RE: [Leica] Lens Tests

["Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" <peterk@lucent.com>]

Hi Chris,

I just sent the chart, and my editorial on Noctilux owners was not to
offend.  Obviously you won one and if you need the F1 great! That's the
reason you are paying the big bucks.  If you never use F1 and typically
shoot in the middle apertures, the Noctilux is money for nothing.  Kind of
like buying a BMX 7 series and only driving it two blocks to church once a
week.

Peter K

- -----Original Message-----
From: c.blaue@bmsg.de [mailto:c.blaue@bmsg.de]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 1999 3:32 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] Lens Tests


Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter) <peterk@lucent.com> writes:

     > Yes, it is the best F1 lens.  Slightly better than the Canon EOS F1
     > lens.  I would say the noctilux is a great lens if you need the
fastest
     > available, but if you don't need F1, you can save a ton o money and
     > improve you pictures too!

Peter,
improvement might be matter of taste. The Noctilux is a very special lens,
and
the posted figures do no justice to it. I needed the LUG and specially
Erwins
comments to find this out.
In this lens are far more low light capabilities incorporated than just
resolution and contrast. E.g. It can handle the very high contrasts usually
appearing in low light conditions without a sign of flare. It pulls the
details out of the shades. 

But hold on, there is even more:

Stopped down it is a wonderful sharp lens, although it looses its special
characteristics a bit. It is far better than a Canon 1.8/50, which I know
pretty good, and I guess this one is stopped down better than the Canon
1.0/50. 

The 2.0/50 is smaller, faster to handle, and - yes you are right - of even
better image quality in terms of resolving power of very very fine details.

But you might well improve your pictures with the special characteristics of
a
Noctilux although it might "chart" lower.


christoph

Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.