Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]WRONG STEPHEN, I am stephen@earthlink.net and have been for over 5 years. Please have your stephen check with earthlink and get the correct address. Thank you. stephen@earthlink.net - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Unsworth" <steve.unsworth@bigfoot.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 2:05 PM Subject: RE: [Leica] noctilux vs. the cheap alternative > Just out of interest, is the metering on an M6 accurate at such low light > levels? > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Bryan > Caldwell > Sent: 25 May 2000 20:19 > To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us > Subject: Re: [Leica] noctilux vs. the cheap alternative > > > But when you push your film AND use a Noctilux, you're in a whole different > world. > > > Bryan > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kyle Cassidy" <cassidy@netaxs.com> > To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> > Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 6:54 AM > Subject: [Leica] noctilux vs. the cheap alternative > > > > [bob was complaining about camera shake] > > > > the other alternative (to buying a noctilux) is to just push your film two > > stops. tri-x does very nicely at 800 or 1600. not to mention the wide > > variety of high speed (i.e. 3200 etc) films on the market today. this shot > > of chip is hp5 at 1600: > > > > http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/pix/pad/18/chip.jpg > > > > there ya go. cheap lux. > > > > > > the ever practical, > > > > kc > > > >