Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks for the offer Greg. If you say it is not up to snuff then that is enough for me. John Collier On Monday, April 28, 2003, at 06:33 PM, Greg J. Lorenzo wrote: > I have all three current formulas Leica 50's. The Summilux is the lens > I use *by far* the least. The results just don't compare with either > the Noctilux or the Summilux (where comparable f stops available). Be > happy you purchased the two best 50's first! > > If you get down this way sometime you'd be more than welcome to borrow > my Summilux and try it yourself. > > John Collier wrote: > >> I often wonder if I had a Summilux if I would use the Noctilux as >> much as I do now. Between the Summicron and the Noctilux there is no >> contest. If I am going to be indoors, I carry the Nocti. My >> particular Summicron suffers from veiling glare (jpgs are still on >> the way, I have to dig for tham as I have not used it in a long time) >> so it is not a favourite lens of mine. Do not get me wrong, I like >> the Summicron much better than any SLR lens (except 105/2.5) that I >> have ever owned. It is just the Nocti is so much better in the flare >> department. I have heard the Summilux is more flare prone and so I am >> reluctant to experiment as the only way I can afford to would be to >> sell one my lenses to finance the purchase of the Summilux. Hopefully >> someday I will get a chance to give one a good testing. >> >> I agree with BD that at times the Nocti 's wide open bokeh can be >> nauseating but it is not that way all the time. I have to do more >> testing but I think it mostly happens when busy "chunky" backgrounds >> are too close to the plain of focus. F/1.2 seems to less susceptible >> to this effect as well. This is all speculation on my part as I need >> to do more testing. >> >> As to justifying the expense, I disagree. I carry the Nocti because >> it does a job no other of my lenses can do. I shoot mostly slide film >> and pushing is not always a viable option. The Noctilux gets the job >> done where otherwise I would be forced to use flash or put the camera >> aside. A simple example is photographing my son's swimming lessons: >> iso 100 slide film at 1/60 and f/1. I would not want to go any slower >> with the shutter. The Nocti gets no special treatment, no protective >> filters and no hood. If I was preoccupied with the expense I would >> sell the damn thing. Who needs a lens you are too nervous to use? >> >> I never wanted an f/1 lens but I had a chance to buy one at a good >> price so I figured I would give it a tryout as I could always sell it >> to recoup my expenses. I found the weight did not bother me and I >> loved the results. I now find myself running out of light much less >> often than I used to. Is it a must have lens? No, but it has worked >> out very well for me. Now if someone wants to lend me a Summilux for >> a day or so... >> >> John Collier >> >> On Sunday, April 27, 2003, at 06:20 PM, bdcolen wrote: >> >>> I am also covinced that the lens is often used by those who own >>> it,when >>> any number of other lenses would produce a better image,simply >>> because >>> they feel the need to justify the investment. >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe, see >> http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html >> > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html