Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/08/04
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The first reason for me to buy in to leica was the noctilux and i find that the0.85 +1.25 magnifier aids focusing even though it,s image is substantially darker then with the straight 0.58.Traded bodies for it even. Also the lens has a lower gear ratio so imho it is specifically made for more critical focusing simon jessurun - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Dory" <dorysrus@mindspring.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2002 2:53 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] 135 w/goggles, w/1.25x magnifier[s] > Checking Irwin's chart, the 135 3.4 requires a rangefinder base of 69.7 to > focus accurately. Worse, the 135 2.8 need a base of 84.6 to focus > critically( the Noct only needs a base of 32.5). So, Mitch, you are right > to conduct your experiments as even an M3 only has a base of 63.71. > > With that said, I still think that having the 135 3.4 matched to your M6 > will help significantly. I can not get accurate focus with my 75 on my M6 > body but focus is a snap on the M3. The conclusion I would draw is that the > tolerances for cams and cam followers in your system all stack in the wrong > direction and focus is never quite right. The Noct a F1 is not exactly a > hot knife for very fine detail so a slight mis-focus will be hard to spot. > But the 135 is still very good indeed with fine detail at 3.4 so a slight > mis-focus screams that you screwed up. > > Thanks for sharing the pictures. I have some near identical shots of > grasses at sunset that are not even close to yours as the &%$##& Japanese L > lens did not handle the backlight near as well as the Leitz lens; and to > boot on an SLR where I could see the flare and try to avoid it. > > Don > dorysrus@mindspring.com > > -- > 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