Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/12/11

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] NOCTILUX/ Canon
From: "Jeffery L.Smith" <jsmith45@bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:32:52 -0600

I got ripped off, in a way. I bought it for $400 on ebay from a guy who
said that it was mint. It was, as best, an "as is". I sent it to Focal
Point for a cleaning, polishing, recementing of two elements, and a
coating. That treatment goes for $250 (apparently not all surfaces were
involved). In reality, it should have been a $50 lens that needed $250
in repairs. I don't regret investing more to get it up to usable
quality.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of B. D.
Colen
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 4:06 PM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] NOCTILUX/ Canon


And how much did you pay for the Canon 50 1.2? I hate to say it, because

I know I must be wrong, and I certainly know I will be flamed, but the 
entire 1.2 image looks pretty good - with much better Bokeh than I have 
seen demonstrated with the Noctilux - and the shot at f 8 looks
terrific.

Once again, these are lens meant to primarilly be used when there is no 
alternative. If you can get more out of them, great....

B. D.

Jeffery L.Smith wrote:

> I have heard nothing but mediocre reviews of the 0.95 Canon lens. For 
> fast lenses, the ranking is always:
> 
> Noctilux 1.0	best
> Canon 50/1.2	okay
> Canon 50/.95	avoid
> 
> I have the 50/1.2 and can only attest to its quality on a practical
> (hands-on) basis. It is slightly soft wide open, and very good stopped

> down from 4 on.
> 
> For several examples, see: http://www.jeffery-nola.com/Week%2045.html
> http://www.jeffery-nola.com/Week50a.html
> http://www.jeffery-nola.com/Week50b.html
> http://www.jeffery-nola.com/Week50c.html
> 
> The last one is a demonstration of what enlarged detail looks like 
> when the lens is wide open.
> 
> Jeffery Smith
> New Orleans, LA
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of 
> ARTHURWG@aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 3:00 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] NOCTILUX/ Canon
> 
> 
> How does the Noctilux compare to the old Canon 500mm F0.95?  I've 
> always
> 
> wondered about that lens. Arthur
> --
> To unsubscribe, see 
> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> 
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe, see 
> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> 
> 


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html