Re: [Leica] 50mm Summilux vs Noctilux

[Ruralmopics@aol.com]

I must admit I'm always a little baffled (maybe slightly impressed) when I 
see folks discuss these super fast lenses. I shoot for a monthly  publication 
and end up in a lot of diverse situations (though not nearly as many as in my 
newspaper days) still I rarely find the need for extremely fast lenses. I've 
just started in Leica photography but my Nikon kit contains no lenses faster 
than f2. Besides rarely needing anything faster I just can't imagine what the 
results would look like shooting a 50mm at 1.4. Depth of field would of 
course be very limited and it seems (to me anyway) inappropriate for the 
field of view you would get with a 50mm at normal working distance. A 180mm 
wide open I can understand but a 50mm f 1.4 just doesn't register in my mind. 
Perhaps I need to try it and see (I think we have a Nikkor 1.4 around here 
somewhere . . . )

Bob McEowen

In a message dated 9/18/99 11:35:49 AM, ryuen@ix.netcom.com writes:

<< Aside from the big size and cost difference, I'm trying to decide if the
Noctilux is a better lens for my style of photography over the Summilux.
I love the idea of being able to use the Noctilux in near darkness. I've
missed many photo opportunities in the past when I'm caught without a
flash. There is no doubt about the qualities of the Noctilux in the
dark, but how does it compare to the Summilux when taking pictures
outdoors during the daylight hours? I am looking for that perfect lens
that I can leave on my M6 for maybe 95 percent of the time. Opinions on
either of these lens would be greatly appreciated. >>