Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In a message dated 9/23/99 1:43:28 AM, ryuen@ix.netcom.com writes: << If someone were to give you a free lens and the choice was between the 21mm Elmarit-M or the 50mm Noctilux, which would you choose and why? Not that I am given this choice, but I was just curious as to what is more important to the average LUG member, wide angle coverage or the ability to take pictures in the dark. >> If I hadn't just bought a 24mm that would be easy . . . I'd go for the 21mm. Given the choice today I'd take the 50mm, sell it and buy a "normal" 50 and a 90 and maybe another body. I just can't think of enough situations where I would be able to make use of the narrow depth of field at f 1.0 to justify that honking piece of glass. Also, while I've never even held a Noctilux, I suspect that there really isn't that much difference in low-light usability between the two lenses when you take "hand-holdability" into account. I just can't imagine reliabely hand-holding that big 50 at much less than 1/60 while I'm quite confident 1/15 is a pretty safe bet with the 21mm -- if my math is correct that's only a one stop advantage for the the Noctilux. I'm sure I'm just not sophisticated enough to appreciate it but I view the Noctilux and similar lenses as "freaks" -- toys for those hung up on numbers and not really a practical tool for day to day photography. I'm quite sure your mileage will vary . . . Bob (doesn't carry anything faster than f2.0) McEowen