[Leica] Help with Nocti

[mark at whitedogs.co.uk (Mark Pope)]

With respect to the 'lack' of close focusing on the Noctilux (or Nokton 
f.1.1 for that matter), I wonder whether the reason for the 1m limit is 
to do with depth of field?

According to http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html the depth of field at 
f1.0 at 0.7m it's 1.09cm (0.54cm in front, 0.55cm behind)
f1.0 at 1.0m it's 2.28cm (1.13cm in front, 1.15cm behind).

So, it seems to me that 1.0m is a practical limit for the lens, 
especially taking into account rangefinder variations.

Just my 0.2p worth...



Mark Pope,
Swindon, Wilts
UK

Homepage               http://www.monomagic.co.uk
Blog                   http://www.monomagic.co.uk/blog
Picture a week (2010)  http://www.monomagic.co.uk/index.php?gallery=paw/2010
Picture a week (2009)  http://www.monomagic.co.uk/index.php?gallery=paw/2009
                (2008) 
http://www.monomagic.co.uk/index.php?gallery=paw/2008

On 24/01/2012 08:33, Henning Wulff wrote:
> I'm with you on the close focussing. That's the one thing that bothers me 
> on the f/1, and I also looked for it on the f/0.95. A close focussing 
> distance of .7m is just fine for the majority of my use for a 50, and is 
> just wonderful on the 75's! On the wides it's sometimes a bit limiting, 
> but generally OK.
>
> I'm glad I kept my f/1. I like a lot of the pictures I take with it, and 
> while big, it's a lot smaller than the 0.95, or REALLY a lot smaller than 
> the gigantic 0.95 SLR Magic lens. The Leica 0.95 has really great optical 
> perfomance, but between the size and lack of closer focussing it's not 
> worth it to me at half the price. I have a couple of smaller 50's with a 
> .7m close focus, and I use them about 60% and the Nocti 40% when shooting 
> 50mm. I'm glad I kept the f/1, as I bought it for less than you can get a 
> current Summicron used now, and current Nocti prices are just silly.
>
> Henning
>
>
> On 2012-01-22, at 5:45 PM, John Collier wrote:
>
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> I agree, it's perfectly ridiculous that 0.3 of a metre would make a 
>> difference. However, after a year of shooting, it did. I loved the 
>> results but I always found myself having to back up from my intended 
>> framing. I started out with SLRs back in the day and my first M was an M2 
>> with a 50 Summicron that focused to 0.7m. I never had any close focus 
>> issues so 0.7 m must have been my working zone with the SLR 50 mm as 
>> well. Even with 35s I seldom "bump" into the 0.7 meter limit.
>>
>> So, after a year of shooting, I did what I felt was best and changed the 
>> lens rather than my shooting style. I next tried the 50 Summilux Asph, 
>> had issues and finally ended up with a late non-asph Summilux which 
>> focuses to 0.7 m. When the new Noctilux came out, the first thing I 
>> checked was the close focus limit and, dang, still 1 m. I now use a 75 
>> Summilux -- thanks Henning for letting me try yours -- and am delighted 
>> as it focuses to 0.7 m and has an even narrower depth of field than the 
>> Noctilux.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On 2012-01-22, at 6:27 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>>
>>> That John sold his Noctilux becuae it went to 1 meter instead of .7 of a
>>> meter is a what I've been hearing on the lug now for a decade with a bit 
>>> of
>>> wonder. One could carry a Summicron in ones pocket for such critical 
>>> close
>>> situations could one not?
>>> 11.8 inches is the difference.  But the real issue would be the 
>>> difference
>>> in size of minimum magnification. The smallest area you can shoot would 
>>> be
>>> and why this could not be settled with a tiny bit of cropping when 
>>> printing
>>> or Photoshopping the  digital image.
>>> The 50mm collapsible and rigid Summicrons  in the 50's and 60's both 
>>> focused
>>> to one meter. Not the key issue I don't think.
>>> Many people when they are in a 2 to 3 foot shooting space mind set reach 
>>> for
>>> their SLR DSLR with maybe a macro lens on it. Put one of those in the 
>>> bottom
>>> of your camera bag and you're covered when you need to get close and 
>>> don't
>>> want to crop.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>
>
> Henning Wulff
> henningw at archiphoto.com
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information