The new Leica Nocticron 42,5mm f/1.2 is now in Stock for the first time at Amazon US (Click here). And Admiringlight (Click here) just posted his full lens reviews:
Having shot with multiple systems and hundreds of lenses, the Nocticron is right there at the top among the best lenses I’ve ever shot with. It is extremely sharp right from f/1.2, has gorgeous bokeh, low distortion, incredibly high image contrast for a fast lens, super fast autofocus, optical stabilization and a pro-grade build. If you are a Micro 4/3 shooter and want speed, background blur and optical quality, you can’t do much better than the 42.5mm Nocticron.
No doubt, great lens! Wish we could get more of these…and if possible for a bit lower price too 🙂
—
More US deals info
The Black E-M10 is also back in Stock via Ritz at Amazon (Click here).
And GetOlympus (Click here) is now selling the reconditioned E-Pm2 kits for $199 only!
45 Responses
I need to save some money, please Admin, stop posting links about this lens! 🙁
This lens is very impressive, not least as it in reality is about lens + sensor + processing. Comparing with the Fuji 56/1.2 on APS-C X-trans both Admiring Light and SLR gear tests clearly shows the m43 combo comes out on top.
Not that I am totally surprised: I did lots comparison between the two systems and in the end I preferred m43: More detail (and noise), a little less contrast – but easily corrected in post process.
It would be nice to have this lens. Partly because of the excellent results, but also as “reference” to everything else.
As the author of this review and the Fuji 56/42.5mm comparison, stay tuned….I will be posting additional information on that comparison, hopefully tonight. My Fuji 56mm had an issue with the focus motor, and I received a replacement yesterday. Interestingly enough, it also showed that my original Fuji 56mm also had a (slightly) misaligned element, as the new one is sharper than the first, and the comparison with the Nocticron is now much closer than before. I’ll be posting updated comparison results soon.
Doesn’t change my conclusions on the Nocticron one iota, though…it’s an amazing lens.
How do you know if an element was misaligned??
In this case I didn’t know until I shot with a second copy and saw that the slightly soft area that was present towards the edges on my first copy of the 56mm at f/1.2 wasn’t really supposed to be there (my replacement lens is noticeably sharper across the frame, and even has slightly higher contrast wide open). I’ll update the results of the test and post an explanation on my site sometime tonight or tomorrow (not sure when I’ll have time).
Thank you for letting me know!!
First: great comparisons and reviews! From your posts I have the impression, I might be wrong, that you chose Fuji as your main system. Would you mind giving your thoughts whether you prefer m43 or Fuji and why. I’m just curious.
I shoot with both systems, though recently, I’ve been using Fuji more because I love the simplified and focused controls, and the lenses are phenomenal. Not to say the m4/3 glass isn’t also outstanding, but I really like the way the Fuji lenses draw, and I love the tonality of the Fuji files. That said, I also love the responsiveness and IBIS of my OM-D.
I am definitely keeping my OM-D and several lenses, such as the 60 macro (best macro combination out there IMO), and a few others. Both systems are outstanding. I’ve shot with Micro 4/3 for nearly 5 years now, and Fuji for the past year plus. Both have great strengths and both have some weaknesses. I’ll continue to use and review both for quite some time.
Both are far preferable for how I shoot to the giant FF Canon kit I carried for nearly a decade before switching to mirrorless.
Have you ever wondered why the FF kit was larger? Hint: optic equivalences don’t match. You probably compared apples to oranges.
They do “reviews” here, they don’t bother with physics and photography.
Yeah, I am sorry for those two or three people who read this forum and are looking for high quality information. Those multinationals have coy ways of marketing their crap.
Do you work for Canon, or are you happy to do their marketing work for free?
ps: I have no interest in driving a huge Hummer on the race-track, but to each his own.
Oh dear lord, not this again. The ‘format wars’ that have cropped up recently are the most misguided time wasting garbage around….I also notice that most of the people who really harp on the format wars tend to not be particularly good photographers.
I don’t NEED a smaller format to exactly match a full frame system for depth of field. And frankly, most photographers don’t as well. If you WANT that, fine…go full frame. There’s nothing wrong with that, but please stop pretending that shallow depth of field is the end all be all of photography. Yes, I carried faster glass that was capable of shallower depth of field than my Fuji or m4/3 kits (well, sort of…I sold my 85L when I went full frame because it was TOO shallow for my taste and the 100/2 suited me better)…but that was mainly because the slightly slower glass was also not as good. The fast m4/3 and Fuji lenses are every bit as good (if not better in many circumstances) as the pro-grade Canon and Nikon lenses….while the smaller but slower Canon and Nikon lenses aren’t as good optically. The Fuji 56mm and PL 42.5mm f/1.2 absolutely TROUNCE the Canon 85/1.8 wide open, and looking at SLR gear tests, they also are notably better than the Nikon 85/1.8. So while these lenses may not be capable of the slightly shallower depth of field of the ultra-fast full frame lenses, they are better corrected in most cases.
Also, since switching to mirrorless, I have improved dramatically as a photographer and more importantly, I have enjoyed photography significantly more, because I can take a full kit anywhere and not feel bogged down or encumbered. If you feel the need for full frame and huge lenses, then that’s perfectly fine, but this implication that depth of field has to match between formats is a waste of time. If you need ultra-shallow depth of field or super high resolution to print 60″ prints, then yes…you should probably go full frame. I personally think ultra-shallow depth of field is overused as a gimmick crutch by a lot of people, and I have no need to print that large, so I use what works for me.
No actual advantage? Where do you put the *much* lower price of, say, an F1.8/85 vs a Noctitoy? And don’t even get me started with magnification; yes, it matters for digital, too.
Those are just two of the many inaccuracies / lies you wrote. I am not going into the rest, it’s just too much nonsense, I am sorry.
The Noctitoy? Well, that pretty much tells me exactly what you are. The reason the price is much lower is because it’s nowhere near as good optically as the Nocticron. Not even CLOSE.
Anyway, I’ve used APS-C, m4/3, Full frame, all extensively (even APS-H for a time). I’ve owned outstanding glass for DSLRs and mirrorless systems and have shot with hundreds of lenses. I’m pretty confident in my ability to evaluate these things. Ultimately, format doesn’t matter if it fits how you want to shoot and gets you the shot you’re after. Anyone who trumpets technical specs and superiority over simply getting the images they want isn’t a photographer.
Perhaps I was not clear: you wrote so much ballax that you are not credible. Verstanden?
Probably not worth wasting your time explaining to this loser. He is either totally brainwashed that FF is better regardless, or he is just one of many trolls that like to jump on whatever forum they can find and argue the opposite of whatever the leaning of the forum and its users are.
Do you have any plans to compare the Nocticron with the Voigtländer Nokton 42.5mm f0.95?
THAT’S a comparison a lot of M4/3 users would be interested to see!
I have already reviewed both lenses, so have no plans to compare them directly at this time. I no longer have either lens, as they were both review samples that I had for a limited period of time. I can say that at wide apertures, the PL has significantly higher contrast and lower spherical aberration, and is probably a little sharper at f/1.2, though both are quite good at wide apertures. The Voigtlander isn’t as sharp outside of the 1-3m range at wide apertures, though. The PL also has nice bokeh outside of that 1-3m range, but inside it, they’re both very good.
For sample images, check out my review index on the site and you’ll see a listing of all reviews, including the Voigtlander 42.5mm f/0.95.
Excellent! Thanks!
Gotta love that add. “You save 1.99$”
Well its a start…
That’s better than the usual, you have .99 🙂
This lens seems to be somewhat of an oddball in the m43 lineup. Significantly larger and more expensive than the much heralded Olympus 45mm f/1.8, yet only of marginally better image quality. To make matters worse is the fact that it’s still bigger, heavier AND pricier than the Fuji equivalent, yet only needs to cover a much smaller image circle for a sensor half the size. There is no doubt the Nocticron is a quality lens, but its relative value is far lower than its nearest competitors.
Those who want it will buy it, and no doubt enjoy the hell out of it. It won’t be a huge seller, but clearly it’s intended for a segment of the market that needs the best possible image quality, ie. professionals who can expect to recoup the cost of the lens through their work.
Difference in weight size to the Fuji is quite small, I wouldn’t even recognise it. I value lower minimum focus distance (only 50cm for the Pana) and stabilisation.
I read somewhere that it covers the APSC image circle, too. Last but not least, the sensor diagonal is important for the image circle (1.3 times larger, not a big deal). If I absolutely need a lens of this type, I don’t care about the size.
I am hanging with Squeezy on this one…he has a point…although I think that this is a great lens for the system (and because I am an Olympus body user), I would like to see this lens quite a bit smaller, without the image stabilization, with an aperture ring that will function on my camera body and less expensive.
I will say that the lens is probably so sharp wide open because the image circle is so large on this piece of glass…but it could also leave the door wide open for Olympus to show off their optical expertise and deliver something better?!
I just can’t see spending $1600 on a lens that has stabilization that I do not need and an aperture ring that I can not use.
Just get the Oly45mm then, unless you already have it. This is a pro quality lens.
And honestly, a great comparison, but matters little if you’re not going to jump the M43 ship and go Fuji. If you’re sticking with M43, you can go Oly, or she’ll out the big bucks.
I’m sue it beats everything over the Olympus 45, except in price alone.
It does not beat everything that the Oly 45 offers…. at f/1.8 is is no sharper than the Oly 45 and the Panasonic is not small or light like the Oly is.
Not just price… Size, weight, and VALUE.
Really? It has an aperture ring but it only works on Panasonic bodies? Can you please confirm that?
If you read the review, you’ll see I confirm that there. Ring works fine on my GX1, but not on my OM-D.
Ach, talk about standards. No M43 for me, that’s for sure… Thanks anyway Jordan.
I suspect you had already decided against m43 before this bombshell 😉
Last tuesday i went to B&H and had the oportunity to try this Glass , , i did not had a plan to buy this Glass in the near future as i still have the EXCELLENT Olympus 1.8/45mm , i also brought my XT-1 &1.2/56mm , but after i hold in my hand,. The build quality is really superb,. The shape iit looks like the REAL LEICA NOCTILUX 0.95/50mm ,. Its more heavier than my Fuji56mm , the font glass is actually smaller than Fuji, but again the black metal construction its like A Huge Magnet, better than olympus 75, ithe dimension is the same as Olympus 12-40 , the the AF /MF & OIS button itts so feel so well . I mounted on my E-M1 and start taking picture , side by side with my 56mm on Fuji XT1, i can see the Nocticron slightly sharper than Fuji , specially in the corner at wide open f1.2, and also has better micro contrast and more pleasing bokeh ,..
Leica lover is very dificult to resist this lens
Really fast lenses, like really fast cars, have poor value (e.g. Canon 50/1.2 is 15x more expensive than 50/1.8). That’s just the way it is I guess.
As for the comparison of the Nocticron 42.5mm f/1.2 with the Fujinon 56/1.2, the Nocticron has OIS, more elements (14 in 11 groups, incl. 1 ED, 1 UHR and 2 aspherical vs 11 in 8 groups, incl. 1 double-sided aspherical and 2 ED), and more aperture blades (9 vs 7).
Looking at slrgear.com, it seems the Nocticron is sharper than the Fujinon; it looks like the Fuji needs to be stopped down to f/2 to match the Pany at f/1.2. Also, as Damn Oly says, it has better micro-contrast and bokeh (probably b/c of aperture blades and more exotic glass elements).
Also, the f-number is a function of focal length / diameter. Notice that image circle doesn’t affect it. With the same f-number (1.2), the one with the shorter FL should be smaller but the Pany has more complex design (OIS and more elements, etc). Hence, it is slightly bigger.
No doubt this is my dream lens but unfortunately I just lose a job recently make me reconsider for the purchase .
Moreover no models available for my shooting program recently , might wait for the price to adjust further before getting it . It’s the matter of time !
If your working language was English, no wonder you got fired.
Really?? You do understand that this is an international site, right? Even Shakespeare himself was more international than you back in the day..
How many languages are you proficient in by the way?
Lol, you save $1.99!
Just a reminder: for about 200 USD more you get a D610/6D with a 1.8/85, which takes better pictures, has shallower DOF and is only a little larger. Just sayin’.
Signed: the common sense fairy.
Yeah, but that with a 70-200mm 2.8 is a PITA
There goes the troll, bad English, 10 pointless messages, all written at the same time. Let me guess: another lonely evening, you got drunk and you poured out here… I am sorry…
One would think that you had the minimal brainpower needed to understand it took me whole of 5 minutes to type those comments. Maybe you are thinking of yourself and your sad life-situation. I’m quite happy with mine – but people that go on a forum dedicated to competitors to just spew garbage like you, on the other hand, must have very unfulfilling lives indeed. Anyway, you are not fooling anyone by using a different username for your response. NerdBuster and CommonSenseFairy (and God knows how many of the other nicknames on here) are clearly the same little troll.
Still angry? Still drunk? Oh my oh my you do need help 🙂