Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/04/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]>I can't fully understand the desire for a Noctilux.... >The Canon 50/1 ... you get hardly any light fall-off, no tempermental nature... >Are you Noctilux owners in love with this lens or with f/1.0? It sounds like f1.0, which I can understand but not with all that >light fall-off.... Chris, The Noctilux is simply the best f/1 ish lens I have found, its not perfect, but it works for me both generally and in some very demanding astrophotography situations where both speed of lens and film are pushed= to the limits. My bad experiences with the Noct-Nikkor have left me very cautious about trying other fast lenses - its a very expensive game. I also believe from other sources that other Nikon lenses such as the 28 f/1.4, while fine with general photography, exibit a fuzzy rendering of point sources. Other leica lenses such as the 21 Elmarit (not asph) and 35 summicron (n= ot asph) I have found also suffer from this but the 35 f/1.4 asph, 75 f/1.4 and 90 f/2 all produce sharp stars - Leica will tell you this if you ask but:: when I tried contacting Leica, Nikon and Cannon to ask specifically= how their lenses performed with point sources such as stars - only Leica responded - the furthest the others were willing to go was to read me t= he brochures. I would certainly like to try canon both for their 24 f/1.4 and the 50 f/= 1 - - but someone will have to prove to me first that they are up to the task= =2E Did you get a chance to do some astrophotoraphy with the canon f/1 lens when you had it? I would be interested to hear more of how the canon lens= performed. = Donald