Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/11/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I have not had any trouble focusing the Nocti: its other people's eyes that are the problem ;-) In reality, you do need to be a little more careful and I had the focus adjusted to the Nocti when I first got it to be sure. If you want trouble, try focusing the Summarex 85 on a IIIf with aging eyesight ;-) Cheers On 19/11/2005, at 9:10, Rick Dykstra wrote: > Hi Rose, > > I've not ever really noticed much trouble with focussing the Noctilux > (though Mark thinks my bowling balls are in and my girl's eyes are > out. It's coz the bright balls have nice edges ;-) ) A little > extra care is needed, that's all. The softness that comes from > shooting at F1 in dim light and lower shutter speeds tends to make > slightly missed focus a non-issue. IMHO. Where I have found myself > thinking "oh, I'm not sure I like that" was a session where I was > shooting a team of young women in their new soccer touring outfits. I > took a couple of head and shoulders shots of each in bright overcast > with the Nocti at the 1m close focus, at f1 and 1000th. The slice > through space looked extraordinary but it didn't look natural. Too > much separation between IF and OOF within their faces. And their > eyes were a little kooky, slightly cross eyed, due to the short > distance. They laughed. I preferred the 90mm shots. > > Focussing the Nocti? Same as any other Leica lens - though mine is > stiff to turn. Swaying the body works, back and forth. > > Never use a Leica lens with the focus turned 'fully close'. Back off > a little. The focussing mechanism of the body has a little lash at > the close focus point and doesn't translate that last bit of focus to > the rangefinder. Maybe this is why people complain about missing > focus with the Nocti. > > Rick. > > On 18/11/2005, at 3:25 PM, Rose Scollard wrote: > >> A couple of Noctilux questions (three, actually): 1) Have their been >> any significant changes in design/construction (and, comcommitantly, >> performance) since the lens was first produced? 2) Is the Noctilux >> at f1 more unforgiving in its demand for critical focus than the >> Summilux 75 at f1.4? 3) Are there any general feelings of >> (dis)satisfaction with the CV 35mm 1.2 lens? I'd be most interested >> in answers on any of these points. thanks, David Scollard >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Rabiner" >> <mark@rabinergroup.com> >> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org> >> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 2:17 PM >> Subject: Re: [Leica] A Noctilux and Velvia ... >> >> >> >>> On 11/15/05 3:30 AM, "Rick Dykstra" <rdcb37@dodo.com.au> typed: >>> >>> >>>> Every now and then the Nocti catches something that makes me think >>>> it >>>> was worth it. >>>> >>>> It was dark enough in the bowling alley at the kids' party. Then >>>> they >>>> turned the lights down and put on the swirly coloured mirror ball >>>> thingy. >>>> >>>> My daughter was about ready for the party food I think. >>>> >>>> Leica MP, Noctilux, f1, 1/15th, Velvia 100F. >>>> >>>> http://members.dodo.com.au/rdcb37/bowling.jpg >>>> >>>> >>> I like the shot a lot! >>> >>> Some missed focus shots I've got in my stack of prints I show people. >>> I try not to be such a hard ass and know that a shot can work >>> without the >>> focus nabbed. >>> Your bowling balls one row towards us are a bit sharper than the >>> model if >>> you notice so your focus so you were racked out a tad too much. Not >>> the end >>> of the world in this case. >>> But it got me thinking about dark indoor shooting with 100 speed >>> film. >>> And the odd thought that a lens like this could somehow be designed >>> optimally to work with "fast" film thicker emulsion. Probably not but >>> there's an off chance. Having 100 film in a Noctilux is not a weird >>> thing as >>> if you want to do my shooting during the day wide open its not going >>> to >>> happen with 400. So I put 100 in mine. (right behind the aperture >>> blades). I >>> figure just as long as I feel a little bit bad about it its ok. >>> This is a soft shot. Nothing seems go be sharp although those two >>> bowling >>> balls if you obsess on them are as I say a tad sharper. No ones >>> going to >>> notice that except photographers obsessed with nabbing their focus. >>> Not only is everything out of focus but there is camera movement and >>> possibly subject movement to add flavor. Eye of newt. Makes a perfect >>> combination. I'm a low saturation guy but I like the high saturation >>> on this >>> shot. >>> I spend time on my large light table with most films and then go >>> outside and >>> it's like you're reading a book about thunderstorms and you go >>> outside and >>> it's a sunny day and you're amazed the sun is out. Real life is not >>> the >>> same. The sky dos not look like neon. >>> So I use Astia and still Kodachrome. >>> Nowadays color saturation wise it doesn't matter what film you use >>> anyway >>> because that's tweaked buy yourself anyway command U in Photoshop. >>> So I don't sweat the sat. >>> >>> >>> >>> Mark Rabiner >>> Photography >>> Portland Oregon >>> http://rabinergroup.com/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > Alastair