Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/10/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Anthony Atkielski wrote: ><Snip> > > You don't buy it because at f5.6 it is or isn't as > > good as, or better than, a Nikkor zoom. Who cares how > > it compares to any other lens, except at the maximum > > aperture? > > It's an important consideration, because it helps determine whether you can use > the Noctilux alone for general purposes at that focal length, or whether you > need to buy a separate 50-mm prime for shots beyond f/2. To make the decision, > you need to know what quality the Noctilux will provide at smaller apertures--if > it is as good as a Nikkor AF-S 28-70, and the latter is satisfactory to you, you > need not invest more in another prime; but if it is worse than the Nikkor, then > you'll need to get a separate 50-mm lens for the smaller apertures. The > difference is $1800 or so, if I'm not mistaken, which is not trivial. > > -- Anthony No it's really not all that great for general purposes. If you are needing depth of field other lenses make better images. Have you read Erwins thing on it or not? The size alone makes it not a general purpose lens. I don't understand how it's comparison to a Nikkor AF-S 28-70 is a determining factor. Down the line you're just going to have to get a Summicron as well and find out what Leica is all about. A quality image and a compact nimble way of working quietly and unobtrusively. And that's not carrying around a Monster lens all the time. Mark Rabiner