Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/26

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Noctilux vs 50mm f/2
From: Chandos Michael Brown <cmbrow@mail.wm.edu>
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 06:55:21 -0400
References: <200005260952.e4Q9qtG00369@helme.stelvio.nl>

The Noctilux is a beast, even by SLR standards.  You could use it as a 
standard lens, happily, I think, but one does then sacrifice some of the 
compact charm of the M system.  Looks impressive as hell, but is heavy, 
and, frankly, I can't help being a bit fussy about it when it's slung over 
my shoulder: so much glass, so many dollars.

I'd intended to use it exclusively (the 35/1.4 is my standard lens), but 
I'm really glad that I kept the Summicron, which spends a lot more time on 
the camera for general 50mm work.

Chandos

At 10:58 AM 5/26/2000 +0100, you wrote:
>I thoughtI would ask this as a general question although I did raise the
>issue in a reply to another message.
>
>I have been told that if I purchase a Noctilux I should keep my 50mm f/2 as
>the Noctilux should be regarded as an additional lens rather than a
>replacement.  Can anyone tell me the possible rationale behind this point of
>view and whether you agree with it or not?
>
>Thanks.
>
>Simon
>
>Amateur efforts at http://www.phoenixdb.co.uk/leica



Chandos Michael Brown
Assoc. Prof., History and American Studies
College of William and Mary

http://www.wm.edu/CAS/ASP/faculty/brown

Replies: Reply from "Simon Lamb" <s_lamb@compuserve.com> (Re: [Leica] Noctilux vs 50mm f/2)
Reply from "Tom Schofield" <tdschofield@email.msn.com> (Re: [Leica] Noctilux vs 50mm f/2)
In reply to: Message from Arne Helme <Arne.Helme@stelvio.nl> (RE: [Leica] Dirty finder)