Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/09/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]John, Many thanks. I've spent several hours reading at these sites and have found them very useful. Obviously, I recognise that there is always a subjective element to anyone's opinions and there are always many given variables that can add or detract from any testing. The conclusion I can draw from both sites, plus various other opinions, is that, for the Leica image quality I'm looking for, the Summicron 50mm f2 is the better lens. Without doubt, the speed and size of the 50 `lux means that it is a very useful lens, but in a way, can be looked at as a compromise between the size and sharpness of the `cron and the speed of the Noctilux.However, the 50 `lux, for me personally, doesn't deliver the image quality I would prefer. Matt. - ---------- >From: John Collier <jbcollier@home.com> >To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> >Subject: Re: [Leica] Noctilux comparison to `lux & `cron? >Date: Fri, Sep 22, 2000, 6:52 am > > Matt, > > I have been following this thread and here are some links you may find > interesting: > > http://www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm > > http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/leicahome.html > > The following statements may help (not including the 50/2.8): > > The summicron has the best quality at f2 of all the 50s. > The summicron will not go to f1. > The summicron is the lightest of the three 50s. > The summicron is the cheapest of the three 50s. > > Do you photograph often in very low light? Noctilux. > Is weight and volume a consideration? Summicron. > Are both the above statements true? Summilux > Would you rather buy a two different f2 focal length lenses than one f1 > lens? Summicron. > > I hope this helps as there will be no easy answers from us for your problem. > > John Collier > > >