Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/02/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have owned both and used both. In November I took a trip to North Carolina on my motorcycle and took an M6 with these two lenses and a tele-elmarit. I found the Noctilux was more useful because you could shoot at a higher shutter speed and get tightly framed shots. I posted a few pictures from that trip and the ones taken with the Summilux ASPH were not tightly framed and edited out. The extra stop of the Noctilux made for a better shutter speed of about 60th. The pictures are at: http://home.istar.ca/~robsteve/photography/trip.htm I have since sold the 35mm Summilux ASPH and replaced it with a Summicron ASPH. I figured I didn't need the extra speed and bulk of the Summilux when I had a Noctilux. Regards, Robert At 04:35 AM 2/13/99 -0800, you wrote: >The idea that the 35 sumilux is a more useful low light to very low >light tool than the Noctilux is an opinion that I have felt strongly and >expressed for a few years now. I am glad to hear others coming around to >it too especially through direct experience as with me it's still just a >strong theory. (I haven't tried them out or done the comparison you just >have) Thanks for the unintentional reinforcement. I am always glad when >my ideas prove out in the real world. >Mark Rabiner. > > > >