Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]From: Mark Rabiner <mrabiner@concentric.net> Sent: Friday, October 08, 1999 11:22 Subject: Re: [Leica] noct performance > No it's really not all that great for general purposes. > If you are needing depth of field other lenses make > better images. I'm sure there are better lenses, but there are worse, too. I need to figure out if it is good enough for _my_ standards, and my standards are obviously based on the lenses I currently use, the best of which (outside my Leica Summicron) is the AF-S 28-70 that I keep more or less permanently mounted on my F5. > Have you read Erwins thing on it or not? I have, and he seems to feel that it isn't good for general purposes, but I'm not sure what he is comparing against. I'm sure it doesn't perform as well as the Summicron, but if the Summicron is 100 times better than my AF-S zoom, that isn't necessarily a problem for me. > The size alone makes it not a general purpose lens. All of the Leica 35 and 50 mm lenses are tiny compared to my Nikkors, so that isn't a problem. > I don't understand how it's comparison to a Nikkor AF-S > 28-70 is a determining factor. Because that is my best Nikkor, and I find that it is satisfactory for my normal use. If the Noctilux can meet or beat that, then it would probably also be satisfactory for general use at 50 mm. > Down the line you're just going to have to get a Summicron > as well and find out what Leica is all about. If I were independently wealthy, I'd do that right now. But unfortunately I have budget constraints. > And that's not carrying around a Monster lens all the time. Surely you can't be thinking of that little itty bitty Noctilux when you say "monster," right? I think that just the lens hood on my AF-S zoom weighs more than a Noctilux. Size and weight are not necessarily a problem. -- Anthony