Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/26
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks for your opinion. Other are saying the same thing - not an everday lens. Simon Amateur efforts at http://www.phoenixdb.co.uk/leica - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chandos Michael Brown" <cmbrow@mail.wm.edu> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Friday, May 26, 2000 11:55 AM Subject: Re: [Leica] Noctilux vs 50mm f/2 > > 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 >