[Leica] : lots of Nocti .95 for sale

[mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)]

Mark meant to write the rangefinder since 1932 not the Noctilux lens.
Thanks Mark!


On 4/5/15 1:48 PM, "Mark Rabiner" <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:

> I'm glad that the Noctilux thanks to convoluted Live View technology is all
> of a sudden a viable piece of gear. As I think of it I recal was Teds main
> lens for I don't know how long I shot with it extensively, It was Jim
> Marshalls main lens for years to decades along with slews of other known 
> and
> unknown photographers since 1932... Little did we know we were using non
> viable gear.
> We've all be real happy with the Leica M rangefinder which is the core
> element in Leica M shooting since the Leica II (Model D) with that same
> rangefinder on every camera since right up to the M6/7/P in recent years
> making it one of the longest continuous and highly successful technological
> products ever made.  83 years! It was pretty solid at the get go it was 
> just
> tweaked from time to time. At one point dumbed down a bit too much making
> for flare which they fixed.
> A lack of confidence in the Leica M rangefinder does not say much for ones
> using the Leica M camera system. The question "why" comes up.
> 
> 
> On 4/5/15 7:43 AM, "Steve Barbour" <steve.barbour at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Apr 4, 2015, at 10:35 PM, Sonny Carter <sonc.hegr at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> You were close to describing "challenge " yourself.  The challenge of 
>> getting
>> what you want in focus with a Nocti.  With live view it is a piece of
>> cake.
> 
> so true?. you actually see the image that will result.
> 
> s
> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> With an M7, there was a challenge.  I met it a few times, and the image 
>> that
>> sold the most prints ever for a single exposure of mine was from an f1 
>> Nocti.
>> It was a carving on the Bishop's chair at the cathedral.  Last month I
>> visited
>> a local architect's home; I have never been there before. Imagine my 
>> delight
>> to find that print in his hallway.
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> Sonny
>> Carter
>> http://www.SonC.com/look
>> 
>> 
>>> On Apr 5, 2015, at 12:15 AM, Frank
>> Filippone <red735i at verizon.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> My theory was that the recent (
>> last 5 years?) if the interest in the Nocti was by rich folk, that wanted 
>> THE
>> most exclusive/extreme camera and lens.... The Noctilux plus an M9 or 
>> M(240).
>> After getting that combo, they figured out that most of their shots were 
>> not
>> in focus.  Then came a period of "otherness"..... chasing the dream of 
>> some
>> other combo of expensive thing, and the Nocti ran out of favor.....for 
>> maybe
>> a
>> Nikon D810 plus some lens or other, that actually made images that were IN
>> focus ( thanks to AF, since these folk never did understand hot to 
>> manually
>> focus anything).
>>> 
>>> That accounts for the recent plethora of used 0.95 for
>> sale at pretty bargain prices...
>>> 
>>> Or so my thinking goes....
>>> 
>>> 
>> Challenge?  Define THE challenge... the desire to have all your friends 
>> see
>> you with the latest and greatest?
>>> 
>>> Frank Filippone
>>> 
>> Red735i at verizon.net
>>> 
>>> I doubt that people do not like it; more likely the
>> availability of more sensitive sensors, make it, to use a Brit term,
>> "redundant" 
>>> 
>>> The price of f 1 noctis are dropping too, for the same
>> reason.
>>> 
>>> Interesting that the Leica M and Sony A7x cameras are finally
>> able to use those exotic lenses in ways they were never dreamed of by the
>> designers, and people are turning away from them.
>>> 
>>> Guess the challenge
>> is gone.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> from my iPad
>>> 
>>> Sonny Carter
>>> 
>>>> On Apr 4,
>> 2015, at 9:43 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Sadly
>> there seem to be a lot of f0.95s for sale, maybe no-one liked it ;-) 
>> Compared
>> to the +12 month waiting list a few years back...
>>>> 
>>>> john
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: LUG
>> [mailto:lug-bounces+john=mcmaster.co.nz at leica-users.org] On
>>>> Behalf Of
>> Sonny Carter
>>>> Sent: Sunday, 5 April 2015 2:40 p.m.
>>>> To: Leica Users
>> Group
>>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] For Sale: pristine Nocti .95
>>>> 
>>>> So if we
>> collected a buck for every word on this thread that doesn't pertain to 
>> Sue's
>> wish to sell her lens, we could buy it from her.
>>>> 
>>>> from my iPad
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> Sonny Carter
>>>> 
>>>>> On Apr 4, 2015, at 8:53 PM, John McMaster
>> <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From:
>> Mark Rabiner
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Just insane Steve.
>>>>>> When we think about getting
>> a new lens or other gear we research it
>>>>>> extensively on the internet
>> often starting with the manufactures
>>>>>> stated specs. Then the >specs
>> which other people are publishing. You
>>>>>> can line with up as direct
>> comparisons. There's dxomark.  MTF
>>>>>> charts. Erwin Puts books and
>> website
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have Erwins books....
>>>>> 
>>>>>> If you'd like I can
>> talk quite lucidly with you about the Noct 1.2. A lens I've seen 
>> personally
>> once but have read about extensively over decades.
>>>>>> We talked about this
>> lens once for quite awhile over a dinner table in a dark steakhouse in San
>> Antonio with Sherry K. and Jim Marshall in 2001.
>>>>>> Jim was going to buy
>> the lens as he heard it was better and was more compact.
>>>>>> Sherry and I
>> talked him out of it. Its not better. It's worse on all accounts.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> Odd, my Puts books show that the f1.2 is sharper wide open, particularly 
>> in
>> the corners and not much between them at f5.6. I know somebody on this 
>> list
>> has personal experience of this being the case.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I really had my
>> facts down on the history of Noctilux glass then
>>>>>> because I had just got
>> one for myself. A lens which I left on my
>>>>>> camera without taking off for
>> a year and made 16x20 fiber archival prints of my finders which I rolled 
>> up
>> and sent to them all over the world for their holiday stocking stuffers. I
>> shot thousands or rolls of film with my Noctilux. Mainly Fuji Neopan 1600
>> which I souped in Xtol 1:3.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Uh huh, so how much fine detail did you
>> get with that compared to say
>>>>> K25? Slight difference between 35mm 1600
>> asa film and an 
>>>>> M9/240/Monochrom for finding a lenses limitations
>> ;-)
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I often used a yellow green or dark green filter with it so
>> I'd not have to stop down so much or at all.
>>>>>> I found Noctilux use to be
>> all about F 1000th of a second and be there.
>>>>>> You have you shutter speed
>> set at 1000th of a second and you hope
>>>>>> you don't have to stop down too
>> much if at all. As its very much about a tight selective focus mind set.
>>>>>> 
>> I can talk about the history of Noctilux and any aspect you want to talk
>> about
>> Noctilux till the cows come home. If you don't like it don't read it.
>>>>>> 
>> George seems to think my experience with the Noctilux is completely 
>> invalid
>> and I should just shut up became I shot film and not digital.
>>>>> 
>>>>> And
>> many people who have shot on both say that digital is very different....
>>>>> 
>> 
>>>>>> Really pretty funny.
>>>>>> Some real narrow small minded sectarian
>> thinking going on on the LUG.
>>>>>> At least no ones correcting my
>> spelling.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Not how I think of George or Steve ;-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> John
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 4/4/15 7:25 PM, "Steve Barbour" <steve.barbour at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> what I am interested in here Mark, is your pure opinion
>> without 
>>>>>> facts, about very expensive leica lenses, that you desire, but
>> have 
>>>>>> never used, importantly you resent another's opinion about these
>> 
>>>>>> lenses, generally that they own and have used ..
>>>>> 
>>>>> I sense
>> that you resent that they have the lenses and you
>>>>>> don t . Please correct
>> me if I am wrong.
>>>>> did I forget anything?
>>>>> 
>>>>> You may
>>>>>> wish
>> to borrow or rent them, to form a basis for an opinion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> Steve
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On
>>>>>> Apr 4, 2015, at 3:47 PM, Mark Rabiner
>> <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What
>>>>>> I'm interested in here
>> is the fact that two eleven thousand dollar
>>>>>> newest from Leica cutting
>> edge lenses have been rejected by two Lug
>>>>>> people because of bad bokeh.
>> And that neither of them have found it
>>>>>> necessary to show us examples of
>> this.  That's 22,000 dollars worth
>>>>>> of bad bokeh and money in the back.
>> Not a jpeg to be seen anywhere.
>>>>>> But we do get to see that the older f1
>> looks like on a tulip.  That
>>>>>> explains everything.
>>>>>> And that when
>> someone in
>>>>>> the world is about to cough up that kind of money for this
>> 
>>>>>> centerpiece of modern Leica technology they could end up telling
>>>>>> 
>> their friend  "I was going to buy this amazing f.95 lens for eleven
>>>>>> 
>> thousand dollars but then I checked and there are these people on
>>>>>> the
>> Leica users group who had to send their back. Or trade it in for
>>>>>> the
>> previous version which came out decades ago and is an f1.
>>>>>> because of
>> bad bokeh? Then googled bad bokeh and its all about not
>>>>>> what's in focus
>> but what's out of focus but for this lens its the
>>>>>> defining deal! So I'm
>> going to hold off till I figure out what's going on"
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>> That's what I'm interested in.
>>>>>> I'm interested in people doing a "been
>> there done that" with a the
>>>>>> gem of Leicas new line of lenes. A lens
>> which from all reports is
>>>>>> nothing short of a modern marvel of optical
>> excellent unmatched in
>>>>>> the modern world.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Been there done
>> that!
>>>>>> Oh I've got the pictures
>>>>>> here somewhere.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From
>> all I've read about it the bokeh which is what an ultra fast
>>>>>> lens is
>> all about on the f.95 is not worse than the f1 but better.
>>>>>> One reason
>> being that the people running and working at Leica now
>>>>>> didn't all of a
>> sudden go to bed and then wake up in the morning
>>>>>> stupid. I have a
>> slightly high respect for the people at Leica
>>>>>> especially the lens
>> design people.
>>>>>> And my eyes work fine when I'm shown a lackluster bokeh
>> image from a 
>>>>>> new Noctilux I'll look into it further.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>> 
>>>>>> On 4/4/15 6:10
>>>>>> PM, "George Lottermoser"
>> <george.imagist at icloud.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Not making
>>>>>> up any rules
>> Mark.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Just an honest question.
>>>>>>> Wondering if you've
>> had
>>>>>> an opportunity to try your M lens collection on a
>>>>>>> digital M
>> body.
>>>>>>> A
>>>>>> friend here in Milwaukee rented an M body just to see if
>> it may be for him.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> My experience with my M8, M, and M Monchrom
>> are very similar to
>>>>>>> others
>>>>>> who've
>>>>>>> needed to have lenses
>> and or bodies adjusted to get them more
>>>>>> precisely in
>>>>>>> line with
>> specifications.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> My 35 lux Asph front focuses
>>>>>> 
>> horribly.
>>>>>>> My 75 lux has similar problems.
>>>>>>> Neither of those
>> lenses
>>>>>> exhibited problems
>>>>>>> on my 3 M6 film bodies.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>> While my 50 lux Asph and
>>>>>> 28 cron Asph both
>>>>>>> focus dead accurate on
>> all three digital M bodies
>>>>>> That's my experience with four lenses on 3
>> film different film
>>>>>> bodies
>>>>>>> and 3
>>>>>> different digital M
>> bodies.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I certainly appreciate your very extensive
>>>>>> 
>> "qualifications" and opinions,
>>>>>>> most especially on the equipment
>> and
>>>>>> processes you've used over the decades.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> a note off
>> the iPad, George
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Apr 4, 2015, at 3:11 PM, Mark Rabiner
>> <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Here a fact I can report on
>> George. I will add my opinion on this
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>> other
>> thread on the Lug which I feel like I have something to say
>>>>>> about as
>> I
>>>>>>>> have done here for seventeen years with no care at all about
>>>>>> 
>> your opinion of
>>>>>>>> my qualifications.
>>>>>>>> You don't get to start
>> making up
>>>>>> crazy rules.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On 4/4/15 12:54 PM,
>> "George Lottermoser"
>>>>>> <george.imagist at icloud.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 3, 2015, at 11:31
>>>>>> PM, Mark Rabiner
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> but it usually
>>>>>>>>>> works and its many
>>>>>> 
>> times more accurate than a ground glass especially with
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> 
>> normal
>>>>>> and more so with a wide
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> do you have any
>> personal experience
>>>>>> with using lenses on Leica M digital
>> bodies?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The realities of
>>>>>> perfectly flat sensors,
>> rangefinder precision, cam
>>>>>>>>> adjustments, etc
>>>>>> are being described
>> to you by individuals who have extensive first
>>>>>> hand eperience
>>>>>>>>> 
>> on the subject they're discussing.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> There's also a
>>>>>> 
>> wealth of information available on the subject.
>>>>>>>>> Bob has provided
>> links to
>>>>>> some the best information on the subject.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>> This is not a
>>>>>> debate.
>>>>>>>>> These are reports on facts.
>>>>>>>>> 
>> 
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> George
>>>>>> Lottermoser
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>> http://www.imagist.com
>>>>>> http://www.imagist.com/blog
>>>>>>>>> 
>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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?+
?????
??$y???Z??????y????????1??N???j??v+b?x???-?'-y?h???v?j>>
w
>> 
g?w(?g?r&??u?????????+'??y????!j???(?g?r&??'
????????Z???z?Z??(??k?????????>>
)
>> ?{m?
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 
>> 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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/