The new Noct 58mm f/0.95 - Bet and Win!!!

[Mexecutioner]

I can't really read the graphs. Can someone please just suggest what brand and type best protect the NOCt or should I not use any, please?

Michael,

I like the  X4 UV filters from Breakthrough Photography. I have them on all of my Schneider Kreuznach lenses. Very neutral, multi-coated and I like the knurled ring which makes it very easy to remove and to tighten. If you are going to be putting the filter on and taking it off regularly I think you would appreciate this design. they are very thin and resistant at the same time. I also use a 105mm CPL from then and it is very nice.

https://breakthrough.photography/products/x4-uv?variant=31478833169

[Roland Vink]

The "BW XS-Pro Clear MRC-Nano Coated" is the best on the marked, most neutral protection filter.
It has the MRC coatings and on top of this the Nano coating Nikon also uses on their top end lenses to keep it easy to clean.

I wondered about the Nano coating ... the "Nano Crystal Coating" that Nikon used is very delicate. It is essentially a thin layer of particles that is very dense next to the glass, so with similar refractive index. The particles become progressive less dense towards the air surface, the structure becomes more open and porous. It doesn't have a definite "surface" at the glass or air boundaries which could cause reflections (which is why it is so effective), there is simply a smooth gradient in refractive index between glass and air which allows much higher transmission. The open structure of the coating at the air surface must mean it is very delicate, it would easily be crushed by touching or cleaning, and IT could be clogged by oils from fingerprints etc. So Nano coat can only be used on internal surfaces which are well protected.

Many manufacturers also use Fluorine coatings which repel dust and fingerprints and are easy to clean, I don't know much about them. Maybe they also have some sort of nano structure but it would be quite different from Nikon's Nano Crystal Coating, so the term "nano" becomes quite confusing.

[Akira]

For the new NOCT s lens, I will not use a 82mm UV filter in the studio, but if I go outside, what is considered the clearest and best brand of UV filter?

Nikon's own ARCREST filter should also be worth considering.  I read a comparison test by Impress-Watch, and ARCREST was the best one, especially in terms of supressing reflection.

[pluton]

It seems that "nano" at B+W is what others call 'flourine'.
I have used Nikon NC and B+W 007 MRC, but not the 'B+W 007 MRC Nano'.   
The Nikon NC seems the clearest by eye, but I have never run a real test. Heck, an old Nikon L37c seems fine to me.
That new "Arcrest" Nikon filter appears not to be sold by USA retailers.  
Added: Looking at the Breakthrough X4 filter, I'd make sure I could return it if the expanded grippy ring interfered with a detachable lens hood. The rings of my Nikon NC 58mm filters are just wide enough to interfere with the attachment/removal of the lens hoods on my Zeiss ZF 35/2 and 28/2 lenses.  The B+W 007 MRC 58mm do not interfere on those same lenses.

[Erik Lund]

It seems that "nano" at B+W is what others call 'flourine'.
...

....
Added: Looking at the Breakthrough X4 filter, I'd make sure I could return it if the expanded grippy ring interfered with a detachable lens hood. The rings of my Nikon NC 58mm filters are just wide enough to interfere with the attachment/removal of the lens hoods on my Zeiss ZF 35/2 and 28/2 lenses.  The B+W 007 MRC 58mm do not interfere on those same lenses.

Yes that is wat i meant with Nano coating. 
And yes the new Breakthrough filters get very nice reviews, but they look like they might interfere with lens hoods,,,

[Mexecutioner]

Yes that is wat i meant with Nano coating. 
And yes the new Breakthrough filters get very nice reviews, but they look like they might interfere with lens hoods,,,

So far all the Breakthrough filters I have do not interfere with the detachable hoods at all, however I noticed than on my macro lens (uses an 86mm filter) the filter feels wider ONLY when I put the hood back on reversed for storage in the bag, who knows, it may be that this longer hood is a bit narrower than all the others I have.

Different lens manufacturers with different tolerances may be another story.

If you decide to try them they have a great 300 day return policy.

[Erik Lund]

Some portrait pictures, I'm not impressed to be honest, I had much higher hopes for a cleaner image regarding APO correction. They also show how difficult it is to get the focus right. Most funny detail is that f/0.95 turns into f/1  That is just not ok...

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries

[Akira]

Some portrait pictures, I'm not impressed to be honest, I had much higher hopes for a cleaner image regarding APO correction. They also show how difficult it is to get the focus right. Most funny detail is that f/0.95 turns into f/1  That is just not ok...

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries

I also observe the LoCA as well as some onion rings...

[Birna Rørslett]

"f/1" is due to the RAW engine used. Photo Ninja reports f/0.9 (!), Silkypix 8.32 f/0.95.

The portrait of the lady I tried (DSC_1275.NEF) is stunningly sharp and the depth of field extremely small. Her left eye is in perfect focus whilst the other is going out of focus ...

I see more colour artefacts than I had expected, but suffice it to say, the test subject and light would not be kind on any lens.

[Erik Lund]

To my eyes 1275 has slight front focus, her nose is sharp to the tip, at least, much sharper than her right eye, so depth of focus could have been moved further back, I would have preferred that. Nice that it's just the raw converter misreading exif data 

[Birna Rørslett]

EXIF information is the same and probably read correctly, this is about presentation incl. rounding off of figures. f/0.95 is 1/6 EV "faster" than f/1 if memory serves. EXIF specification allows only down to f/1 thus the information must come from Maker's Note.

[Birna Rørslett]

Some RAW engines literally choke on the NEFs taken with the f/0.95 Noct.

Here is what the poor RawTherapee spat out ....

[Erik Lund]

  Very creative!

[Birna Rørslett]

After RawTherapee, running this NEF through NX-D was an anti-climax. Just smooth, perfect rendition and all the colour artefacts are gone.

By the way, NX-D also reports f/0.95 for this lens.

To show the lens performance with NX-D, here is a screen dump of the NX-D output at 100%. No claims for colour accuracy as this is from a secondary monitor not colour-profiled. Do click the image to expand it to 100%. This is f/0.95, remember .... Unbelievable.

[Erik Lund]

Very impressive sharpness, but the green in the right eye highlight is apparently not gone here.