Re: [Leica] Noctilux fever

[tedgrant@islandnet.com (Ted Grant)]

Martin Howard wrote:

>With all the recent ranting and raving about the Noctilux, I thought I'd
>add a (sane) comment to the contrary.
>
>I don't have the Noctilux.  I have no desire for it.  I fail to see the
>reason for spending horrendous amounts of money on a lens for one more
>extra stop, when using one stop slower shutter speed & bracing, or
>one stop EI faster film will do the trick.>>>>>>>>

Hi Martin,

A couple of things the Noctilux allows me to do that you may not understand
unless you have used it in a work situation.

<<<< I fail to see the reason for spending horrendous amounts of money on a
lens for one more extra stop,>>>>>>>

Well because it allows me to charge "horrendous fees" (makes me feel almost
guilty sometimes):)  when I can apply the f1.0 aperture creating images
others will fail to do, unless they use the same size lens. If you are
earning your keep by taking pictures and you buy equipment just because you
think it's cool and not as a tool, I'd have to assume the photographer has
been drinking developer.

I buy Leica lenses for a very simple reason, they allow me to shoot in a
manner I most enjoy, by the light that is motivating me as it shines on and
what it does to the subject! Usually that means at the widest possible
aperture and highest possible shutter speed. This might mean a light level
of f 1.0 is the widest aperture and the shutter speed maybe 1/15th with an
asa film of 1600!

Or it'll be Kodachrome 64 indoors in a darkened restaurant with models and
no disturbing lights to other patrons while I click away having a fun time.
And only the Noctilux allows me this kind of non-disturbing freedom with no
extra lighting still ending with quality.

Then later driving the art directors crazy by not telling them the answer
to their questions, "How did you do that? What's the secret to capturing
the real look and ambiance without using a lighting crew at 2 a.m in the
morning?

The answer?  "It's a trade secret gained through a special kind of lens
that I'm not at liberty to divulge!":) Then I smile and say,"OK what's the
next shoot?":) That way they think I'm some kind of magician! :)

<<<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>>

I don't use it now, but the Summarit f1.5 I used it exactly the same way.
Were the images as good as what the Noctilux does? No! Technically I don't
know the answer why not, I'm sure Erwin or others more familiar with
technical details can answer it. I just used it, I liked the images, the
clients liked the images, the clients paid me! Is there anything else too
consider? :)

<<<<<Tips for using cameras without built-in meters in poor, non-uniform
lighting>>

Piece of cake! If you're shooting chrome....meter for the highlights and
let everything else fall into place. And don't start screwing around trying
to measure six different places to find some kind of average. yep I know
there's going to be folks who'll try to eat me alive on that. You no what?
I don't care. It's very simple with chrome..just meter for the highlights,
set camera, shoot film, it works! :) And if you can throw in a bracket or
two, go for it.

B&W? I don't do much different if I can get the ball of an incident meter
in the same light as on the subject; read light, set camera, shoot film, it
works!:) Now I'm really going to have them looking for my hide. :)  But you
see, I've always worked with the KISS method. Keeping it simple stupid
eliminates all the techie stuff that eventually drives you crazy and
missing a bunch of good frames.

And it doesn't matter if it's an old or new Leica, Summarit or Noctilux.

<<<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.>>>>>>

But you know what? We all think the same, only some of us don't take it
seriously and have fun at it all the time, without pondering over all the
details.  Economic or otherwise.

>No doubt someone will write to "enlighten" me to the fact that the
>Noctilux and Summar are worlds apart with regard to resolution,
>contrast, MTF, lp/mm and whatnot.>>>>>>

Hell no not me, half the time I don't know if you guys are talking lenses
or scotch!  Oops, excuse me. Sorry, the scotch part I recognize. It's all
those other summer things that mixes me up. :)

<<<<Still, with EI 400 film, at f2 and 1/15s or 1/30s (possible with
bracing and proper breathing) you can get wonderful shots.  With a Nocti,
the same would be 1/60 or 1/125 at f1. The difference between resting your
elbows on the table or not.>>>>>>>

Well yeah I guess your right. However I'd prefer asa 64 or 100 chrome and f
1.0, as the ethereal effect is incredible when working around people and
not shooting downtown night scenes.

>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.>>>>>>

Martin mon ami, yes and no! The final part comes down to the speed of
colour or B&W film you work with, the level of the light -- high or really
low, movement of your subjects and the eventual quality of the finished
product. And or use of the images.

This is a far better topic over a beer, or several, than questions and
answers back and forth across the world. Unfortunately it can lead to hot
and heavy discourse if someone misses a smiley! :) :) :)
ted


Ted Grant
This is Our Work. The Legacy of Sir William Osler.
http://www.islandnet.com/~tedgrant