On top you can watch the Leica Nocticron 42,5mm f/1.2 lens video review made by frugalfilmmakers. But the big question of the moment is, can the lens beat the optical performance of the $600 cheaper Fuji 56mm f/1.2 lens? Both lenses have been released at about the same time, both have the same f/1.2 speed at the same focal length (85mm FF equivalent). While the Nocticorn is much more expensive it also has a built-in lens stabilization (the Fuji has not) and a faster AF performance. Admiringlight had the lucky chance to test both lenses at the same time and writes:
- Wide open, the Panasonic Leica has notably higher contrast straight out of camera. It really has remarkable contrast for an f/1.2 lens. You can process the Fuji images with a simple contrast adjustment in post to match this, but it doesn’t get that high contrast pop until about f/2.2 straight out of camera.
- The Fuji exhibits some spherical aberration wide open, which may show as a glow with high contrast subjects such as white text on a black background. The Panasonic Leica exhibits extremely minimal spherical aberration.
- While both lenses can show some Longitudinal CA at wide apertures, the Nocticron displays it much more readily. High contrast areas immediately in front and behind the focus point display as a magenta or green fringe. Still, both lenses do a decent job in this department considering the speed.
- Price. Here’s it’a s huge win for the Fuji, coming in at $999 vs. the $1599 of the Nocticron. You do get optical image stabilization with the Leica, but I’m not sure that makes up the full $600 difference between the two lenses.
So overall the Panasonic wins the performance test. But it’s up to you to judge if that edge in performance, the in lens IS and faster AF are worth the $600 price difference. Be sure to read the full review at Admiringlight to learn more about the lenses!
You can buy the lens at Amazon US (Click here), Adorama (Click here) and BHphoto (Click here). In UK at Wexphotographic (Click here). In Germany at Redcoon (Click here), Technikdirekt (Click here).
P.S.: Nocticron vs A7+Canon 85mm lens by Derrick Pang.
65 Responses
Both lenses look great, but looking at the more scientific tests at slrgear.com I’m not sure the Panasonic is better optically. I’d say the Fuji has the edge, which is quite impressive given it’s the same size, $600 cheaper and has the same aperture for an APS-C sensor size (the Panasonic would need an f/0.9 to match it).
Still, with Fuji you don’t get IS, while with m4/3 you get it either in the lens or in the body (with Olympus bodies), so if price isn’t a concern I’d still prefer the Panasonic option for that reason.
Tests are mixed. And slrgear shows almost equal performance. I like the closer minimum focus distance of 50cm vs. the 70cm on the Fuji.
At F1.2, it’s not nearly close. The Panasonic Leica is much sharper according to SLRGear.
I agree…..and lets face it….if you are spending $1600 on a lens…the only place I am REALLY looking for performance is at f/1.2. If the SLR gear graphic is spot on…the Panasonic is clearly much better. It would be interesting to see what DxO comes up with comparing both sensors and lenses….but there is really no contest here.
That being said…in the real world, looking at prints from both set ups I would love to see that difference (or if it is just academic).
You can’t use SLRGear results cross platform!
The chance is thin but I will try to make it clear, to you and everyone else: the comparison should be between the Fuji stopped down at F1.8 and the Nocticrap open at F 1.2. Klaro? Kapish? Is it really that hard?
Well that sets the tone huh, it’s clear you are no fan of m43. And no you shouldn’t compare at F1.8 on the Fuji with 1.2 on the m43 since the lenses are made for the format. On both systems you would want to use the lens wide open capisce.
Yes “digifan”, I am no fan of M43. I am no fan of any system, to be true. But I am a fan of physics and she has been scarred badly here.
Next, there is going to be a comparison between the Noctifun and some Canon F1.2… Let me guess: the Canon is going to lose LOL.
Bollox, I know you are right but you are talking to non-photographers and non-technicians here. Marketing trolls? Yes. You are never going to convince them mate 🙂
SlrGear.com shows the Panasonic lens having half the blur-index compared to the Fuji lens, meaning the Panasonic lens is sharper than the Fuji lens, at all apertures.
Pictures taken with the Fuji lens confirm the low-contrast imaging at wider apertures ( reminds me of my Voightlander 25mm f/0.95 wide open ) compared to the Panasonic lens.
With the built-in OIS ( providing 3 additional F-stops of exposure in low light ) the Panasonic lens takes the win.
The FujiFilm lens is impressive for its compact size, but Panasonic’s Leica-approved design seems to be better. It’s just a matter of whether it’s US$600 better to someone who has neither brand–or both brands.
For the author, who has products from both systems, I’m sure it was an important comparison.
The test is flawed, the Fuji will perform much better when not used at minimum focus distance. It is extremely sharp in the corners when used 1-2 meters (or further) away from the subject. This admiringlight test is more of a macro test rather than a real life (portrait) situation. And for close-up portraits, the focal lengths are too small anyway.
Admiring light answered to your question: “It is worth noting that both lenses perform as well, if not better, towards infinity, even at wide apertures…I just have it had time to do that comparison.”
You can compare pics at other review sites. They too show a very close match, with IMO slightly better results for the Panasonic. But this difference show up at 100% only. And at higher ISO the Fuji has an advantage due to the larger sensor (but for the same DOF you don’t need longer exposure times or can make use of the stabilisation).
Both are great, if only they would cost around 800Euros!
The main test was performed at approximately 1m…perhaps slightly further (I didn’t measure exactly.) The book in question is rather large. That’s a relatively tight portrait framing, but certainly not out of the ordinary. The portrait test was done a little further back – around 1.5m or so.
Yes, the Fuji does perform better at 1.5-2m than it does at 1m, but I can tell you from my experience with both lenses, the PL is overall the (slightly) better optic. It is even better across the frame further away as well, achieving sharpness all the way to the corners at f/1.2 near infinity. (I’ll have a full size long range sample in my full review of the Nocticron, which should be up sometime in the next day or two).
That’s not to say that the Fuji is poor..it’s one of the very best fast lenses I’ve ever used….it’s just that the Nocticron is probably the best. FWIW, I will not be purchasing the Nocticron, but the Fuji 56mm in the test is my own.
Fuji Schmuji.
The real test will be a head-to-head between the two M4/3 42.5mm lenses.
Voigtländer Nokton vs. Panasonic Nocticron
Good luck waiting for that Voigtländer lens to be focused by the camera body.
Besides, FujiFilm has an impressive range of lenses, unlike Panasonic who just has a range of lenses.
Good luck trying to get 1/8000 sec. shutter speed out in daylight when you are shooting f/1.3 with your X-T1. The MFT kit in general is much smaller and lighter than the Fuji. …and then you don’t have to deal with the whole X-Trans issue and change your whole work flow and buy new software, etc. just to get the top results…and I am not even going to get into flash sync……
Funny…I don’t go to the Fuji Rumor site to tell all of the people there that their system is big, slow and inferior (actually I don’t think that …The fuji system has its pluses no doubt)…but why do you come here to bash these enthusiasts????
I didn’t bash anyone. I have a Panasonic GH3 with two micro Four-Thirds lenses from Panasonic, the most expensive of which is far too expensive for its performance.
The Voigtländer lenses are manual lenses with no electronic connection, as far as I know. Good optics or not, the camera body isn’t going to manipulate the lens, is it?
As far as the X-Trans II sensor, I’m already using software that accommodates it fairly well, so I wouldn’t have to change anything but the brand but I’m switching from the GH3 to the GH4, and ditching the 35-100mm f2/.8 for Olympus’ 40-150mm f/2.8, after seeing how much better the GH3 is with the 12-40mm f/2.8 lens.
I have a bunch of fingers that can easily drive any of my Noktons’ aperture AND focus rings.
Imagine that, using your hand…
oh, wait…
I’m SURE your a real master with at least ONE of your hands, eh? 😛
ROTFLMAO
I’m certainly impressed that you would use a 10 year old’s insult on me.
Do you often imagine what other men do with their hands? 😛
+1
That would be a more meaningful comparison to anyone waist-deep in MFT.
Someone will eventually make that comparison, I am sure and then go off on the advantages of IS and AF…which, does have to be taken into account along with the sharpness and contrast comparison…
How do those two lenses stack up size-wise?????
Panasonic has been doing this scam for years now. Slap the Leica name on something and jack up the price to a ridiculous level.
Nocticron see every crow foot on 7feather’s face. She not happy!
From Admins part of the post ” But it’s up to you to judge if that edge in performance, the in lens IS and faster AF are worth the $600 price difference. ”
Are there really that many people trying to decide between these 2 lenses? You would have to be invested (or considering investing) in both mft and fuji for it to matter. Yes I can buy the fuji lens and body for the same price as the Pana, but I don’t think I want to switch systems(or maintain 2 systems) for it. Obviously if you are in fuji, you buy the fuji and probably would never consider the pana. The fact is both lenses are great additions to the respective lineups. If you have the means, I highly recommend them (Ferris Bueller quote).
If you haven’t bought into either system, you would want to know, especially if it was a second such effective focal length for work at weddings.
I guess I can understand that, but I don’t think 1 lens should/would determine a system. Either way I enjoyed the comparison, but these two lenses are not direct competitors IMO, which is the way admins comment read to me..
Sure, it’s not enough to switch systems.
Thank you! It’s about time somebody said that.
Still, there might be a few people for whom a wide-aperture portrait lens is important enough that they’d base their choice of mirrorless system on it. Those people (all six of them) are in an interesting position price-wise:
— They can buy the Fuji lens and an XT-1 (the only Fuji body worth buying right now, IMO) for about US $2300 total.
— Or they can buy the Necro… er, Narco… I mean, Nocticron plus an Olympus EM10 or Panasonic GX7 (both really nice cameras) for about US $2300 total, AND they get image stabilization. Still think the Nocticron is overpriced?
Yes, that’s a silly example — but it illustrates that the real question here is simply that of which camera “flavor” you like better. Buy the one you like, and the lens that goes with it. You can’t go wrong either way (as long as you’ve got that much money to burn…)
Well..don’t get me wrong…I like reading about this comparison and all…but considering I have 2 MFT bodies and 10 lenses…it is not like I have a choice between these two lenses! LOL. At the $1600 price (and don’t get me wrong…I LOVE a good lens and am willing to pay for it), and this being my secondary camera system (FF my primary) I am going to just keep shooting with my small, light Oly 45mm f/1.8 and concentrate on the subject, lighting and composition . I probably won’t notice the $1200 I did not spend to get an f/0.6 advantage.
If I really need bokeh…I will get out the big gun (FF).
Bob, this is a full stop advantage, not 0.6.
Zoom…I did no mean in “absolute” terms. I would have stated “f/.6 of a stop advantage for the Panasonic. In simple terms F/1.8 – f/1.2 is f/0.6. difference in F number. The crowd in here can wax phophetic for days on that topic…I am not interested.
The ratios are not the stops, they’re a ratio between the front opening of the lens and the focal length. However, certain ratios let in double the amount of light than another… that is referred to a “Stop”, usually of light. Makes it easy to determine how much light difference you have. 1.4 and 2.0 are a full stop apart, 1.4 has double the light of 2.0. Like wise, 1.2 has double the light advantage of 1.7, and slightly more than 1.8. It is a full stop.
See what zoom started…..zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
No. f/1.8 – f/1.2 = approx. 13mm here approximately. The / sign is a division. 1.8 and 1.2 are the denominators (and numbers without any unit). f is the focal length, in this case i took 45mm to simplify.
The result here is the difference in diameter of the visible aperture. Take from it what you want.
Otherwise you could say, comparing a f/5.6 and f/8 telephoto, that f/8 – f/5.6 = f/2.4, which is idiotic because it’s about the same difference as between those f/1.8 and f/1.2 lenses (actually the difference is greater since f/1.7 is already a full stop from f/1.2).
..or to complete what i said if you want to keep a fractional notation, provided f is constant:
f/1.2 – f/1.8 = 3f/3.6 – 2f/3.6 = f/3.6 . I guess you didnt attend elementary school did you.
What is interesting, also…if you go to SLR Gear and compare the Nocticron at F/1.8 (actually SLR gear jumps from f/1.4 to f/2.0 so you have to do a little creative “interpreting” @ 1.8 for the Nocticron…so minutiae-weenies..stay away)…
to the Olympus 45mm at f/1.8…they are equal in terms of sharpness (don’t know about contrast)… Actually that is QUITE impressive considering we are comparing a $399 lens to a $1600 lens.
Well.. its common sense that $1600 lenses are not for everyone. Not even for Seizure, can you imagine? 🙂
Any similar reasoning can be made for any high tag priced lenses for any mount. Panasonic made the gamble that there is a good enough demand for such lens and they delivered. Its cool, we have that choice now!
Of course you will, and anybody with a little sense, too. Let’s see the anger ripping our now! I love angry nerds.
The lenses aren’t directly comparable because they’re for different systems, and both of them have capabilities that are a hair’s width away from each other, and no doubt exceed the photographic limits of any of those actually willing to speculate on them on the Internet. Live and let live. They’re both amazing lenses. Shame about the Leica’s price tag…
The reviewer got it wrong… it’s not Nockton that Leica uses but it’s the name Noclilux!
Noclilux cream for saddle rash. Lens is Noctilux.
Anyone else noticed that he’s claiming the Panasonic could cover an APS-C-sensor? ..maybe they designed this with the upcoming/rumored Leica-ILC??
For reference…here is the test shot I did with the Nocticron mounted on the X-E2 (it will semi-mount…the m4/3 mount is a little smaller, but will still be held in…though you can’t focus or change aperture, and the register difference means it focuses well beyond normal…I had to focus close on my E-M5 at f/1.2, take the lens off the camera at that point and then put it on the Fuji). You can see there’s notable corner shading from lens falloff, but no mechanical vignetting. I though the subject, another ~85mm fast combination for APS-C, was appropriate, though certainly not artistic:
http://www.admiringlight.com/2014/nocticron_fuji.jpg
Thanks for demonstrating this, Jordan!
Never mind what “AdmiringLight” says, smaller formats are normally inferior to larger ones, no matter the lens. OK APS is only twice the size of M43, so there is a tiny chance… Very very tiny, I’d forget about this nonsense altogether.
It certainly shows up in the sample pictures, lol.
At 100%, yes. At lower lint, yes. Else? rarely.
Look at the newest LuminousLandscape article on current gear and formats, or Thom Hogen’s opinion.
For a certain group of photographers it really matters, but for most amateurs? I’m not so sure (although having the latest best reviewed gear gives sometimes some satisfaction).
What about this era of photography is normal? The sensor is only one part of the equation.
So you are using Large format cameras? Please show me your fantastic pictures!
Of course the Fuji will not be worse, and of course this sort of tests matter less than your bogeys, but many little nerds want them.
Anybody who answered to LiarBrigade cares to use proper English and standard logic? But of course,
it’s Panasonic employees, affiliates and fan-girls, so there cannot be any towering
intellects.
Thanks for exposing some of the lies by the way, I am a total beginner and I am never sure who to listen to. The quality of your writing vs the sassy answers you get definitely swayed the balance for me.
Wow, well how about that. Quite an about face from the 43 Rumors post the other day – http://www.43rumors.com/nocticron-test-by-lloyd-chambers-its-a-must-have-lens/#disqus_thread
So many we’re quick to compare the Fuji to the Nocticron and how the it’s less expensive without considering –
1 – they are two different lenses
2 – they are for two different systems
3 – One lens is for still photography and the other for hybrid photography
Gear heads still have a hard time accepting that M43 might very well be the best system on the planet and that it might replace the DSLR as the standard in the future. The argument has been done before when medium format film people ripped on 35mm film people and when film people ripped on digital people.
Cueing random DSLR trolls in 3…2…1…
Who are the gear heads? Nerds who look at test charts and brick walls? People paid by Panasonic to sell gear? Ignorant “photographers” who shoot badly exposed punks with low quality gear?
Gear heads are into the gear and what it can do. Photographers are into the art and the they can do with the gear. Nether are better or worse than each other.
I say the ignorant photogs who shoot punk heads with bad gear 🙂 Your comment is a classic it’s so true.
Kudos to Nocticron .
I might wait for the price to adjust further before getting it .
As mentioned , it will be even great bokeh if the Nocticron in 50mm F1.2 ( 100mm FF equ ) .
85mm F1.2 not the best for m4/3 .
Both lenses are too extravagant for gear heads, I’m afraid. Wide open they are almost irrelevant for any purpose other than pure art, but I’m convinced some photo-gear websites will be soon be flooded with depictions of cats’ eyelashes. And yes, the Nocticron is way overpriced for any lens. At anything wider than f/2 it’s only suitable for stationary subjects, which takes away its advantage over the equivalent Voigtlander (stabilization notwithstanding).
Not a realistic comparison….in terms of DOF 1.2 on m43 means 2.4 on ff and 1.2 on aps-c fuji means 1.8….so not comparable…. (m43 lens 0.9= 1.8 ff)
just 2 cents…
Well only gearheads are only concerned with DOF.
The photographer is much less concerned with this. He knows his gear and how he needs to use it to come to the result he envisions.
The gearhead machineguns away at static subjects and max aperture. I see it so often when I’m in the field.
Unfortunately the V3 is 1″ if it was APS-C or higher it would be THE camera for gearheads rattling away at 20fps at each button press on every occasion.
I think they are much the same, so I went and ordered the Fuji because of the price difference. Can’t wait to try it on my E-M5…
Most peculiar is that the Nocticron lens is both heavier and larger in every dimension than the Fuji while covering a smaller a smaller sensor with the same f/number. Furthermore, the optical quality of the Panasonic is overstated and this article’s headline is somewhat misleading. While the Panasonic looks to be sharper wide open while the Fuji is sharper stopped down a bit. Still, none of that is really relevant unless you pixel peep. The biggest factors here are the size and price. Panasonic’s lens should be lower in both categories. That said, despite whatever insignificant advantages the Nocticron may have, the Fuji is easily the better value.
I read in of the recent reviews that the Nocticron image circle covers close to aps format. That, in combination with a different choice of lens formula might be the reason for the extra mass and/or dimensions?
Thanks – it’s good to hear some common sense here. OK maybe the Pana flares a lot less than the Fuji? I doubt it 🙂
Personally with a 45mm f1.8, a 50mm f2 and a 50mm f3.5 (not including the 12-40 f2.8, 40-150 f2.8 which I will be buying when released) I dont think I could justify another lens at this focal length.
Having said that this is a superb option for m43rds users who want to get more subject isolation with AF, and IS.
Lens could be slightly better and is way more expensive but to bad you have to put it on a camera with tiny sensor and therefore the M43 combo will always be worse.