Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/10/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]If it's not too late to add my brief comment: I tested a Nokton recently to try to persuade myself that I don't need a Summilux, although I am something of a junkie of minimum DOF. In a very much "real world" situation - shooting handheld at wide apertures in and around the camera shop - I discovered some very interesting things. 1) The APPARENT DOF was greater on the Nokton at f1.5 than the Summicron at f2! This may be due to the way the Nokton renders the image as flat and slightly harsh all over, compared to the way the summicron moves from a luminous creamy "popping" sharpness to a very smooth OOF. 2) Under these very pragmatic conditions, while the Nokton is certainly sharp - with a slightly gritty look - the Summicron is definitely better at rendering texture and modelling, and giving that "3d" look. This takes two forms a) in rendering the volumes of the head of the obliging salesman (i.e. the form of the head) and b)in separating him from the cluttered shelves behind him. 3) Focussing on a non-moving target (the display case full of cameras, with signs and labels) I could see no noticeable difference in overall "sharpness" between the Nokton at 1/60 and the Summicron at 1/30 (both at max aperture) This may merely prove that I shake as much at 1/60 as at 1/30!. But the labels shot with the Summicron were definitely more "readable" at normal viewing distance (holding an 8x12 print about 18" from the eyes) and the subtle shifts in colour between different pieces of text more apparent. 4) Moving outdoors, the Nokton at f5.6 again looks bitingly sharp but does not render the micro-tonalities of pavements and walls as well as the Summicron at the same aperture (which again seems to have less DOF!) So, as far as the images go, the Nokton is clearly "impressive" - but in a way I don't particularly care for. But the real crunch for me is the ergonomics - the aperture and focus rings on the Nokton are very close together and as the former moves very easily without much of a sense of detent at each setting, it is all too easily moved while focussing, leading to much annoyance! For me this was such a glaring feature, that I am amazed that no-one has commented on it in the many threads I've read. I owned a CV 50mm 2.5 (Skopar?) which was a delight ergonomically; small, compact, very solid, with a short focus throw. But its excessively smooth imagery (high res/low con?) was IMO a move too far in the other direction! (I can speak with much more authority about it because I tested it under controlled conditions - tripod, studio flashes, slow films, etc.) The final outcome of my Nokton test was to confirm that TMax 100 (which I had decided to use to give a more accurate outcome than the circle of confusion offered by my customary 400 ASA fare, but still hand-holdable indoors - as opposed to my slow-speed favourite Pan F) is a truly hideous film! For location work, the S-shaped curve remains IMO perhaps a more important attribute than others often touted in "product development". Just some small thoughts. Clearly the matter of "quality" in a lens and the image it makes, is subtle. If one makes prints (as I do) one needs not only to remember how a sea of sand on the easel under the focus-magnifier resolves itself into form in the print, but consider Gombrich's discussions in Art and Illusion which show how APPARENT pictorial "truth" is a product of a complex set of fictive appearances. BTW, If any British readers see this, I have an exhibition of documentary monochrome photographs opening in our university next week - mail me for details, if you're anywhere near Bristol between then and mid-December and would like to take a look. Good wishes to all. - ---------------------- Peter Metelerkamp Programme Director MA in Film and Television Production University of Bristol peter.metelerkamp@bris.ac.uk - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html