I own this lens, and the other three in the series. While I agree with you on many of the points, the Nokton 0.95 lenses have an incredibly pleasing quality to their images. Skin tones, in particular, are rendered in a very flattering way, appearing brighter and smoother than most other lenses. Colour contrast is excellent. This is a "happy" lens that is a sheer joy to use, and produces rich, bright, attractive images. The 0.95 thing is just a bonus on a lovely, wonderful lens.
@@FJ_0412I also use mine for filming. I have 4 Voigtlanders 10.5mm F/0.95, 17.5mm F/0.95mm, 25mm F/0.95 and the 42mm F/0.95. I use MFT so the fast lens work for me. I'm using the Panasonic GH5s along with 13 other vintage lenses. The ultra fast lenses are good. If I were using Full frame I would not bother so much with faster lenses. 2 of my favourite lenses are the Voigtlander 42.5mm F/0.95 and the Pentax SMC-A 50mm F/1.2
When some people overpay for a lens they need to justify the purchase by overstating its niche-eeness. You're a straight shooter, thanks for the objective upload and demonstrating the reality of owning this lens independent of the mind.
"Yes, for filmmakers who want a cinematic image. No, for professional photographers who need to rely on their gear for money." Um-OK. No overlap there IYHO. Seriously I can agree with your judgment of the particulars and disagree with characterizing it as an unserious lens for which there are better choices. Full disclosure, I didn't pay full price for my used 17.5, and there are more options for adapting full-frame lenses to portrait lengths out there than there are for 35mm equivalents, so there's that. But still a lot of people, not silly, frivolous people either, see something in this family of lenses that you don't really talk about, but seem to know is there, and honestly this review strikes me as an exercise in praising with faint damns. I wanted a medium-wide with a certain look, thought hard about this lens, did my due diligence, and since I've had it in my hands for hours and hours now I'm pretty psyched about it. I think I can offer my clients something special with it, which is nice because I do in fact rely on my gear for money. I suppose we look at the same facts and come to a different conclusion, which is why they make chocolate and vanilla. : )
All good points! I should have probably added WHAT work I was referencing. A lens would have to give me a great reason to give up autofocus if I were to use it and I didn't see anything that this lens did that made it worth missing thousands of shots due to manual focus in any given day. I find the highly touted close focusing distance a bit of a sham too considering how unsuably soft the lens becomes that close as well. To me, the lens is overpriced partially because the bokeh looks cheap and distracting to my eyes. It isn't funky enough to be cool like an old Helios and it surely isn't soft enough to be considered creamy. I've since found out that a lot of people, like you, love the Voigtlander look. Maybe it'll grow on me one day! All of that aside, probably more than 50% of my favourite pictures that I have taken, I have shot with this lens. The user experience is the best part about it. I just can't recommend it on any technical level in today's market.
@@FJ_0412 I can't argue when it's a personal choice, so fair enough. I myself don't much like the Helios look and can't see spending fifty bucks on it, but lots of people do so there you are. I might just go for the Sigma 16mm autofocus if I get busy and don't want to fool around focusing. Honestly I wish we still had the ground-glass focusing screens of the old manual SLRs.
Good review - you are right I think but there's still something that draws me to this lens. The only thing you forgot to mention was that its low light / night time light ability will be very good.
Felix, I rarely disagreed so much with a Review! This lens is especially suitable for professionals. It is a very specific use lens, it is true, but I know countless photo and video professionals who love working with this lens, precisely because of its unique and different character! Extremely sharp lenses are not desirable in many cases. I have been a videographer for over 20 years and I work with multiple systems and lenses, and I can tell you that the results obtained with Noktone are unique and perfectly suited to what is proposed. Just know how to use and use in the right situation. I think that your video would be more appropriate if you put your evaluation as a personal opinion linked to your particular experience and not an attempt to generalize, recommending it or not. Technically your video is good. It's good to have more alternatives! It is good to have the right tools for the right situation and the desired end product. In this scenario, even the price can be relativized!
That's fair. I'd like to add that I don't see how this video could be taken as anything else but a personal opinion from a random user. My channel carries my name, I'm not representing a magazine or a business and I've got nothing to sell. Just because I have a RUclips channel doesn't make me an authority figure nor does it make my opinion worth more than anyone else's :)
Felix Jäger Felix, thanks for your reply. You do an excellent job and great presentation. I think it ends up influencing yes, even if it is not your intention. Keep up the excellent work. Greetings from Germany!
I own this lens and your review was 100% accurate. It has been a fun lens to own, particularly for my video work for the shallow DOF, but it's probably time to move on from it. I'll probably trade it in or sell it. Good job on the review!
It's build for night shot on sunny day it's almost useless at 0,95 you need very low Iso and fast shutter or an nd filter to compensate, but if you like shiny Twilight and a sky full of stars it could have some use with long exposure, definitly a niche market but a usefull one for some very technical photographer.
Very informative, and a bit confusing in a informative presentation. So, how about the 17.5mm f/0.95 Voigtlander, have you tried it? Thanks for your advice, warning, and I think subtle exuberance in the possible fun a novice could have with an overpriced, in your opinion, built like a great hunk of an engine, with a great eye that's a lens. I Think.
You should keep doing this, the camera review world is the driest desert when it comes to comedy, so this is very refreshing. You're to the point, you definitely need to keep that. Fucking hilarious.
I think the video makes the lens look better than it actually is, because you are so good at taking good pictures. For example, I absolutely LOVE the pictures at 0:36 and 2:18. Do you think they would have turned great with a leica nocticron or the oly 75mm 1.8? Also, are your pictures straight off camera or do you retouch them heavily?
Hard to say. Voigtlander lenses definitely have a distinct look. The issue with the bokeh in this lens is found in basically every Voigtlander AFAIK. I haven't tried any vintage lenses, really
I think I made my point that I find the colour shift problematic, the bokeh quite ugly and the lack of sharpness hard to justify at this price range = I don't like the character, especially when all of that "character" disappears the second you stop the lends down, as in the bokeh changes, the colour shift disappears and the sharpness increases dramatically, making it a totally different flavour.
1:33 I don't think it's meaningful to compare this to a f1.8 lens. Most people are interested in this lens because it offers 0.95 aperture - in my case for shooting in low light. f1.8 renders 3 whole stops darker!
Not so much a photographer’s lens so much as a cinematographer’s delight. Worth every cent for me.
I own this lens, and the other three in the series. While I agree with you on many of the points, the Nokton 0.95 lenses have an incredibly pleasing quality to their images. Skin tones, in particular, are rendered in a very flattering way, appearing brighter and smoother than most other lenses. Colour contrast is excellent. This is a "happy" lens that is a sheer joy to use, and produces rich, bright, attractive images. The 0.95 thing is just a bonus on a lovely, wonderful lens.
Definitely my all time favorite lens for M4/3 of 7 years filming with Lumix GH series !!
I love it for filming as well! The photographic side is where I'm a bit skeptical 😬😅
@@FJ_0412I also use mine for filming. I have 4 Voigtlanders 10.5mm F/0.95, 17.5mm F/0.95mm, 25mm F/0.95 and the 42mm F/0.95. I use MFT so the fast lens work for me. I'm using the Panasonic GH5s along with 13 other vintage lenses. The ultra fast lenses are good. If I were using Full frame I would not bother so much with faster lenses. 2 of my favourite lenses are the Voigtlander 42.5mm F/0.95 and the Pentax SMC-A 50mm F/1.2
@@FJ_0412 long exposure and a lot of filtering is the answer.
When some people overpay for a lens they need to justify the purchase by overstating its niche-eeness. You're a straight shooter, thanks for the objective upload and demonstrating the reality of owning this lens independent of the mind.
"Yes, for filmmakers who want a cinematic image. No, for professional photographers who need to rely on their gear for money." Um-OK. No overlap there IYHO. Seriously I can agree with your judgment of the particulars and disagree with characterizing it as an unserious lens for which there are better choices. Full disclosure, I didn't pay full price for my used 17.5, and there are more options for adapting full-frame lenses to portrait lengths out there than there are for 35mm equivalents, so there's that. But still a lot of people, not silly, frivolous people either, see something in this family of lenses that you don't really talk about, but seem to know is there, and honestly this review strikes me as an exercise in praising with faint damns. I wanted a medium-wide with a certain look, thought hard about this lens, did my due diligence, and since I've had it in my hands for hours and hours now I'm pretty psyched about it. I think I can offer my clients something special with it, which is nice because I do in fact rely on my gear for money. I suppose we look at the same facts and come to a different conclusion, which is why they make chocolate and vanilla. : )
All good points! I should have probably added WHAT work I was referencing. A lens would have to give me a great reason to give up autofocus if I were to use it and I didn't see anything that this lens did that made it worth missing thousands of shots due to manual focus in any given day. I find the highly touted close focusing distance a bit of a sham too considering how unsuably soft the lens becomes that close as well. To me, the lens is overpriced partially because the bokeh looks cheap and distracting to my eyes. It isn't funky enough to be cool like an old Helios and it surely isn't soft enough to be considered creamy. I've since found out that a lot of people, like you, love the Voigtlander look. Maybe it'll grow on me one day!
All of that aside, probably more than 50% of my favourite pictures that I have taken, I have shot with this lens. The user experience is the best part about it. I just can't recommend it on any technical level in today's market.
@@FJ_0412 I can't argue when it's a personal choice, so fair enough. I myself don't much like the Helios look and can't see spending fifty bucks on it, but lots of people do so there you are. I might just go for the Sigma 16mm autofocus if I get busy and don't want to fool around focusing. Honestly I wish we still had the ground-glass focusing screens of the old manual SLRs.
The mitakon 25mm f0.95 is a real bargain. Also very sharp wide open and half the price and very small for what it is. Check it out.
I have that lens its freakin sweet
Right off the bat, you are one of the best RUclipsrs for lens reviews!
Thank you! 😃
this is one of the best reviews i've seen . had a lot of giggles all troughoit the video. Great job man!
Thank you, hope it helped :)
@@FJ_0412 it certainly did!
help!
Good review - you are right I think but there's still something that draws me to this lens. The only thing you forgot to mention was that its low light / night time light ability will be very good.
Thanks brother - I appreciate that you get to the bottom line right at the start.
Might as well, life is short
Music and lighting in the first 5 seconds made me sub!
Thank you - I thank my Spanish friends for showing me the Latin rhythms...
easily the best review I have ever seen
Loads of gems of information in here! Thanks.
Really good review format, I subscribed too.
Thank you
Felix, I rarely disagreed so much with a Review! This lens is especially suitable for professionals. It is a very specific use lens, it is true, but I know countless photo and video professionals who love working with this lens, precisely because of its unique and different character! Extremely sharp lenses are not desirable in many cases. I have been a videographer for over 20 years and I work with multiple systems and lenses, and I can tell you that the results obtained with Noktone are unique and perfectly suited to what is proposed. Just know how to use and use in the right situation. I think that your video would be more appropriate if you put your evaluation as a personal opinion linked to your particular experience and not an attempt to generalize, recommending it or not. Technically your video is good. It's good to have more alternatives! It is good to have the right tools for the right situation and the desired end product. In this scenario, even the price can be relativized!
That's fair. I'd like to add that I don't see how this video could be taken as anything else but a personal opinion from a random user. My channel carries my name, I'm not representing a magazine or a business and I've got nothing to sell. Just because I have a RUclips channel doesn't make me an authority figure nor does it make my opinion worth more than anyone else's :)
Felix Jäger Felix, thanks for your reply. You do an excellent job and great presentation. I think it ends up influencing yes, even if it is not your intention. Keep up the excellent work. Greetings from Germany!
@@TITAOSTEIN Liebe Gruesse zurueck :)
I own this lens and your review was 100% accurate. It has been a fun lens to own, particularly for my video work for the shallow DOF, but it's probably time to move on from it. I'll probably trade it in or sell it. Good job on the review!
Sell it to me
This lens looks awesome
It's build for night shot on sunny day it's almost useless at 0,95 you need very low Iso and fast shutter or an nd filter to compensate, but if you like shiny Twilight and a sky full of stars it could have some use with long exposure, definitly a niche market but a usefull one for some very technical photographer.
Very informative, and a bit confusing in a informative presentation. So, how about the 17.5mm f/0.95 Voigtlander, have you tried it? Thanks for your advice, warning, and I think subtle exuberance in the possible fun a novice could have with an overpriced, in your opinion, built like a great hunk of an engine, with a great eye that's a lens. I Think.
I haven't tried any of the other Voigtlanders, no. I just got this one because it seemed interesting!
haha very nice review! Fun and informative !
You should keep doing this, the camera review world is the driest desert when it comes to comedy, so this is very refreshing. You're to the point, you definitely need to keep that. Fucking hilarious.
Really fun, helpful review. Disappointed that there aren't more videos! Cheers.
I think the video makes the lens look better than it actually is, because you are so good at taking good pictures.
For example, I absolutely LOVE the pictures at 0:36 and 2:18. Do you think they would have turned great with a leica nocticron or the oly 75mm 1.8?
Also, are your pictures straight off camera or do you retouch them heavily?
Thank you a lot! I do quite a bit of re-touching as I love Lightroom and editing. I don't think I could ever NOT edit.
They would have turned out differently if only because the 75mm has quite a bit more reach than the 42.5!
I love your presentation style. It's both educational and fun to watch!
Thank you, potato!
great review!
Well done, subscribed keep it rolling 🤟🏼
Thanks, Jay 😃
I wonder how you explain all the people who use the voigtlanders
as their workhorse lenses for video on m43 bodies 🤔
As I said in the video, it's great for video.
Great review! Brilliantly thorough. Keep it up!
Cheers :D
Great!
Nice review :-)
How would this compare to a good 50mm vintage lens with a no electronics adapter? $500 Zeiss or Pentax Takumar?
Hard to say. Voigtlander lenses definitely have a distinct look. The issue with the bokeh in this lens is found in basically every Voigtlander AFAIK. I haven't tried any vintage lenses, really
I've had fun with Minolta MDs. I'd try those out. Though it won't go as crazy open.
So it seems it's a video lens, uh?
Does this lens have IBS?
Damn you missed the whole point of a voigtlander. It’s about character....not about sharpness.
I think I made my point that I find the colour shift problematic, the bokeh quite ugly and the lack of sharpness hard to justify at this price range = I don't like the character, especially when all of that "character" disappears the second you stop the lends down, as in the bokeh changes, the colour shift disappears and the sharpness increases dramatically, making it a totally different flavour.
1:33 I don't think it's meaningful to compare this to a f1.8 lens. Most people are interested in this lens because it offers 0.95 aperture - in my case for shooting in low light. f1.8 renders 3 whole stops darker!
Спасибо за обзор!
1:24 🤣😂
Noooo i just bought it 1 hour agooo
It's still a great lens
This lens is very very sharp, and has an beautiful bokeh, so I think maybe your specimen is garbage, since you have made this video.