Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/11/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]A couple of Noctilux questions (three, actually): 1) Have their been any significant changes in design/construction (and, comcommitantly, performance) since the lens was first produced? 2) Is the Noctilux at f1 more unforgiving in its demand for critical focus than the Summilux 75 at f1.4? 3) Are there any general feelings of (dis)satisfaction with the CV 35mm 1.2 lens? I'd be most interested in answers on any of these points. thanks, David Scollard ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Rabiner" <mark@rabinergroup.com> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 2:17 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] A Noctilux and Velvia ... > On 11/15/05 3:30 AM, "Rick Dykstra" <rdcb37@dodo.com.au> typed: > >> Every now and then the Nocti catches something that makes me think it >> was worth it. >> >> It was dark enough in the bowling alley at the kids' party. Then they >> turned the lights down and put on the swirly coloured mirror ball >> thingy. >> >> My daughter was about ready for the party food I think. >> >> Leica MP, Noctilux, f1, 1/15th, Velvia 100F. >> >> http://members.dodo.com.au/rdcb37/bowling.jpg >> > I like the shot a lot! > > Some missed focus shots I've got in my stack of prints I show people. > I try not to be such a hard ass and know that a shot can work without the > focus nabbed. > Your bowling balls one row towards us are a bit sharper than the model if > you notice so your focus so you were racked out a tad too much. Not the > end > of the world in this case. > But it got me thinking about dark indoor shooting with 100 speed film. > And the odd thought that a lens like this could somehow be designed > optimally to work with "fast" film thicker emulsion. Probably not but > there's an off chance. Having 100 film in a Noctilux is not a weird thing > as > if you want to do my shooting during the day wide open its not going to > happen with 400. So I put 100 in mine. (right behind the aperture blades). > I > figure just as long as I feel a little bit bad about it its ok. > This is a soft shot. Nothing seems go be sharp although those two bowling > balls if you obsess on them are as I say a tad sharper. No ones going to > notice that except photographers obsessed with nabbing their focus. > Not only is everything out of focus but there is camera movement and > possibly subject movement to add flavor. Eye of newt. Makes a perfect > combination. I'm a low saturation guy but I like the high saturation on > this > shot. > I spend time on my large light table with most films and then go outside > and > it's like you're reading a book about thunderstorms and you go outside and > it's a sunny day and you're amazed the sun is out. Real life is not the > same. The sky dos not look like neon. > So I use Astia and still Kodachrome. > Nowadays color saturation wise it doesn't matter what film you use anyway > because that's tweaked buy yourself anyway command U in Photoshop. > So I don't sweat the sat. > > > > Mark Rabiner > Photography > Portland Oregon > http://rabinergroup.com/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > >