Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] and the 1.7/35 Ultron? was: Nokton first impressions...
From: "Raimo Korhonen" <raimo.korhonen@pp2.inet.fi>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 18:12:38 +0200

I´m contemplating about exchanging my old (1976) non-ASPH Summilux for the Ultron - does it make sense?
All the best!
Raimo
photos at http://personal.inet.fi/private/raimo.korhonen

- -----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: Stephen Gandy <Stephen@CameraQuest.com>
Vastaanottaja: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Päivä: 17. huhtikuuta 2000 21:33
Aihe: Re: [Leica] Nokton first impressions... and possibly last.

>>
>> << J Deadman writes:
>>
>> << Well, I guess I've shot around ten or twelve rolls with this lens now and
>>  ... it's a tough one. Most of the stuff I've shot has been family stuff
>>  which I don't like to put on the web, so it's hard to illustrate the points
>>  I'm about to make.
>>
>>  First, the good things: it's as well made as my other Voigtlander lens (the
>>  75, which I love to bits), it handles well, and for such a fast lens it
>>  behaves impeccably when shooting against the light. The focus throw is nice
>>  and snappy. As for sharpness, well, check out Erwin's figures. It's as sharp
>>  as I will ever need a lens to be.
>>
>>  Are you detecting reservations? You sure are.
>>
>>  There is something about this lens that I don't like. Frank Dernie said he
>>  didn't like the bokeh, and I agree. It's just... not right. If I had to give
>>  it a name it would be 'technical' or 'cold'. In a 1.4 lens this is a
>>  disaster. The 75 has great, chunky bokeh.
>>
>>  The 50 is... smushy, but not in a good way.
>>
>>  It's depressing to buy a lens (having shot some stuff with it in the shop
>>  and developed it) and then get the growing feeling, which I now have, that
>>  this is not a lens I can live with. I know others (BD, right?) like the
>>  Nokton, and in many respects I can see why. It's sharp, even wide open, it's
>>  flare-resistant, it's cute, the pictures it takes are really 'modern'
>>  looking (ie they look like current-generation lens shots). And it's cheap.
>>  But it's a definite case of the MTF charts and the price tage not telling
>>  the whole story. The 'character' of this lens is all wrong, IMHO. Sad, isn't
>>  it?
>>
>>  Anyone want to buy one, near mint, boxed, etc?
>>
>>  --
>>  Johnny Deadman >>
>