Noktor 50mm f/0.95 - new micro four third lens from a new company

[thisisapocalypse]

The lens is only MANUAL FOCUS, it's written somewhere, and I bet all my gear (I don't have any money) that aperture will be manual too.
By the way, a lot of times, 1.8 is not fast enought, sometimes even my 50 1.4 is not fast enought.
And I love the shallow DoF fast lenses give.

Exactly - my fastest lens is an f/1.2 and by God I'd love to have another half a stop of speed.

To be fair, I think there are some folks who just really love fast lenses, I'm one of them, so I'm not usually one to criticize anyone who's trying to give me more high speed options - not everyone has the same need for speed, so I can appreciate where they are coming from, although, I'd be lying if I said I understood the lack of need for speed

 

[BitMaestro]

You might try asking Stanley Kubrick how often f/1.8 is not fast enough. Or even f/.95 for that matter. He went to great lengths for a lens almost a full stop faster than THAT.

And given that Kubrick was able to go great lengths, why would he be using a GH1? Barry has noted several times that the GH1 is not a pro camera. The reason many of us use it anyway is that we are willing to deal with the limitations because of the GH1's low price. In other words, we're on a budget. So my point was that I don't see why many of us would spend upwards of $700 (based on the $730 price of the similar Senko lens) when we could get close with, say, a Canon FD 50mm f1.4 + adapter for under $200.

Speaking of the Senko, how many of us bought that lens? As Barry pointed out above, we all could have already gotten essentially the same performance for $730 + $40 for c-mount adapter. How many of us did? My guesstimate is that a lot more of us went the "close but cheaper" route.

I fail to see how f/8 to f/4 is any different than f/1.8 to f/.95...

No doubt we're talking about a specialty lens but the difference between f/1.8 and f/.95 is just as massive as f/8 to f/4 when you are in a situation that calls for a faster lens,

Key phrase there, "when you are in a situation that calls for a faster lens". My point being that there are many more situations that would call for a lens that's faster than f8 than there are situations that call for a lens that's faster than f1.8.

If you fail to see that, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Keep in mind the GH1 is not the only market for this, and neither is video. The GF1 and Olympus EP-1 cameras with a lens like this would be unbelievably awesome for street photography and that's a much bigger market than just video on the GH1.

While I don't disagree, I would like to point out that, similar to how the GH1 isn't a pro video camera, the m4/3 system isn't a pro stills system. (cf the high ISO performance of the GH1 and any full frame DSLR.) IMO m4/3 is targeted at users who would like more performance than a compact/bridge camera has in a package that's smaller than most DSLRs. And similar to how I don't see the folks who choose the GH1 for video shelling out upwards of $700 when they can get close for under $200, I don't see the folks who choose an m4/3 camera for stills shelling out upwards of $700 when they, too, can get close for under $200.

Exactly - my fastest lens is an f/1.2 and by God I'd love to have another half a stop of speed.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice to have. I'm saying that I don't think most of the potential buyers of this lens would be willing to pay $700+ for it.

Mark

 

[thisisapocalypse]

And given that Kubrick was able to go great lengths, why would he be using a GH1? Barry has noted several times that the GH1 is not a pro camera. The reason many of us use it anyway is that we are willing to deal with the limitations because of the GH1's low price. In other words, we're on a budget. So my point was that I don't see why many of us would spend upwards of $700 (based on the $730 price of the similar Senko lens) when we could get close with, say, a Canon FD 50mm f1.4 + adapter for under $200.
Mark

GH1 = not a pro camera, yes that's right. But that's also pretty irrelevant.

Professional grade m4/3 cameras could be produced. The mount is fine and the system is innovative. I've used pro cameras all my life (Eos-1 film and digital versions, Nikon D_'s, Nikon F5 film cameras, etc.) and I love my GH1. It is what it is, and I just love it. It's right for me.

Now if I were a company developing a super fast lens, would I develop it for the m4/3 mount? Probably not, personally, the market is probably pretty small...but I'm assuming they've done some research and have determined that there is enough of a market to make some money doing this, and as a user, I'm not going to complain about more lens options.

Here's the other deal - while the GH1 has lots of limitations, to my knowledge, I am unaware of any other consumer grade camera, or pro grade camera under $10-20K that shoots really good HD video (DSLR or otherwise) that can actually take advantage of a lens this fast.

You can't do it on video cameras with 35mm adapters...you lose light with those adapters, so you're not going to get a real effective f/.95. There used to be a Canon Eos 50mm f/1.0 L lens that is no longer produced (replaced with an f/1.2 version), so that would be your next fastest option if you were shooting on a DSLR.

I don't know if the Leica/Voigtlander super fast lenses can be adapted for use on EOS bodies, but let's assume that's also possible - that now gives us what...a tiny handful of cameras and lens options (all DSLRS: GH1, 5D, 7D, Eos-1Mk4, T2i) that in combination can deliver HD video (at a price of under $10-20K) with a true f/.95-f/1 image to the sensor - and only one of those cameras is truly pro-grade. So we don't have a ton of options to start with for this.

With such a small number of cameras that can do this specifically, I don't think it's over the top to have a lens like this specifically designed for the GH1. The sensors for m4/3 cameras, if the mount continues to be used should only get better, and pro cameras can definitely be designed around it, one of the great things about the m4/3 sensor is that its easier to develop good superfast lenses for it since it doesn't have to cover such a large image circle.

Olympus already knows how to build essentially pro-grade bodies, if they wanted to do it with an m4/3 mount, it could definitely be done and I wouldn't be surprised if that were to happen within the next few years - a pro grade rangefinder style camera is also a possibility.

And besides, even pros don't own ONLY pro cameras or use them all the time. I know plenty of pros who keep good consumer grade cameras (like a GF1) on them at all times for street photography...sure the camera may not the best in the world, but you don't need the world's best camera to take the world's best photo. There are pros and cons to everything, and every pro I know finds the GF1/EP-1 to be very cool cameras and I don't think any of them would be all that bothered if they were dropped into some city and that's all they had to use for a day...and I could almost guarantee you that if you stuck a f/.95 lens on there of good quality, plenty of them would be chomping at the bit for a chance to use it....as what's your other option for a camera like that? A Leica M8/M9 with a Leica /f.95? That rig would cost you about $15-18K! I don't know if you have/are or have ever been a pro photographer, but I can tell you that most of them are not as gear-snobby as you might think...they just want something that works and are typically interested in really cool lenses, be them "pro" grade or not.

If you only need f/1.4, that's great - and worth the $200.

But f/1.4 is not f/.95, and $700 for a good f/.95 lens is damn cheap.

The Canon EOS 50mm f/1.0 L now sells used in the $3-5K range, and the Leica f/.95? $9K new?

$700-800 for a f/.95 starts to sound not-so-bad and we're not all using the GH1 because we're on a VERY limited budget - some are, for sure, but the GH1 offers a lot of things that other cams don't offer, and if those strengths are what you want, and you have less than $10-20K (or even more, even the Red doesn't have the high ISO performance of a 5D/7D/GH1) to spend on a camera...the GH1 can be a good choice if these strengths match your needs.

I bought mine so that I could use lots of cool legacy prime lenses and build a good, fast lens kit for a reasonable amount of money. It doesn't mean I have NO money to spend, just a limited amount.

You really cannot match the GH1 from a price/performance standpoint for low light capability. Period.

You're talking $1200 for a GH1 (including kit lens) + let's say $800 for this 50mm f/.95 = $2K.

You've gotta spend WAY more to do it with a 5D/7D ($2500 for the 5D body plus....$4K for a used Eos 50mm f/1.0 L lens...that's $6500 vs $2000....that's an enormous difference in price for similar performance (aside from FOV)....and I personally think the image out of the GH1 is better than those cameras...so...until I've got $20K or more to spend, the GH1 is my cam because I use superfast lenses whenever possible. That's just my personal preference and suits me, and again I recognize that I may be in the minority...but that's fine, I'm not complaining, I'm getting exactly what I want.

 

[thisisapocalypse]

Key phrase there, "when you are in a situation that calls for a faster lens". My point being that there are many more situations that would call for a lens that's faster than f8 than there are situations that call for a lens that's faster than f1.8.

I do agree with that, I don't do all of my shooting in dimly lit caves, I assure you but 2 stops is 2 stops is 2 stops was really my point, and there is an ISO consideration, if you can open up and use a slower, better looking ISO, that's not a bad thing.

 

[Ivan Lee]

GH1 = not a pro camera, yes that's right. But that's also pretty irrelevant.

Professional grade m4/3 cameras could be produced. The mount is fine and the system is innovative. I've used pro cameras all my life (Eos-1 film and digital versions, Nikon D_'s, Nikon F5 film cameras, etc.) and I love my GH1. It is what it is, and I just love it. It's right for me.

Now if I were a company developing a super fast lens, would I develop it for the m4/3 mount? Probably not, personally, the market is probably pretty small...but I'm assuming they've done some research and have determined that there is enough of a market to make some money doing this, and as a user, I'm not going to complain about more lens options.

Here's the other deal - while the GH1 has lots of limitations, to my knowledge, I am unaware of any other consumer grade camera, or pro grade camera under $10-20K that shoots really good HD video (DSLR or otherwise) that can actually take advantage of a lens this fast.

You can't do it on video cameras with 35mm adapters...you lose light with those adapters, so you're not going to get a real effective f/.95. There used to be a Canon Eos 50mm f/1.0 L lens that is no longer produced (replaced with an f/1.2 version), so that would be your next fastest option if you were shooting on a DSLR.

I don't know if the Leica/Voigtlander super fast lenses can be adapted for use on EOS bodies, but let's assume that's also possible - that now gives us what...a tiny handful of cameras and lens options (all DSLRS: GH1, 5D, 7D, Eos-1Mk4, T2i) that in combination can deliver HD video (at a price of under $10-20K) with a true f/.95-f/1 image to the sensor - and only one of those cameras is truly pro-grade. So we don't have a ton of options to start with for this.

With such a small number of cameras that can do this specifically, I don't think it's over the top to have a lens like this specifically designed for the GH1. The sensors for m4/3 cameras, if the mount continues to be used should only get better, and pro cameras can definitely be designed around it, one of the great things about the m4/3 sensor is that its easier to develop good superfast lenses for it since it doesn't have to cover such a large image circle.

Olympus already knows how to build essentially pro-grade bodies, if they wanted to do it with an m4/3 mount, it could definitely be done and I wouldn't be surprised if that were to happen within the next few years - a pro grade rangefinder style camera is also a possibility.

And besides, even pros don't own ONLY pro cameras or use them all the time. I know plenty of pros who keep good consumer grade cameras (like a GF1) on them at all times for street photography...sure the camera may not the best in the world, but you don't need the world's best camera to take the world's best photo. There are pros and cons to everything, and every pro I know finds the GF1/EP-1 to be very cool cameras and I don't think any of them would be all that bothered if they were dropped into some city and that's all they had to use for a day...and I could almost guarantee you that if you stuck a f/.95 lens on there of good quality, plenty of them would be chomping at the bit for a chance to use it....as what's your other option for a camera like that? A Leica M8/M9 with a Leica /f.95? That rig would cost you about $15-18K! I don't know if you have/are or have ever been a pro photographer, but I can tell you that most of them are not as gear-snobby as you might think...they just want something that works and are typically interested in really cool lenses, be them "pro" grade or not.

If you only need f/1.4, that's great - and worth the $200.

But f/1.4 is not f/.95, and $700 for a good f/.95 lens is damn cheap.

The Canon EOS 50mm f/1.0 L now sells used in the $3-5K range, and the Leica f/.95? $9K new?

$700-800 for a f/.95 starts to sound not-so-bad and we're not all using the GH1 because we're on a VERY limited budget - some are, for sure, but the GH1 offers a lot of things that other cams don't offer, and if those strengths are what you want, and you have less than $10-20K (or even more, even the Red doesn't have the high ISO performance of a 5D/7D/GH1) to spend on a camera...the GH1 can be a good choice if these strengths match your needs.

I bought mine so that I could use lots of cool legacy prime lenses and build a good, fast lens kit for a reasonable amount of money. It doesn't mean I have NO money to spend, just a limited amount.

You really cannot match the GH1 from a price/performance standpoint for low light capability. Period.

You're talking $1200 for a GH1 (including kit lens) + let's say $800 for this 50mm f/.95 = $2K.

You've gotta spend WAY more to do it with a 5D/7D ($2500 for the 5D body plus....$4K for a used Eos 50mm f/1.0 L lens...that's $6500 vs $2000....that's an enormous difference in price for similar performance (aside from FOV)....and I personally think the image out of the GH1 is better than those cameras...so...until I've got $20K or more to spend, the GH1 is my cam because I use superfast lenses whenever possible. That's just my personal preference and suits me, and again I recognize that I may be in the minority...but that's fine, I'm not complaining, I'm getting exactly what I want.

Very well said! I'm your fan

I would say that if I had like 15k, I would spend on a EX3 with the best mini35 available, and for less than 15k, I will stay with my GH1, period.

 

[0100]

Yeah I think I will stick with my 50mm 1.4 FD for $50 shipped. HaHa

Let's see I paid $1050 for a brand new GH1 with kit lens. Who knows what I could recoup if I sell the kit lens.

Paid $30 for FD adapter.

Paid $50 for the 50mm 1.4

I'm keeping this thing cheap.

$80 vs $800 is a huge price difference at least for me. Would rather take the $720 and pickup a pan 20mm, and 14mm to have in the bag.

 

[Ron Rodenmeyer]

I'm going to stick my nose in once again and say (yet again) that we're still debating with facts that are not known. The $800 figure is, I believe, still just a guess. Noktor could surprise us either way with the cost.

Also, comparing this lens to a Canon 1.8 or even a 1.4 is simply not a fair comparison. Price one of these against a Canon 0.95 that came with the old Canon7 rangefinders, and you'll see they're totally different animals. On average, you can expect to pay 10 times as much for a Canon 0.95 then you would on a 1.8 FD, or even a 1.4.

As many smarter than I have already pointed out, if you need a lens this fast, this may be the ticket. I probably won't buy it unless it's cheaper than expected, but many will. The more lens choices available with M4/3 mounts the better in my book.

 

[pix2pixels]

Apart from AF, auto aperture, this lens should also provide XLR inputs to be considered by seasoned pros.

 

[thisisapocalypse]

Price one of these against a Canon 0.95 that came with the old Canon7 rangefinders, and you'll see they're totally different animals. On average, you can expect to pay 10 times as much for a Canon 0.95 then you would on a 1.8 FD, or even a 1.4.

Agreed, the trouble is the Canon 50mm f/.95 "dream lens" is just so rare and I was hoping to make my comparison with other in-production lenses.

The $800 figure is indeed a guess - but the comparisons still hold true even if the Noktor is quite a bit more expensive than $800...I think beyond $1500 and it would have trouble in the market...but who knows, maybe a bunch of rental shops will buy them up, rent them for $50/day or whatever.

 

[Sean Jeong]

I'm going to stick my nose in once again and say (yet again) that we're still debating with facts that are not known. The $800 figure is, I believe, still just a guess. Noktor could surprise us either way with the cost.

Also, comparing this lens to a Canon 1.8 or even a 1.4 is simply not a fair comparison. Price one of these against a Canon 0.95 that came with the old Canon7 rangefinders, and you'll see they're totally different animals. On average, you can expect to pay 10 times as much for a Canon 0.95 then you would on a 1.8 FD, or even a 1.4.

As many smarter than I have already pointed out, if you need a lens this fast, this may be the ticket. I probably won't buy it unless it's cheaper than expected, but many will. The more lens choices available with M4/3 mounts the better in my book.

Ahaha I totally agree with Ron. We're arguing about rumours that started on another forum and found its way over to dvx. All we can do is wait it out and see what Noktor has in store for us.

 

[BitMaestro]

Now if I were a company developing a super fast lens, would I develop it for the m4/3 mount? Probably not, personally, the market is probably pretty small...

...we're not all using the GH1 because we're on a VERY limited budget - some are, for sure,...

...I recognize that I may be in the minority...

That's what I don't get. m4/3 lenses are relatively small subset of the interchangeable lens market, and @ $700+, this lens is targeted at a smaller subset of that already small subset.

a pro photographer, but I can tell you that most of them are not as gear-snobby as you might think..

I didn't mean to imply any kind of snobbery. My point was simply that pros typically have higher standards and higher budgets for their equipment. (And secondarily, that pros are a smaller market.)

Mark

P.S. while I agree that the GF1/E-P1 bodies are much more carryable--even pocketable with the 20mm f1.7 "pancake"--than most DSLRs, the difference is less dramatic with a larger lens. Also, with the 4/3 format's 2X crop factor, a 50mm lens starts to get a little long for street photography. And AF-S (in stills mode) would also be nice. So even here, I don't see the Noktor having mass market appeal.

{edit}
P.P.S. Then there's this Panasonic G1 GH1 GF1 E-P1 E-P2 M4/3 55mm F/1.0 lens on eBay.
{/edit}

 

[Psynema]

This is confusing

Noktor is ripping off the brand name Nokton by voightlander.

For reference sake

You can get a lens NOW with an adapter made by NOKTON (not noktor's vaporware lens) that is a 1.2 35mm which is usually priced at $900 - not an often mentioned item on this board, but if you want a superfast lens you can just get the 35mm 1.2 right now.

Again THAT LENS, made by an actual brand name, is $900 so that should give an "expected price point" and I personally wouldn't pay much more than $900 to go from 1.2 to .95 considering the 1.2 by nokTON has more reputable history. NokTON (not these nokTOR guys) also make the 1.1 50mm which is $1100

So nokTOR (the knockoff guys in this thread) better be at that price point IMO to make this even worth considering cuz' I don't think going from 1.2/1.1 to .95 is worth that much by a company with little history and possibly rebranding.


I like 50mm lenses, don't get me wrong, but they are a PITA and too long on the GH1 to do handheld without the jitters. I have a hard time getting an image I like on a 1.4 50mm.

35mm 1.2 I think is PERFECT for a lot of people - i'd LOVE to see footage on the GH1 with that lens which ALREADY EXISTS and made by a legitimate company with a history. Can't find footage for it other than on an EP2. 35mm can be wide/tele with a few short steps, wide enough so you can handhold it without sensor jitters, and 1.2 on a wider lens (not a 50mm) will give you more DOF room.

 

[Barry_Green]

Why is Noktor "vaporware"? They said they'd have details March 1st. According to my calendar, it isn't March 1st yet.

 

[Psynema]

Why is Noktor "vaporware"? They said they'd have details March 1st. According to my calendar, it isn't March 1st yet.

It was reported a rumor by most people on the net, so I haven't heard the March 1st official presser thing until now. Many folk on other sites suggested it was a rumor/hoax since it linked to a twitter account.

Plus focal length OTHER than 50mm are being "proposed" or "thought about" on the site it says - Not too excited to be honest over 50mm since every kind imaginable has been made. f.95's been done a few times as has 1.1

Now I'd love to see .95 lenses 35mm and wider - but for now those are spec.

 

[Barry_Green]

I saw some of those posts. So it seems some folks want to trash-talk a company before it's even had its first chance to meet its first deadline? How is that fun for anyone?

Why not just wait 'til March and see what (if anything) they release?

Sheesh. Somebody should give folks a break and let them at least have an opportunity to do what they say they're going to do, before leaping down their throat and calling "foul" all over 'em. I know the internet has compressed people's perception of time, but really...

Noktor announced their forthcoming product on February 14th. By February 18th (today) it's already been denounced as vaporware? Good lord, give the entrepreneurs a break! If they're a scam or a fake we'll find out soon enough, but how about giving them a chance first?

 

[thisisapocalypse]

The 35mm f/1.2 Voigtlander lens is awesome. But that's not an f/.95...so...I'm missing something I suppose. I'm very much excited about this 50mm f/.95 - yeah they've been "done" but it's not like we have a ton of choices for a lens like this - yeah, it's a little long for street photography, but on the other hand...how much would a 100mm f/.95 cost, if it could even be made? Yeah, on the crop sensor the DOF isn't the same as it would be on a true 100mm f/.95, but still - it's all very cool, specialized, but cool and opens up creative possibilities, I'm pretty much just always in favor of anyone who wants to help move the ball forward in terms of opening up creative possibilities, yeah, 50mm f/.95s aren't technically new, but they are scarce and expensive, so I won't complain if they are more readily available and specifically mount on my camera natively - that's awesome.

I'd rather have a 35mm for 25mm f/.95 but let's give these guys a chance and see what they do.

 

[noirist]

I'm having trouble understanding why this not-yet-available product generating so much more excitement than the currently-available Senko/Navitar/Yakumo 50mm f0.95 plus C-mount adapter. Since "Noktor" has stated that the optics will essentially be the same as the Senko/Navitar/Yakumo, manufactured by the same Japanese optical company, with no auto-focus or auto-aperture, what's the big advantage of a native micro 43rds mount?

 

[Barry_Green]

That's the question I was wondering about up in post #12.

 

[Solomon Chase]

I'm having trouble understanding why this not-yet-available product generating so much more excitement than the currently-available Senko/Navitar/Yakumo 50mm f0.95 plus C-mount adapter. Since "Noktor" has stated that the optics will essentially be the same as the Senko/Navitar/Yakumo, manufactured by the same Japanese optical company, with no auto-focus or auto-aperture, what's the big advantage of a native micro 43rds mount?

Because the Senko/Navitar/Yakumo F0.95 lenses do not work with c-mount adapters (the base is too large) and they do not focus to infinity.

 

[Ron Rodenmeyer]

Solomon-

Eugenia has posted in the comments section of Bloom's blog that Noktor is your company. Care to confirm or deny?