File :-(, x, )
Leica offers World's fastest Aspherical lens Anonymous
Along with the M8.2, Leica has unveiled the world’s fastest asphercial lens, the NOCTILUX-M 50 mm f/0.95 ASPH. offering the market a faster lens than the SUMMILUX-M 50 mm f /1.4 ASPH. The wide maximum aperture gives extremely shallow depth of field and very low-light capability. Priced at £6290 it will be made available in February 2009.

>> Breaking the optical “sound barrier” of lens speed 1.1 has been the Holy Grail of lens design for many years. Notably, the Canon 0.95 “Dream lens” was a bold attempt; however this was prior to modern aspherical lens technology.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Fapfapfapfapfapfapfapfap.
>> Anonymous
>> Breaking the optical “sound barrier”

GOD, dpreview, hire better writers
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I wonder if the aspherical elements helped or it sucks just as badly as the ultra-fast lenses from the aperture race era.
>> Project !dashI8UpO.
     File :-(, x)


Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:09:15 23:25:29Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width600Image Height505
>> FrtFlks !!Ez7/DaRmPG+
I came buckets. One day I'll have that lens, a 35mm f1.4 and a MP.
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>254755
Sigh, that's the Leica press release. I guess when your money goes towards aspherical elements and the German forest pixies needed to grind them, you can't afford decent writers.

I think the 21/1.4 is a much more awesome groundbreaking invention anyways.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>254867
>I think the 21/1.4 is a much more awesome groundbreaking invention anyways.
More awesome, useful, practical, and exciting to Leica users (as opposed to people like myself, who just like to look at Leicas while pleasuring themselves), yeah. But the f/0.95 is more groundbreaking. There's only been one mass-produced commercial lens faster than f/1.0 before, after all, and that was with 1960s technology.
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>254873
And there's been zero 21mm lenses faster than f/2.8, as far as I can recall. Same goes for 24mm.

Also I've already bought into the M mount so depending on whether I think I can spare a kidney one of these may end up on my camera. 21/50 is my favorite combo at the moment...
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>254876
>Same goes for 24mm

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeSIGMACamera ModelSIGMA SD9Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS WindowsMaximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)179 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution180 dpiVertical Resolution180 dpiImage Created2006:09:26 03:32:08Exposure Time1/125 secF-Numberf/16.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Exposure Bias-3 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length105.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width758Image Height600RenderingCustomExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>254876
Canon's got a 24mm f/1.4L.

I'll grant you the 21mm, but I'm guessing the reason for a lack of fast 21mm was more because, pre-Crop-Digital, there wasn't that much call for a focal length that wide that was that fast than any inherent technological difficulties in doing it.

I'm just saying that the 21/1.4 is groundbreaking like building a new mini-mall just outside of town whereas the 0.95 if groundbreaking like a moon base.

(With the corresponding truth that the mini-mall just outside of town is going to be a hell of a lot more practical and useful for a hell of a lot more people)
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>254878
>>254881
It sucks to be wrong :(

I'm still not psyched about the new Noctilux. 0.95's been done before so there's not as much to brag about, and I doubt the f/1 is much different. But I suppose we just find different attributes more appealing in the great lens dick-waving contest.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>254889
>I'm still not psyched about the new Noctilux
Understandable. Like I said, it's clearly designed to be lusted after on the Internet and purchased primarily by people who will keep it in a pristine box next to their pristinely boxed M1 and M2 and M3 and M4 and M5 and M6 and M7 and M8 and M8.2 and M9 and MP and CL and so forth and never ever actually *used* because that would lower their collectible value. Which is just as well, all things considered, because if they ever were to actually open that expensive pristine box labeled M9 they'd be in for a nasty surprise.

The 21/1.4 and 24/1.4 are definitely more exciting announcements for actual photographers actually using Leicas (especially the M8, which has been badly hurting for wide/normal fast lenses).
>> Anonymous
>>254881
>0.95 if groundbreaking like a moon base
It's not that groundbreaking, actually. The reason no one has made a mass-produced f/0.9 lens yet isn't purely technical difficulty; it's just that no one really needs it. Having a lens that fast in your line-up certainly helps to keep the cult status and e-peen size, but it's a risky investment if you hope to get some money from it. Leica hopes to reclaim the R&D costs by marketing the 50/0.95 to an extremely small market of rich fans for an extremely high price, but we'll see if this strategy works.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>254900
>it's just that no one really needs it.
Same could be said for a hypothetical moon base. Main reason we went to the moon in the first place was so we could get there before the Russkies, after all. :)
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
i wanna see what moaan does with this.
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>254908

oh, and what the fuck? do i have to goddamn say it? jesus you guys are lagging.

f/1.0 is so pedestrian to me.
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
Oh so genius. Hahaha, all the rich Noctilux owners who had to get it because it's the fastest are gonna snap this bitch up so fast.
>> Herbie !!s1ksehRmCZk
>>254908
You mean besides take pictures of his Corgi? Don't get me wrong - it's an adorable dog - but I'm more interested to see what Tommy Oshima might do with it if he gets one.
>> Anonymous
hey guys is this smaller than the old F1 noctilux? it doesnt look as large
whats lecia claim its weight is
>> fence !!POey2hdozCZ
>>254926

awesome stuff.
>> Anonymous
Aside from keeping it around to look nice, the Noctilux series are always jocked by bokeh fiends.
>> Anonymous
>>254939

630g

Also that 24 3.8 sounds interesting since it will probably be not so expensive. The 24 1.4 sounds great as well.
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
It would be soooo cool if Sigma would make their own version of this lens for Nikon, Canon, etc...

Oh yeah, it would also be sooooo cool to own 200mm f/1.8. Too bad the price tag is beyond my reach. :(
>> Anonymous
>>254750
Canon made 50/0,75 lens for thier manual mount decades ago.
Here some samples
http://www.pbase.com/pganzel/superfast_x_ray_lenses_adapted_to_dslrs
>> Anonymous
>>255535
Ewwwww. I can do the same effect with a gausian blur in photoshoop :P
>> Anonymous
>>255515
A now-defunct company called Kilfitt made a 180/1.3 and 240/1.2. The 240/1.2 actually covered 6x9, which is just crazy.

Their quality control was insane- every lens that left the factory had two test shots made on it, on glass plates- film just wasn't flat enough. The cameras, for maximum stability, were mounted in concrete blocks bolted to the floor. Etc. etc. They made Leica look like Sigma when it came to QC.
>> Anonymous
>>255805

I'm guessing they didn't charge Sigma prices?
>> Anonymous
>>255814
I'm guessing not, though I've never seen a catalog or whatever. They specialized in weird exotica- they often used the name "Zoomar" or "Zoomatar," which is where we get the term "zoom"- they made the first for 35mm still, a 36-82/2.8. They also made the first 35mm macro lens, a 40mm, in f/3.5 and 2.8 versions.
>> Anonymous
>>255805
>>255827

nice trolling, 8/10
>> Anonymous
>>255830
Not trolling, Google it.

If you mean the references to Sigma, it's well-known they make some good or great lenses with shittastic quality control. The chumps who don't know or care about get their botched products, and everyone else gets a good lens on the cheap after a few tries with the customer service department. Everyone wins.
>> Anonymous
>>255840
And I grant I'm being hyperbolic.
>> Anonymous
>>255830
you probably think he's trolling cause he's talking about a company from the first half of the 20th century, and that disappeared around that time too.
>> Anonymous
"f/1.0 is so pedestrian to me."

I love this fucking phrase. Props to whoever coined it the other day.
>> Anonymous
>>255894
Watch Erwin Puts say the exact same thing in fifty sentences of horrible, pretentious prose. (The "horrible" part is probably mostly that English isn't his first language, but he should write in Dutch and have someone competent translate it, then.)
>> Serenar !m827jEgWi.
>>255830
Fuck you.
http://www.kilfitt.org/Lenses/Zoomar_180.htm

keep clicking around there
>> Kilz2latex !!3htj9hFDMA4
f 1.4/1.8 isnt faster than f 1 everyone