RE: [Leica] Noctilux DOF (was Delta 3200)

["Lee, Ken" <ken.lee@hbc.com>]

Bob,

If I may be so bold as to suggest an alternate site until Ted put up some of
his Noc shots, have a look at Robert Stevens Noct. images

http://home.istar.ca/~robsteve/photography/Noctilux.htm

Ken
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	BOB KRAMER [SMTP:BobKramer@COOPERCARRY.com]
> Sent:	Friday, February 04, 2000 11:44 AM
> To:	'leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us'
> Subject:	[Leica] Noctilux DOF  (was Delta 3200)
> 
> Hi Ted,
> 
> Thanks for your thoughts on the Noctilux.  Perhaps I spoke too strongly
> about the image quality possible with this lens, but a mis-conception
> borne
> from my admittedly limited exposure to photographs taken with this lens.
> I
> blame society!  Actually, I blame Leica as my comments are largely based
> on
> the representative Noctilux photo from their latest M brochure (the chick
> on
> the motor scooter).  As well as the few other photos I have seen taken
> with
> this lens.  In Leica's case, one would think that when showcasing their
> most
> expensive M lens they would choose a photo that shows us the very best
> that
> this lens can offer.  Maybe its just me... I dunno.
> 
> Clearly you regard the Noctilux highly based on your own experience using
> it.  And this is the way it should be.  But I do think we all gravitate
> towards the lenses as well as the other equipment that allow us to best
> realize our own individual photographic vision.  I think my original post
> on
> this issue was in response to someone saying something to the effect that
> if
> I wanted a 50mm Summilux, what I *really* needed was a Noctilux.  And all
> I
> am trying to say is that this ain't necessarily so, for a variety of
> reasons
> including cost, weight, size, optics and DOF issues.  Particularly when we
> are talking about your "standard" lens, the lens that is going to hang on
> your camera 80% of the time, the one you are going to lug around wherever
> you go.
> 
> Ted, I would love to see some of your shots using this lens.  Perhaps you
> could add a photo or two to you website, or email me one or two so I can
> get
> a better feel for what is possible with the Noct. beyond what I have seen
> to
> date.  I am more than happy to add another lens to my wish list.  You
> never
> know when I might win the lottery!  :-)
> 
> Bob Kramer
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > 
> > From: Ted Grant <tedgrant@islandnet.com>
> > Subject: RE: [Leica] Delta 3200
> > 
> > Hi Bob,
> > 
> > Well it isn't that, we who use them regularly in our work in colour as
> > well
> > as  Black & white don't get sharp pictures, we do. And regularly.
> > 
> > Actually I'd have been dead in the water for magical low light moody
> > colour
> > material without it. One thing it does very very well that allows you to
> > blow away art directors while using available existing light shooting
> > Kodachrome 64! They think your crazy and question your common sense, not
> > to
> > mention your mental state.  UNTIL! They look at what they thought you
> > weren't shooting in a serious  manner.
> > 
> > The Noctilux for cost and I agree isn't for the Sunday shooter, it's
> alot
> > of bread to shell out for a  lens you may not use wide open or you don't
> > like the look of the subject separation from the background.
> > 
> > However it isn't a lens for everyone until they use it for sometime to
> > become accustomed to it's handling and for shooting mainly wide opn or
> > near
> > that for a high percentage of their picture taking.
> > 
> > If one isn't prepared to work in twilight zone lighting for magical
> moment
> > photographs then they'd be foolish to buy one.
> > 
> > But I can assure you that we who work with them on a regular basis
> > wouldn't
> > part with it for hell or high water.
> > 
> > <<<<<Using this lens wide open, the question isn't "Do I want the
> > eyelashes
> > to be in focus?", it is "*Which* eyelash do I want to be in
> > focus?".>>>>>>>
> > 
> > Naw that's what sorts out the same old pictures to where people who pay
> > you
> > say, "Jeeeeesh how did you do that and it looks incredible!:)
> > 
> > <<<<Combine this problem with the high lens cost, the inevitable even if
> > minor optical compromises that result with this fast a lens, and the
> lens
> > size and weight, and I just don't feel a burning desire to own it.>>>>>
> > 
> > Naw the depth of focus/field isn't a problem, it's an asset if you make
> it
> > work for you. :)
> > 
> > To each his own, but the different picture possiblities with it and cost
> > are not a problem, as it's only a tool allowing the photographer to
> shoot
> > where others fear to tread without using a twinkie flash!  (sorry guys I
> > had to get my anti-flash fix) :)
> > 
> > The Noctilux opens a whole new world of picture taking and shouldn't be
> > cast aside because one doesn't know how to use it nor the funds to
> > purchase
> > as it's only limited by your imagination to see.
> > 
> > ted
> >