Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/01/15

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Noctilux fever
From: "Roy Zartarian" <>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:46:53 +0000

I think, Martin, that your concluding statement says it all.  If you 
know your film and how to process it, you've got half the battle won. 
If you really know what your equipment will do, you've gone all the 

My quick war story was an event in a very dim cathedral where an old 
college roommate was being installed as the dean of a theological 
seminary, and I was in a pew with an M3, Summarit and Tri-X.  The 
light level was so low that I couldn't get a reading from the MR 
meter so I mentally calculated down from a lighting environment whose 
exposure I knew.  The result was, if I do say so myself, a very nice 
portfolio of that memorable event including a portrait at the 
lectern that now hangs in his office.   


On 15 Jan 99 at 23:40, Martin V. Howard wrote:

> I would welcome comments from those who use the older Leica gear.
> Those with IIs and IIIs, who use 35 Elmars and Summarons, 50
> Summars, Summarits and Summitars, 90 Elmarits and 135 Hektors. Tips
> for using cameras without built-in meters in poor, non-uniform
> lighting.  Not because I'm anti-technology, but because I'm sure you
> exist and it would be a nice balance to the discussions about
> high-tech, super-expensive, exotica.  Leica, to me, is as much about
> being able to take pictures where an SLR wouldn't work, as it is
> about quality, myth and money.
> I'm sure that those who have bought Noctiluxes are very happy with
> them.  Still, I'm convinced that spending the equivalent on
> practicing (i.e., film, developing and printing) would ultimately
> result in better photographs.  At least for me.