Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/12/01

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

Subject: [Leica] Wanted: Noctilux
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Fri Dec 1 21:20:04 2006

On 12/1/06 11:40 PM, "Ric Carter" <ricc@mindspring.com> typed:

> Okay, I'm interested. Who else can share experience with this lens?
> 
> I'm more interested in performance on M6/7.
> 
> Is it a good alternative to the Summilux 35? What are the trade offs?
> Have you used both?
> 
> Thanks for comments and thoughts.
> 
> Ric Carter
> http://gallery.leica-users.org/Passing-Fancies
> 
On an M8 a 35 is a 45.5 normal.
So it would be a "normal" ultrafast perhaps made for low light lens
For digital. An M8.

For film its a wide angle ultrawide.
Apples and oranges.

A wide angel you are getting more left to right;
Are you going to want less front to back?
less obvious. Not intuitive

When one uses a wide one wants to stop down.
Your getting everything left to right more.
You also want it front to back.
Your not picking out stuff you are getting everything.

With a 50 with film it's a long normal or short tele.
Its got grabbing power you can pick things out of its relatively narrow
shooting angle. Angle of view.

Again with a 35 its just not the same thing.

My guess Ted would agree. As would anybody.

Mark Rabiner
New York, NY
40?47'59.79"N   
73?57'32.37"W

http://rabinergroup.com/




In reply to: Message from ricc at mindspring.com (Ric Carter) ([Leica] Wanted: Noctilux)