Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/04/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Yeah, the performance of the goggled 135 is just *awful* isn't it? ;-) I was focusing on the inside of his left eye and it looks right on the money to me. I do like the 135 better for portraits at times than the Noct (sacrilege, I know), but it's so much slower that I'm forced to use bounce flash to get the shots. http://mysite.verizon.net/vze1ssgc/Easter/easter_img_0001.htm Yeah, sometimes the nausealux effect (isn't that what BD called it?) at f/1 is too pronounced, even for me. But I liked the colors anyway, and with a serious case of cabin fever raging, that's the important thing to me... Regards, /Mitch -----Original Message----- Those of us who, like you have to live with the "terrible" performance of the 135 goggled Elmarit share your pain. Maybe if we spent lots more money we could extract decent portraiture from the (what was it he called the lens?) oh yes, "pooch." Seriously, that is a lovely shot. Though the URL was off on the Noctilux, it was easy to find. Sometimes I love Noctilux output at f1, othertimes, as in a couple of your plant shots, the "bokey" makes me slightly seasick. Regards, Sonny