Re: [Leica] Re: Noctilux

["Greg J. Lorenzo" <gregj.lorenzo@shaw.ca>]

I have all three current formulas Leica 50's. The Summilux is the lens I 
use *by far* the least. The results just don't compare with either the 
Noctilux or the Summilux (where comparable f stops available). Be happy 
you purchased the two best 50's first!

If you get down this way sometime you'd be more than welcome to borrow 
my Summilux and try it yourself.

Regards,

Greg

John Collier wrote:

> I often wonder if I had a Summilux if I would use the Noctilux as much 
> as I do now. Between the Summicron and the Noctilux there is no 
> contest. If I am going to be indoors, I carry the Nocti. My particular 
> Summicron suffers from veiling glare (jpgs are still on the way, I 
> have to dig for tham as I have not used it in a long time) so it is 
> not a favourite lens of mine. Do not get me wrong, I like the 
> Summicron much better than any SLR lens (except 105/2.5) that I have 
> ever owned. It is just the Nocti is so much better in the flare 
> department. I have heard the Summilux is more flare prone and so I am 
> reluctant to experiment as the only way I can afford to would be to 
> sell one my lenses to finance the purchase of the Summilux. Hopefully 
> someday I will get a chance to give one a good testing.
>
> I agree with BD that at times the Nocti 's wide open bokeh can be 
> nauseating but it is not that way all the time. I have to do more 
> testing but I think it mostly happens when busy "chunky" backgrounds 
> are too close to the plain of focus. F/1.2 seems to less susceptible 
> to this effect as well. This is all speculation on my part as I need 
> to do more testing.
>
> As to justifying the expense, I disagree. I carry the Nocti because it 
> does a job no other of my lenses can do. I shoot mostly slide film and 
> pushing is not always a viable option. The Noctilux gets the job done 
> where otherwise I would be forced to use flash or put the camera 
> aside. A simple example is photographing my son's swimming lessons: 
> iso 100 slide film at 1/60 and f/1. I would not want to go any slower 
> with the shutter. The Nocti gets no special treatment, no protective 
> filters and no hood. If I was preoccupied with the expense I would 
> sell the damn thing. Who needs a lens you are too nervous to use?
>
> I never wanted an f/1 lens but I had a chance to buy one at a good 
> price so I figured I would give it a tryout as I could always sell it 
> to recoup my expenses. I found the weight did not bother me and I 
> loved the results. I now find myself running out of light much less 
> often than I used to. Is it a must have lens? No, but it has worked 
> out very well for me. Now if someone wants to lend me a Summilux for a 
> day or so...
>
> John Collier
>
> On Sunday, April 27, 2003, at 06:20 PM, bdcolen wrote:
>
>> I am also covinced that the lens is often used by those who own it,when
>> any number of other lenses would produce a better image,simply because
>> they feel the need to justify the investment.
>
>
> -- 
> 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