Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/04/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Perhaps I was lucky. Dead on on two cameras. My older camera I'd have to adjust the vertical with a tiny screw driver sometimes. But that had no effect on the accuracy of focus with any and all my lenes. The famed Leica rangefinder can get knocked out of whack sure but it usually works and its many times more accurate than a ground glass especially with a normal and more so with a wide. I brought mine in once in Portland he fixed it while I waited. So its all the more reason to shoot with a super fast lens like the Noctilux. Or a 1.4 wide 21 or 24mm. And the fact that while using that glass we are not just seeing a mass of blur or bokeh. We can see everything even though we know that little of it will be sharp if we are shooting wide open. On 4/3/15 6:51 PM, "Steve Barbour" <steve.barbour at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Apr 3, 2015, at 2:36 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > > > My Nocti f1 focused perfectly on two M6's. One much older than the > other. > So I'm not ok with the idea that its a thing you have to have > specially > calibrated for a certain body and so on. I think the thing just > works. luckily some of the time, most of the time, not always?. You are not > seeing what you are shooting, you are depending on a purely mechanical > linkage > that can (and does) get out of whack (to use an optical term. Then it must > be > re calibrated. This happened to me. s > > > On 4/3/15 5:04 PM, "John > McMaster" <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote: > >> I don't tend to use my Noctilii > at f5.6, nothing wrong with it just I would >> use a different 50mm if I was > expecting that. It can be difficult to get the >> f1 focussing calibrated > accurately but it can be done. The 90AA is not at its >> best at closer > focussing distances, should be updated with FLE like the >> 75AA.... >> >> > john >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark Rabiner >> >> I'm glad > to know that John that the f1 has no problems with digital as I >> thought > there were a few threads to the effect on this list a long while >> back. And > that this had been corroborated in the real world. Having spent all >> that > money on a lens I'm glad and gotten great results with it with film its >> > nice to know if I ever lay my hands on a Monochrom or M240 I'd be able to>> > shoot f1 with it and be there and get that look. Didn't they say it messed > up >> at f5.6? Focus shift? >> If I ever got a digital M I'd certainly give it > a shot. >> Aspherically I have the 21 and 24 Elmarit's, the 35 Summicron and > the 90 Apo >> asph Summicron another lens which in my dreams I heard people > saying was a >> problem with digital. >> >> On 4/3/15 4:27 PM, "John > McMaster" <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote: >> >>> I own both Mark, not sure what > issues the f1 has with digital? My f1 >>> focusses fine on all my Ms but the > F0.95 front focusses slightly on >>> the Monochrom :-( I enjoy my Leica lenses > where I can get a very >>> different, but equally good quality, images with a > 75mm Summilux or >>> the 75mm APO Summicron. I am not aware of any other > system like this, >>> with Hasselblad and Canikon etc you tend to need the > latest lenses as >>> they catch up ;-) >>> >>> john >>> >>> -----Original > Message----- >>> From: Mark Rabiner >>> >>> I would also like to see side by > side comparisons but the meantime I'd >>> think the new lens is better than > the old one (which I have) on all >>> accounts. This is a key lens in the > Leica lineup with high visibility >>> promo value and the last lens Dr. > Andreas Kaufmann is going to mess up in any >>> respect. >>> The f1 has > trouble with digital. A huge embarrassment for the Leica company. >>> This one > costing three times more money and having the fastest design >>> available is > not going to have any glitches in it. Its going to be worth it. >>> Leica has > the resources to make sure this is the case. >>> >>> Its common on at least > this the list to assume that a lens with an >>> aspheric element in it has a > harsh look with ruined bokeh. Leica went >>> to bed and woke up stupid. >>> > Its as if it goes without saying so that people will make solid >>> statements > to this effect without even seeing this first hand on a new >>> lens it not > questioned by anybody. >>> I've have four M lenes with aspherics in them and > have found that >>> first hand to not be true. Each generation of Leica glass, > Nikon too >>> and I'd think Canon gets sharper with better contrast and god > forbid >>> they'd forget much better bokeh. As this aspect of a lens is all > anyone cares >>> or knows about any more. >>> I find this worship of old glass > to be puerile. Even multi coating is >>> looked upon with a negative slant and > older simpler coatings revered. >>> They even say this improves film speed. > Pay extra for a single coated >>> lens. Less contrast means better shadow > detail. Like never. >>> The lens or camera companies are highly competitive > and none of them >>> are stupid. The general level of optical engineering > improves every minute. >>> I always with few exceptions get the latest a > camera company has to >>> offer unless I cant afford it or its no longer made > or its more >>> compact or something. If I get old glass I don't claim they > make >>> better images. They make cheaper images. >>> >>> >>> On 4/3/15 3:18 > PM, "John McMaster" <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote: >>> >>>> The f1 can create > 'dreamier' images, the f0.95 is a bit harsher. I >>>> read a few years back > about someone who had both; he used the f0.95 >>>> if he was going somewhere > and had to get a photo (stopped down it is >>>> almost as good as any Leica > 50mm) but used the f1 in his own time for >>>> personal images. The colours > from the f0.95 and gorgeous but the f1 >>>> is also significantly smaller and > lighter! >>>> >>>> john >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> >>>> > >>>> Or maybe it's just nostalgia... >>>> >>>> Even if it's purely > emotional, I just can't justify having something >>>> this expensive that > makes me feel guilty not loving it. >>>> >>>> Sue >>>> >>>> Sent from my > iPhone >>>> >>>>> On Apr 3, 2015, at 10:04 AM, Robert Adler > <rgacpa at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> There is something lovely and unique > about the "older" Notcti's >>>>> indeed! I agree that there is some secret > ingredient missing in the >>>>> new 0.95's. I think if I were to see some > side-by-side shots I might >>>>> be able to better see a difference. >>>>> > Good luck with the sale: many love and produce beautiful images with it. >>>>> > Best, >>>>> Bob >>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 8:29 PM, Susan Ryan > <skalte at icloud.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I shot maybe 100 images with it. > Just don't love it the way I did my 1.0. >>>>>> $9000. Photos available. > Paypal preferred but we can discuss >>>>>> alternatives if necessary. Contact > me offlist. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sue Ryan >>>>>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See > http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > > > > > -- > Mark William Rabiner > Photographer > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See > http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more > information _______________________________________________ Leica Users > Group. See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Mark William Rabiner Photographer http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/