Re: [Leica] Noctilux vs 50mm f/2

["Simon Lamb" <s_lamb@compuserve.com>]

Art

Thanks for that response.  I held a Noctilux today and I see what you mean.
I think for the photos that I am taking the f/2 will suffice for now.  I
will start saving the pennies.

Simon

Amateur efforts at http://www.phoenixdb.co.uk/leica


Art Peterson wrote:
> Simon,
>
> I agree with it.  The Noctilux is uniquely great for the reasons expounded
> upon by Tina, Ted, and others here; but its drawbacks include greater
size,
> greater weight, and greater viewfinder obstruction, and so my normal carry
> around lens is the Summicron, which, within its more limited range of
> apertures, is also optically superior (although I say that without
> consulting Erwin's website and would defer to his findings as reported
> there).  For all of these reasons, I would not part with my Summicron.
>
> Art Peterson
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simon Lamb [mailto:s_lamb@compuserve.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2000 5:59 AM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Leica] Noctilux vs 50mm f/2
>
> I thoughtI would ask this as a general question although I
> did raise the
> issue in a reply to another message.
>
> I have been told that if I purchase a Noctilux I should keep
> my 50mm f/2 as
> the Noctilux should be regarded as an additional lens rather
> than a
> replacement.  Can anyone tell me the possible rationale
> behind this point of
> view and whether you agree with it or not?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Simon
>
> Amateur efforts at http://www.phoenixdb.co.uk/leica