Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/04/21

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Re: Film Demise
From: Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 09:47:04 -0700
References: <002101c0c993$d0fb4ec0$4d02a8c0@neurosoft.lan> <5.0.1.4.0.20010420095611.00a821f0@206.34.200.40> <l03130300b706849cc9c6@[216.40.161.63]> <002001c0ca48$a9699960$ea0e5d18@rochester.rr.com>

At 12:07 PM 4/21/01 -0400, B. D. Colen wrote:
>
>I wonder if anyone has the statistics on the percentage of low light
>"keepers," taken in delivery rooms or anywhere else for that matter,
>shot with Noctiluxes, v. the percentage shot with everything else...what
>do we want to guess, 1/4 of one percent shot with the Noctilust? Which
>is not to say that it isn't a great lens. It's just that most of the
>world's great photographers have somehow gotten through their entire
>careers without ever using one.
>
>B. D.
> 

I strongly suspect that it is the person behind the lens that makes the
difference. I'll bet that Ted has a high hit ratio while an amateur will be
on the very low end.

And in reality, most of the world's greatest photographers have never used
a LEICA, much less a Noctilux.

JB

Replies: Reply from "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> ([Leica] Re: The Necessity of the Noctilust - or lack there of...)
In reply to: Message from "mdelman" <mdelman@rochester.rr.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Film Demise)