Re: Re[2]: [Leica] supposed to be a Leica M group

["Adi" <adisoon@pl.jaring.my>]

it's that unreasonable pride in owning a Leica, or whatever other brand of
camera. Stephan Gandy's great article on "Consumerism should answer all
your questions. 

- --adi 

- ----------
> From: Peterson_Art@hq.navsea.navy.mil
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re[2]: [Leica] supposed to be a Leica M group
> Date: Tuesday, January 27, 1998 11:18 PM
> 
>      
>      Don't get me wrong: I like Leicas, even own one!  But below is
another 
>      example of the kind of writing I continue to fail to understand.
>      
>      Sure, the Noctilux is a great lens (I only wish I could afford one),

>      and it can yield impressive results in situations like that
described. 
>      But just as surely, it is not unique.  Canon also makes an f/1.0
lens, 
>      I believe, and many other camera manufacturers include among their 
>      products f/1.2 lenses, which are barely more than a half-stop slower

>      than the Noctilux and so would hardly require "a zillion mega
candles 
>      of light from strobes" in order to "shoot KR in these situations." 
So 
>      what's this really all about?
>      
>      Art Peterson
>      
> 
> 
> ______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
> Subject: Re: [Leica] supposed to be a Leica M group
> Author:  leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us at internet
> Date:    1/26/98 10:46 PM
> 
> 
> here is another hockey "Noctilux" story! :)
>      
> Several years ago I was shooting an NHL game in the Vancouver Coliseum 
and 
> I thought, "great place to use the Noctilux and shoot kodachrome 64!"
Wild 
> thought and damn near didn't do it. Until I put the camera to eye and
took 
> a reading with the M6 metering and the little red arrowheads lit-up!
>      
> Well would you believe that? hell here I am getting a reading that was 
> lighting the two arrowheads equally at 1/500 at f.1! and ISO 64!
>      
> So I figure , "Why not, go for it!" :)  So I'm standing there with a
bunch 
> of news shooters and take a roll of Kodachrome 64 out of my bag and load 
> it. "What the hell are you going to do with that in here?" Amidst
laughter 
> and other unrepeatable comments.
>      
> "Shoot it! Why not? The exposure is 1/500 at f.1, so what!" Just b'cause 
> you guys have to use those big machines and shoot all that high speed
stuff 
> etc etc etc.!" :)
>      
> I was very carefully watched as I plinked away, a little on the loose
side 
> for the net action, but nevertheless it looked good through the
viewfinder.
>      
> A couple days later when I got the rolls back and made a visit to the
paper 
> photo department, layed the pages of KR slides on their light table the 
> guys didn't believe it! There was lots of ooo's and aaaaaaaawwe's. "but
too 
> bad they're too loose!" Only negative comment.  But they were very 
> impressed with a Noctilux!:)
>      
> "Hey if you guys were only using real cameras, well, what can I say.":)
>      
> It was great and one of the times I just had plain ordinary fun shooting 
> film that no one in their right mind would consider shooting in an indoor

> kockey arena. :)  Well OK, it was lit for TV like high noon at the OK 
> corral, nevertheless the M Leica and a Noctilux allowed me colour quality

> by the existing light rarely seen from an indoor hockey game. :)
>      
> Sure lots of guys shoot KR in these situations, but they have a zillion 
> mega candles of light from strobes! :) Hey me, my M and my Nocti baby!
>      
> What can I say! :)
>      
> ted
>      
>      
>      
>