Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/06/14

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] The Noctilux and toy cameras: cousins of the surreal
From: "Mark E Davison" <Mark_E_Davison@email.msn.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 15:21:24 -0700

I've been looking at some of my old Noctilux shots, and mulling over the toy
camera thread. Here's my two cents.

There is a delicious irony in comparing an M camera with a Noctilux and
plastic toy cameras.

If you shoot a Noctilux wide open, you will get slightly surreal, watery
images, where very little is in focus (the depth of field is very thin) and
there is marked light fall-off towards the edge. These images bring to mind
many of the old soft focus pictures of the pictorial school of photography,
and they are remarkably similar (at least in overall effect) to the images
you get from toy cameras in broad daylight.

Now there are differences with the Noctilux: there is remarkable resistance
to flare, subtle color gradations can be discerned, and the small amount of
the image that is in focus is quite clear, (although I'm sure Erwin Puts
would tell us the micro-contrast suffers compared to the Summicron 50 at
f2.)

Both toy cameras and the Nocti wide open can be used to convey a dream-like
nostalgia in an image. The Nocti is peculiarly capable of mimicing the
property of human vision in dim light, where your detailed vision (from the
color rods and cones) is still operating, but starting to fade.  For both
systems it is easy to stray into creating images which are maudlin or
kitsch, so beware. For family momentos, kitsch is sometimes good. Just what
grandma ordered.

And no, it is not easy to reproduce the artistic effects described here with
high-quality point and shoots with fixed focal length lenses. (I've got a
Nikon 35Ti with a 35/2.8 so I speak with experience, if not magisterial
authority.) When there is enough light for the point and shoot, the image is
too darn clear, and doesn't fall off towards the edges at all. Where there
is not enough light, the image is just smeared out from camera shake. Not
the same thing at all.

Whether or not you can justify (to yourself) the cost/weight/size of the
Nocti in your bag depends on whether you like the effect and whether you do
a lot of low light photography.

There is certainly no reason to be snobbish about all this, and pretend the
Noctilux is necessary for available light photography. I sometimes talk to
ordinary folks who are dissatisfied with the flash pictures of their kids
that they are getting out of their point and shoots. If they are looking for
something better, I recommend just about any SLR whose flash can be turned
off (or doesn't have one), a 50/1.4 prime, and some 800 speed color print
film. My advice is usually ignored, but there it is. My sister's husband got
some beautiful newborn photographs with such an SLR rig.

The Noctilux is a special lens, with a special look, for the dedicated
professional or deluded enthusiast such as myself.

Come to think of it, maybe I'll go get some slow film, a 2 stop neutral
density filter, and try taking wideopen Noctilux photos in broad daylight.
Maybe the shots will look like they came out of a toy camera!

Mark Davison

Replies: Reply from "Dan Post" <dpost@triad.rr.com> (Re: [Leica] The Noctilux and toy cameras: cousins of the surreal)