Noct Nikkor (58/1.2 AIS), another batch

[Airy]

Indeed, even at low res.

[Roland Vink]

When using my Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 AIS at f/2 the lens is notably sharper than at f/1.2.

These results should not be too surprising, even for a well corrected lens like the Noct. Very few lenses are perfect wide open, especially lenses of this age and of this speed, so you should expect some aberrations at wide apertures which reduce on stopping down.

Also, the depth of field at f/1.2 is very shallow even at far distances as in the picture above. For example, if the lens was focused on the car, I should expect the fence in the foreground, and the hill in the background to be far enough outside the focus zone to be a little soft. Again, stopping down to f/2 will increase the DoF and render the whole scene more sharply.

[Airy]

Using the (historical) Noct wide open, we're not looking for perfection, are we

Still, f/1.2 is usable under some circumstances, because of the relatively high contrast (much less haze than others) provided by this lens, so the pics still have some punch despite nearly everything being out of focus. I could not find one of my oldest Noct post here, where some forum Member was surprized by the "apparent" sharpness at f/1.2.

I have found this other old thread with some comparisons: https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=7723.0

Ah, finally found my original thread. See the first two shots, both at f/1.2, that illustrate well this "contrast" story: https://nikongear.net/revival/index.php?topic=5780.0

[Imagelover]

I also add the Noct f/4 shot only so you can compare if you like. It's getting better at f/4...

[Airy]

A funny lens, this Noct. Both pictures were taken minutes apart, f/1.2. No contrast or color tweaks in PP.

[Airy]

Some more. Df, 58/1.2 at f/2, f/1.4 (3 times), f/2.8 at minimum focussing distance, all handheld of course.

[ianwatson]

There is something enchanting about this lens in your hands, Airy.

[MFloyd]

Personally, I don’t have anything “wider” than f/2.8. If I would have such a lens, it would be to shoot it wide open, no ? I had an occasion to handle and shoot the Noct f/0.9: waw ! Only for this I would buy a Z. 

Idem for Leica’s Noctilux 50mm f/0.95. These are genuine masterpieces, even if the applicability is somewhat limited, and return on investment is close to nil ...

[Airy]

Having used the Noct since 2017, and a couple of 50/1.2 before, I have slightly different views.

As I mostly shoot static subjects with MF lenses, aperture is to me the synonym of DoF. Everything else is taken care of by the wide ISO range provided by the Df.

The Noct provides me with a full range of DoF, according to circumstances. f/1.2 is mostly irrelevant at minimum focussing distance (unless you want everything to be unsharp); f/2.8 seems the bare minimum.

At a distance, subject isolation benefits a lot from f/1.2-f/1.4 (other, similar case: the 105/1.8 AIS wide open also allows such tricks, but bokeh is not so good). When I need more sharpness and DoF, f/4-f/8 is also available and usable with the Noct, despite some field curvature. Besides, the Noct has more barrel distortion than classical fifties, but it is easily corrected if need be (i.e., rarely).

Bottom line, the Noct is a fine all-rounder if you *also* need high subject isolation, but it remains an all-rounder all the same, also because it is rather small and light, compared with contemporary monsters. I can shoot all day and not swap lenses all the time. The Noct is sure not perfect; its main drawback however is price but even so, my non-financial ROI is significant. I wonder what would have happened if it had been produced in higher quantities using machine-grinding for the aspherical front element...

Of course, given the present market where chart-shooters have the say, the old Noct is doomed and will remain a collector item, in most cases.

I'm happy to have found Mr. Rörslett's website, early in my digital photography "career", helping me stay away from charts when considering actual lens usability.

By the way, on my fourth and so far last trip to Japan, I decided to take the Noct with me (together with the Zeiss 25/2) and did not regret it. Another similar setting I frequently use is Nikkor 28/2 + Voigtländer 58/1.4.

[Erik Lund]

Lovely rendering!A lens that will always be close to my heart.Thank you for sharing! Much appriciated

[Imagelover]

Today I took with me the AF-S Nikkor 58mm f/1.4G and the AI-S Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2, in order to shoot some shots for comparing. The first shot is with the 1.4G, the second with the 1.2. Both were shot at 2.8, D810 and a tripod, mirror lockup. You out there are the best to compare, but i noticed that the 1.2 render the sky a little more "bluish" or "colder". What do you think?

[Imagelover]

Here is the second one ( AI-S Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 at f/2.8 )

[Nasos Kosmas]

It’s hard to see any difference it’s almost identical, the sky difference is the 4 minutes  in time and some rosy clouds

[Airy]

At f/2.8, I do not expect big differences anyway - all fifites being "good enough" at f/2.8. At wider apertures, you would expect less halos with the newer coatings of the Neo-Noct, as I could see from a tester in Brussels who also owned an '"old" Noct.

Color difference may arise from Auto WB and its reactions to ambient light. Yesterday I experienced such variations (not due to moving lights, probably just a small camera movement). Not very likely in your case, since you used a tripod and car lights most likely did not disturb. Maybe just the sunlight fading away quickly at that time of the day, resulting in more blue in the later shot.

[Airy]

Df, noct wide open. ISO 360 and 1/60 is always nice to have at night.