Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Re: noctilux vs. the cheap alternative
From: kwilcox@mail.davison.k12.mi.us (Ken Wilcox)
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 08:29:49 -0400
References: <003c01bfc67e$1319cc60$1974fdcc@BryanCaldwell> <4.2.2.20000525172932.00ab7c20@infoave.net> <392DB421.2099D20F@home.com>
 
At 9:34 AM +0100 5/26/0, Simon Lamb wrote:
>Ted
>
>Is the Noctilux a viable alternative to the 50mm f/2 or would it be wise to
>keep the f/2 when purchasing a Nocti?
>
>Simon
>

I'm not Ted but I'll jump in anyway.

I have kept my 50 Summicron (2 actually) for weight considerations. I love
the Noctilux but I won't carry it around all day if I'm sure I won't need
it.

Ken Wilcox

DO NOT use the reply fuction! Address any response to wilcox@tir.com

- ----
Ken Wilcox                        Carolyn's Personal Touch Portraits


				      preferred---> <wilcox@tir.com>
						   <kwilcox@gfn.org>
In reply to: Message from "Bryan Caldwell" <bcaldwell@softcom.net> (Re: [Leica] noctilux vs. the cheap alternative)
Message from Tina Manley <images@InfoAve.Net> (RE: [Leica] noctilux vs. the cheap alternative)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@home.com> (Re: [Leica] noctilux vs. the cheap alternative)