[Leica] Help with Nocti

[jbcollier at shaw.ca (John Collier)]

Hi Mark,

I agree, it's perfectly ridiculous that 0.3 of a metre would make a 
difference. However, after a year of shooting, it did. I loved the results 
but I always found myself having to back up from my intended framing. I 
started out with SLRs back in the day and my first M was an M2 with a 50 
Summicron that focused to 0.7m. I never had any close focus issues so 0.7 m 
must have been my working zone with the SLR 50 mm as well. Even with 35s I 
seldom "bump" into the 0.7 meter limit.

So, after a year of shooting, I did what I felt was best and changed the 
lens rather than my shooting style. I next tried the 50 Summilux Asph, had 
issues and finally ended up with a late non-asph Summilux which focuses to 
0.7 m. When the new Noctilux came out, the first thing I checked was the 
close focus limit and, dang, still 1 m. I now use a 75 Summilux -- thanks 
Henning for letting me try yours -- and am delighted as it focuses to 0.7 m 
and has an even narrower depth of field than the Noctilux.

John

On 2012-01-22, at 6:27 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote:

> That John sold his Noctilux becuae it went to 1 meter instead of .7 of a
> meter is a what I've been hearing on the lug now for a decade with a bit of
> wonder. One could carry a Summicron in ones pocket for such critical close
> situations could one not?
> 11.8 inches is the difference.  But the real issue would be the difference
> in size of minimum magnification. The smallest area you can shoot would be
> and why this could not be settled with a tiny bit of cropping when printing
> or Photoshopping the  digital image.
> The 50mm collapsible and rigid Summicrons  in the 50's and 60's both 
> focused
> to one meter. Not the key issue I don't think.
> Many people when they are in a 2 to 3 foot shooting space mind set reach 
> for
> their SLR DSLR with maybe a macro lens on it. Put one of those in the 
> bottom
> of your camera bag and you're covered when you need to get close and don't
> want to crop.