Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]mrabiner@concentric.net writes: << A dozen years ago BL (before Leica's) I got a new 50 1.4 Al for the Nikon and I shoot for a week for it a whole on location fashion issue for a local paper here. I did not take that lens off there camera >> <A really big proportion of people who started in 35mm photography as hobbyists in the 60's or early 70's still feel the most comfortable with a 50. For a lot of us it was our only lens for a good while, until we could afford another one, which was most likely a 135. To this day, if I could have only one lens, period, I'd have to choose a 50 (or its equivalent in another format), for no other reason than I've got more experience making it "make do" than any other focal length. > DT >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So how far can the nocti GloomBuster challenge the Impressive 75 summinocter? If I missed this part, then I'd change my thinking (I try anyway). If you don't have at present a 50, then you're first priority is to get one! Forget 75 - the 50 will demand your consideration at every waking moment, the Noctibeast will plague you even more. Again, I don't know what you've got. But I wouldn't get too involved in the practically irrelevant differences in 'optical precision' as you are going to go in circles because they for one will always impose a new statistic which the other will balance out and this means that, as was posted, you are not comparing the same lens at all and so comparisons at the technical level will be in a constant state of refutation. Rather maybe think in terms of what the consequences of buying either will be. For one, they will both produce some expression and/or verbalization of glassmania. But if you (again presupposing) are lacking in the 50, the 75 will NOT relieve you because the issue is compounded as it's not only the nocti that is in question but even more so that it's a 50 and its mandatory. 1 or 1.4 - this difference will serve it's purposes however life is much easier with the best lens there is (yeah I know about the other three or four, five) the (current) 50 summicron. I've yet to find someone who was thinking of trading in a 50/2 because they wanted the rare occasion lens (yes, both could call for a nice cup of hot tea.) If you get the nocti - well, this is not the closest all-around-schlep-around-shmateh? It gives much consideration for the summicron or even the 50 lux, which ahh...the summicron too good for me, I'll hand hold the 1/15 sec, or miss the damn shot - but I'll have a hard time talking back to mr. 50/2. But as was posted the two in question are not mutually exclusive either. But that's not a reason in itself at all, it's just an observation with a consequential judgment (maybe that's reason). The 75 'lug because it is different would nicely compliment that gap of 50mm - to 90. Of course when you do buy a new 90 you will certainly, you must get the new apoasphericalugubug. The 75 is a good luxey choice. You will not be so retrospectively doubtful if you have the summicron, and if you are then it's all messed up and you should just get one lens - the 21 asph and play a different ballgame to relieve the noctisummidrom. The 50 well I couldn't get in close enough or the 35 is just easier or I've bumped into the wall and I could have gotten the summicron and paid for the damage to the hole in the wall. The 75 is just so convincing you can see the specifics are bouncing around and not giving any real substantial priority for an either/or deal. So the 50 has alternatives, which will suit most needs usually and give better results in real-time on more occasions than not, perhaps. The 75 well you can't get the 75 summicron and maybe you would not want it or you can wait and wait for the 75 asph which is tedious. In conclusion, I haven't the slightest idea what in the world I would do as this is horrible. Someone will 'show' you what a nocti will do on this or that situation. Ueah well, make your decision as if all the lenses in this range are perfect and judge by your setup and what's available. The shot (i.e. what what can do witha given focal length in the majority of the situations) is what matters. To me it matters just as much that I have a better day when I've got the smaller yet usually equally if not more capable lens on my M. Please hold the refutations, as I didn't really think about anything when I'm, typing here...