf/nrr_vol2_2020_02_e.pdf)
Thx for the heads up!
Very comprehensive article ;)