Advertisement
This is the fastest 50mm lens in production(http://bit.ly/Leica50mm), but the Noctilux has been around for a long time, and so has the cult-like following for this …
source
Facebook Comments
Advertisement
This is the fastest 50mm lens in production(http://bit.ly/Leica50mm), but the Noctilux has been around for a long time, and so has the cult-like following for this …
source
Fuck the lens who’s that beauty in red?
aren't this lens like freakin expensive?
you are a terrible photographer
Digital camera users can cry, cause their cameras sensors can only see only down to f/1.2
How do you take pictures of strangers like that without being yelled at??
When I lived in Alaska, because of the winter time darkness, I so wanted a lens like this on my Nikon FM2, just couldn't afford one.
we need a f0.0 lens that cant focus for 100% bokeh.
honestly f/0.95 is stupid, nothing is in focus (except maybe .5mm) why bother unless you have money to burn?
Do you know any lab in HK who does print to recommend ? I used to go to Robert Lam 20 years ago. Is it in business still? Thank you for your answer
how does the f1 version compare to this?
To answer the question posed in the click-bait title, NO. Not the sharpest, not the best contrast or saturation, and not even the first, which title goes to the Canon 50mm 0.95 from the mid-1960s.
What about purchasing the 0.95 Aperture part, anyone?
I'll take my $60 pentax 50mm f1.4 over this. It's pretty sharp wide open and great at f1.8. This is a wonderful lens, I'm sure, but at that price tag? 😂
well.. I'd better get a set of 6 Canon L prime lenses, and the rest of the money.. on something else.
I was watching these old pictures from 1930s (google redskins footbal game 1930s) and I am amazed of the clarity of the lens used 100 years ago. Some of them even show a very shallow DOF in broad light and I don't think they were using telephoto lens back then. What do you think about old camera lens, compared to the lens produced in modern times ?
https://www.google.com/search?safe=active&client=firefox-b&biw=1680&bih=924&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=8BAiXJPnHcim_Qb74I2wCQ&q=redskins+football+game+1939&oq=redskins+football+game+1939&gs_l=img.3…17952.17952..18285…0.0..0.63.63.1……1….1..gws-wiz-img.hhGMnsp5a_I#imgrc=sr1VeLi12A2GfM:
I have for sale this canon 50 mm 1:0.95 dream lens . If you want to buy contact me on tianulaurentiu@yahoo.com. Is with tv lens version !!
Jesus, the amount of experts on here is astounding!! Give the guy a break, you set of know betters!
I'll stick with my micro four thirds Voigtlanders and save myself a few quid!
Holy mother of God Thats a lotta lens to be sitting next to water 2:48
Chinese face, British accent 👍
is it just me or is he a shitty photographer
to bad the interviewer isn't a better photographer…..
This guy is the worse photographer ever… $15000 and all the pictures were shyte.
Seems very hard to focus this lens wide open. A lot of shots were focused on things other than the face, and in none of them were the eyes sharp. I guess focus and recomposing doesn't work well for portraiture because the narrowness of the depth of field means the eyes would go out of focus as soon as the angle of the camera changes. Unfortunately, with a Leica the only viable means of focusing is at the centre of the viewfinder. I think the great majority of people would be better off with a 50mm f2 Summicron.
Who's here after Nikon released the Z 58 f/0.95 for $8k?
Moi canon 700d and helios 44/2 and industar 50/2 ,canon 18/55((
Man, what the hell is going on with the colour fringing!!!! For that price???
Proof that an expensive lens and camera isn't a guarantee for good shots. I don't know what went wrong here!