Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]<So... I would still be really interested to hear of any experiences with the above lenses, and of how they compare with Leica lenses for <open aperture available light work. In the absence of an article by Erwin about the subject, does anybody know of any information of this <sort out on the web? Simon, If this is not arising other flame I humbly state than I use regularly a Noctilux and a Nikkor 50mm f1:1,2. My wish was to get a Noct Nikkor 58mm f1:1,2 which users say it's a wonder as it has the first element hand modeled to become aspheric and it is perfectly corrected for coma and punctual lights in almost darkness. Anyway Nocti is better but Nikkor is not really bad. Full open lack contrast and sharpness is average but Nocti is not much better... The real merit of these lenses is to get pictures in available light and Noctilux is really good avoiding coma and other optical aberrations. Both are really very difficult for focusing but Nikkor is easier with the electronic rangefinder of F4 camera that can use both AF and MF lenses very well. I'm going to test the magnifier with Nocti to improve my pictures focus. I could see the results of a Canon 50mm f1:1 just last week in the official presentation in Spain of Canon EOS 1D, a very nice digital tool. When used with the mentioned lenses the result lacked again of contrast. They were astonishingly good with a 300mm f1:2,8 IS. So finally the Noctilux, IMHO, is the best. If just I can get a Noct Nikkor, a little bit cheaper than it is actually, my opinion will be more accurate. Kind regards Félix - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html