Anyone Shooting Noctilux on the M9?

I should be more specific, the current version of the Noctilux 50mm f/0.95, not the old f/1.0. Thank you!

The usual is to use more than 50mm for portraits.
But it depends on what kind of portraits you are planning to do.
if I am not in a mistake those are the most expensive items in the leica M system, the most expensive body with the most expensive lens.
Maybe they give good results.
;-)

Yes I suppose there is a theory for expensive euipment give godo results ha ha. Thank you Brandan for your rersponse. I agree that longer focal lengths are typically more desirable for portraits, which has made the 90mm APO the most suitable lens if you shoot Leica, but I typically use a 70-200mm or a 135m f/2.0 on a Nikon with AF otherwise I am can never keep up with the models. That said, the boken on the f/0.95 is wonderful (from the samples that I have seen on the M8) and gives that dreamy look everyone is raving about. I am really tempted to shoot this puppy for a lower-paced full-body glamour B/W portraits with nothing but the eyes in focus, or foreground thrown off, etc. I've tried it with the Summilux 50mm and yes the results are terrific, but ironically I like the pre-ASPH Summilux 50mm results better than the ASPH as the former gave me a more "dreamy" look as I found the the new ASPH to be a bit too contrasty for what I was trying to accomplish. It seems that the f/0.95 may be a perfect answer to the holy grail that I am seeking . . .

I've been fooling around with this combination for only a couple of days now. I think they did an admirable job of retaining the old Noctilux look with the ASPH. The M9 does a really nice job of handling the edges and corners. Original is in DNG; this is JPG extract of course. Absolutely no manipulation other than what the M9 does in camera. As far as fall-off is concerned, I can't see any difference between the DNG and extracted JPG. I took this at f/1.4 to get a little more depth of field.

Another, this one taken at f/.95. Focus point is his watch dial. This is for illustrative purposes only of course. No artistic claims. :-)
Zero manipulation, right out of the camera, all settings neutral.

Last one. My wife, Andie, at Thanksgiving. Taken at f/2 to get some DoF. I tweaked the levels in this one, but nothing else.

Ken, thank you VERY much for sharing. This is exactly what I wanted to see. Curiously, I don't see any noticeable falloff even at f/0.95. I expected that the f/0.95 would have less falloff (when compared with the Summilux 50mm ASPH when stopped down to f/2.0 or more (as Leica's on graphs show), but did not expect the corners to be this bright at f/0.95. Of course, Leica's own charts also show about a 3 stop falloff at the corners for the Summilux 50mm ASPH when shot at f/1.4, and I never saw that either (admittedly I didn't go shoot a bunch of pictures of a white wall); this is something I also never understood because graphs don't lie . . .

Of course falloff is not always a bad thing, but it's obviously easier to add vignette than to remove it :)

I should again clarify that my experiences with the Summilux 50mm ASPH were also with the M9, not film. Perhaps there is a difference in falloff between the M9 and the film bodies? Meaning does the M9 compensate? That would be really interesting . . .

I agree, I'm also surprised by the lack of fall-off. I think the M9 firmware is compensating.
I will be trying it out with film as well, and I expect we'll see the true Noctilux corner character.
My Summilux ASPH is off being coded. When it comes back I'll be doing a comparison with that, too.