Is the Neo-Noct a sharp lens? Discussing the AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4

[JKoerner007]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people don't actually understand the lens they're interested in ...

NO, the Neo-Noct is *NOT* sharp ... compared to any lens that is considered authentically-sharp ... and that is by design.

Portrait lenses are purposefully "unsharp" ... but designed to have special rendering ... which is exactly what the 58/1.4 embodies.

Even a damned cell phone "purposely blurs" portraits, and renders such images differently, when it recognizes this intent.

I have read hundreds ... and hundreds ... and hundreds ... of posts and cries for "why" the 58 f/1.4 "isn't sharp" ... by those who understand nothing.

And, by the same token, I have read hundreds ... and hundreds ... and hundreds ... of posts and exultations of those who love the 58/1.4 because of its rendering ... by those who understand the purpose of the lens.

And that is pretty much a summary of everything that's ever been discussed about this optic.

[David H. Hartman]

I thought the NOCT and neo-NOCT were designed for night photography where points of light are rendered as comet like splotches at large apertures by conventional lenses, not as points light.

Dave Hartman

[JKoerner007]

The Noct. is the name Nikon coined to reflect the actual indended purpose of the original nocturne 1.2 AI/S lens.

The 'neo-noct' is a term zealots coined in their failed attempt to liken the two (unrelated) lenses together ... based on a misunderstanding of each lens' intended purpose.

[Frank Fremerey]

The Noct. is the name Nikon coined to reflect the actual indended purpose of the original nocturne 1.2 AI/S lens.

The 'neo-noct' is a term zealots coined in their failed attempt to liken the two (unrelated) lenses together ... based on a misunderstanding of each lens' intended purpose.

Erik Lund is a Zealot???

[Airy]

The Noct. is the name Nikon coined to reflect the actual indended purpose of the original nocturne 1.2 AI/S lens.

The 'neo-noct' is a term zealots coined in their failed attempt to liken the two (unrelated) lenses together ... based on a misunderstanding of each lens' intended purpose.

It is true that "Neo Noct" is no official Nikon designation.
But shortly after the release of that lens, a Brussels photographer (working at the main camera shop: PCH, rue du Midi) and (old) Noct owner showed me some night shots he made with both lenses, photos that were also published in a photo magazine. The comparison was rather in favour of the "neo noct", especially as far as flare is concerned. So the term is not undeserved.

Concerning the "other personality", I had a similar experience with the Noct : stopped down, and field curvature aside, it becomes a very sharp lens, while contrast always seems to be there (which is the biggest difference with the 50/1.2).

Bokeh-wise, the noct has a good reputation, at least compared to other fifties (I think the Zeiss MP is better though), but the neo noct seems to be even better. So once again, the designation is not inappropriate.

One thing is sure, none of these lenses have been designed to yield optimum results at test chart shooting (which probably triggered some howling in the marketing department). So what. Should I say "fortunately" ?

[Fons Baerken]

It is true that "Neo Noct" is no official Nikon designation.
But shortly after the release of that lens, a Brussels photographer (working at the main camera shop: PCH, rue du Midi) and (old) Noct owner showed me some night shots he made with both lenses, photos that were also published in a photo magazine. The comparison was rather in favour of the "neo noct", especially as far as flare is concerned. So the term is not undeserved.

Concerning the "other personality", I had a similar experience with the Noct : stopped down, and field curvature aside, it becomes a very sharp lens, while contrast always seems to be there (which is the biggest difference with the 50/1.2).



Bokeh-wise, the noct has a good reputation, at least compared to other fifties (I think the Zeiss MP is better though), but the neo noct seems to be even better. So once again, the designation is not inappropriate.

One thing is sure, none of these lenses have been designed to yield optimum results at test chart shooting (which probably triggered some howling in the marketing department). So what. Should I say "fortunately" ?

I must  when i read this, well put Airy.

[chambeshi]

It never ceases to amaze me how many people don't actually understand the lens they're interested in ...

NO, the Neo-Noct is *NOT* sharp ... compared to any lens that is considered authentically-sharp ... and that is by design.

Portrait lenses are purposefully "unsharp" ... but designed to have special rendering ... which is exactly what the 58/1.4 embodies.

Even a damned cell phone "purposely blurs" portraits, and renders such images differently, when it recognizes this intent.

I have read hundreds ... and hundreds ... and hundreds ... of posts and cries for "why" the 58 f/1.4 "isn't sharp" ... by those who understand nothing.

And, by the same token, I have read hundreds ... and hundreds ... and hundreds ... of posts and exultations of those who love the 58/1.4 because of its rendering ... by those who understand the purpose of the lens.

And that is pretty much a summary of everything that's ever been discussed about this optic.

Aggressive Angst is bewildering and not needed on this Forum

Use of the term Neo-Noct / "derived from the Noct-Nikkor etc" is widespread WRT the 58 f1.4G. This includes extensive discussion with Nikon designers in Eyes of Nikon, the official book dedicated to Nikkor lens. None other than from the mouth of Haruo Sato, who had waited for decades to apply his concepts, building on what Nikon had acheived with the Noct-Nikkor.

In the [translated] words of Haruo Sato, "The design philosophy of "the point appears in a point" was originally passed down the design philosophy of Noctonikor. Initially I was thinking of bearing the name "Noct". However, the point image is greatly improved so that the depiction will be better, and the MTF is also improved further, so there are parts that exceeded the performance in terms of Nikon's Nikkor. Therefore, we decided not to use the name of the Noct."

https://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/621449.html

http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Camera-Lenses/2210/AF-S-NIKKOR-58mm-f%252F1.4G.html "Flattering, versatile 58mm focal length (87mm equivalent on DX-format D-SLRs) that pays homage to the acclaimed Noct Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 lens.....Paying homage to the acclaimed Noct Nikkor 58mm f/1.2, the 58mm focal length falls in the sweet spot between a standard lens (50mm) and a medium telephoto lens (85mm). "

[Frank Fremerey]

OK. Now we know the official term is not neo noct but "hommage to the noct"

Frankly, I can live with both.

I did not fall in love with this lens at first sight. But the longer I own it the more I love it.

[Danulon]

It is a very useful lens for non portraiture pics, too:
(f/1.4, sorry for the small file size - quick conversion on my smartphone)

[JKoerner007]

It is true that "Neo Noct" is no official Nikon designation.
But shortly after the release of that lens, a Brussels photographer (working at the main camera shop: PCH, rue du Midi) and (old) Noct owner showed me some night shots he made with both lenses, photos that were also published in a photo magazine. The comparison was rather in favour of the "neo noct", especially as far as flare is concerned. So the term is not undeserved.

Concerning the "other personality", I had a similar experience with the Noct : stopped down, and field curvature aside, it becomes a very sharp lens, while contrast always seems to be there (which is the biggest difference with the 50/1.2).

Bokeh-wise, the noct has a good reputation, at least compared to other fifties (I think the Zeiss MP is better though), but the neo noct seems to be even better. So once again, the designation is not inappropriate.

One thing is sure, none of these lenses have been designed to yield optimum results at test chart shooting (which probably triggered some howling in the marketing department). So what. Should I say "fortunately" ?

I think I have to retract my statements.

According to Nikon's own literature the two do seem to share objectives:

Of the Original Noct. 58mm f/1.2 (taken from Thousand and One Nights), Nikon says:

• "The Noct NIKKOR that was said to be named after "Nocturne" was released in 1977, the same year the release of the Nikon Photomic A. This lens, as was called "Noct", was designed for taking a picture at night with fully opened aperture stop."
  
  ...It was the Noct NIKKOR that was developed for correcting the troublesome sagittal coma flare produced at the maximum aperture.

Of the 58mm f/1.4G (taken from Nikon USA), Nikon says:

• "the AF-S NIKKOR 58mm f/1.4G, a lens designed to excel in low-light and nighttime applications but with characteristics you'll enjoy for so much more. Its fast f/1.4 maximum aperture produces outstanding evenly lit images with edge-to-edge sharpness—virtually no sagittal coma or light falloff.

In fact they do appear to have been crafted to meet similar objectives.

Thus I'll retract what I said previously

[OCD]

It is true that "Neo Noct" is no official Nikon designation.
But shortly after the release of that lens, a Brussels photographer (working at the main camera shop: PCH, rue du Midi) and (old) Noct owner showed me some night shots he made with both lenses, photos that were also published in a photo magazine. The comparison was rather in favour of the "neo noct", especially as far as flare is concerned. So the term is not undeserved.

Concerning the "other personality", I had a similar experience with the Noct : stopped down, and field curvature aside, it becomes a very sharp lens, while contrast always seems to be there (which is the biggest difference with the 50/1.2).

Bokeh-wise, the noct has a good reputation, at least compared to other fifties (I think the Zeiss MP is better though), but the neo noct seems to be even better. So once again, the designation is not inappropriate.

One thing is sure, none of these lenses have been designed to yield optimum results at test chart shooting (which probably triggered some howling in the marketing department). So what. Should I say "fortunately" ?

+ 1

Airy, I agree with your take on the 58.

Here's my favorite article on the Neo-Noct by Steve Simon: https://www.thepassionatephotographer.com/the-nikkor-58mm-f1-4g-lens-me-a-review/

Steve's in alignment with your assessment I think.  His article was the tipping point for me to splurge and buy this lens, and no regrets thus far because it is a fun and versatile lens to use, and a reminder that sharpness is not everything.  Of course we may desire great sharpness, but for me (emphasis on "for me") sharpness is over-valued because it is one of the easiest aspects of a lens to measure (and again, it is quite fine if others value sharpness more than me for the kind of photography they enjoy).  The Neo-Noct and lenses like it, so-called "character lenses," are much more difficult to "measure" because whether or not you appreciate such a lens is quite a subjective decision - and the arguments on such lenses can be massive.  In this regard, the passion that so many on NikonGear have for the Vintage Nikkors comes to mind, and the synergy Bjorn describes between his 105mm f/2.5 and Df is a fine example.  I do believe we bond with our gear, and that is a value that exceeds all measurements.  We just can't expect others to share our passion necessarily, horses for courses as they say [a].

[a]  Horses for Courses:  (British Proverb)  Different people are suited to different things or situations.

[chambeshi]

+ 1

Airy, I agree with your take on the 58.

Here's my favorite article on the Neo-Noct by Steve Simon: https://www.thepassionatephotographer.com/the-nikkor-58mm-f1-4g-lens-me-a-review/

Steve's in alignment with your assessment I think.  His article was the tipping point for me to splurge and buy this lens, and no regrets thus far because it is a fun and versatile lens to use, and a reminder that sharpness is not everything.  Of course we may desire great sharpness, but for me (emphasis on "for me") sharpness is over-valued because it is one of the easiest aspects of a lens to measure (and again, it is quite fine if others value sharpness more than me for the kind of photography they enjoy).  The Neo-Noct and lenses like it, so-called "character lenses," are much more difficult to "measure" because whether or not you appreciate such a lens is quite a subjective decision - and the arguments on such lenses can be massive.  In this regard, the passion that so many on NikonGear have for the Vintage Nikkors comes to mind, and the synergy Bjorn describes between his 105mm f/2.5 and Df is a fine example.  I do believe we bond with our gear, and that is a value that exceeds all measurements.  We just can't expect others to share our passion necessarily, horses for courses as they say [a].

[a]  Horses for Courses:  (British Proverb)  Different people are suited to different things or situations.

Thanks for the link - that article makes for an enjoyable read. Great photos too :-) Another endorsement for the Neo-Noct is from David Yarrow, described as his Desert Island lens

https://davidyarrow.photography/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Digital-Photographer-2015-dec.pdf

https://www.pressreader.com/australia/nphoto/20161222/282282434953684


FYI, links to other reviews I've logged:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/nikon-lens-reviews/nikon-58mm-f14g-af-s.html
http://www.samhurdphotography.com/reviews/nikon-58mm-1-4-review-in-depth-lens-review/
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/nikon_afs_nikkor_58mm_f_1_4_g_review
http://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/nikon/58mm-f1.4g-af-s-nikkor/review/
http://www.photozone.de/nikon_ff/883-nikkorafs5814ff
https://fstoppers.com/originals/why-i-love-nikon-58mm-f14g-lens-70168

[David H. Hartman]

Here's my favorite article on the Neo-Noct by Steve Simon: https://www.thepassionatephotographer.com/the-nikkor-58mm-f1-4g-lens-me-a-review/

Thank you for posting this link. Steve Simon is a moderator on the Flickr Digital Learning Center. You might like these...

https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigitallearningcenter/discuss/72157664009720315/?search=58mm

https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigitallearningcenter/discuss/72157675308273552/?search=58mm

https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondigitallearningcenter/discuss/72157650328229443/?search=58mm

Dave

[richardHaw]

don't know if anybody mentioned this.
I vaguely recall the lens designer (Sato-san) mentioning that this lens is a homage to the 58/1.4 (https://richardhaw.com/2017/06/20/repair-nikkor-s-5-8cm-f1-4-auto/)

the lens wasn't calculated for sharpness but for pleasing rendering. I talked to the designer and he had the rendering of human skin in mind when he calculated this. it is a very bold move by Nikon to make such a lens in modern times where MTF charts are all the rage.

I failed to appreciate the lens when it came out but apart from not affording it, i can see no reason not to dislike it.

[David H. Hartman]

SHB "not to like it" ?

The prince of typos is wondering.

Dave

I wish I could see a reason to dislike it but personally I can't. I had to settle for an AF-S 50/1.8G.