[Leica] For Sale: pristine Nocti .95

Fri Apr 3 15:46:53 PDT 2015

Mark, you among few, know of course that it’s easy to make a copy, but a copy that communicates feeling is another story…lyrical, poetic… that’s what we mean….
soul, and I know you understand all this very well.

s

> On Apr 3, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:
> 
> Wow Bob! "Digitally precise!" Sounds like a pejorative! I can look it up but
> I have a feeling I'm not going to find it!
> As in  what you get when you get a lens with cutting edge modern glass and
> modern coatings and modern lens design?
> And as if anyone ever could tell a digital photo from an analog photo.
> A digital photo has no soul!!!
> You get that well known hated "digital" look instead of the revered "analog"
> look. Which most people just chalk up to smoother bokeh and lower contrast.
> And my god a lens with measurable micro contrast is probably a very bad
> thing. Steals the soul!
> We should be shooting tri x with single coated glass and making a real
> photograph.
> Bad equals good. 
> A premise which shoots the hell out of any intelligent conversation you're
> ever going to try have about the materials  and practice of photography.
> 
> 
> 
> On 4/3/15 4:24 PM, "Bob Adler" <rgacpa at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> I didn't complain that the old lenses make better images. I don't think
>> lenses make images.
>> The 0.95 is stellar: Sharper at 0.95 than the f/1 is at f/1 and a truly
>> contrast-less bokeh. But I prefer the older less perfect look over the
>> newer, more digitally precise.
>> 
>> Dare you to say my preference is wrong! ;-)
>> 
>> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 1:19 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 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
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 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