Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/05/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 04:21 PM 5/4/98 -0300, you wrote: >At 3 May 1998 22:40:23 EDT, TEAShea <TEAShea@aol.com> wrote: > >> Tina and Erwin... Tina's enthusiatic comments and Erwin's insighful >> analysis of the 50 1.0 did me in. I gave in and got one. > A fascinating, weird lens, and yet another example >of how misleading it can be to read too much into arbitrary formal tests >of something whose normal usage involves a complex array of factors. >I find I don't find its weight and bulk nearly as annoying as the 1m >minimum focusing distance. 0.7m is limiting enough; 1m makes me keep >scooting away from people. And I'll *probably* get used to the long >focus-ring travel... > > -Jeff Moore <jbm@instinet.com> > Absolutely, Jeff! I agree with everything you said. The closer you get, the more critical the focusing will be. I just finished a series with the Noctilux where I had to focus quickly or not get the picture. We were delivering Meals on Wheels to the elderly and I had to take the photos within the 2-3 minutes that the volunteer could spend at each house. The houses were very dark - 1.0 - but I knew that I had to get several feet away or the depth of field would be impossible. I would much prefer to be closer, but there is not enough light. What a challenge! It would have been totally impossible without the Noctilux (I suppose I could have used #$%^&*( FLASH)!! NEVER!! Leically yours - Tina ______________________________________________________________________ Tina Manley, ASMP <http://www.photogs.com/manley/index.html> <http://www.aperture-photo.com/site/reportage/manley/manleyframeset.html> <http://www.onlineartistleague.com/manleyt/portfoli.htm>