Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/03/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ted writes: <<>> " because the residual aberrations of such a fast lens add an > ethereal quality to your photos? "<<<<< I've used a Noctilux since it was available in Canada, '72-73? And at times it was - is my main lens indoor and out. However I was never aware of this condition. Is this something I've missed all these years that's good, bad or ugly? Serious question.>> Ted, To be honest I've never used a Noctilux. But I do have a vintage Canon 50mm F 1/2 on an M3 that I use for informal available light portraits of women. The slight uncorrected spherical abberation when used at settings greater than F 2 gives a hint of a soft halo around a sharp core that most of my subjects seem to like - sort of like a Hollywood diffusion screen effect. Stopped down beyond F 2 the lens is quite sharp, nearly as good as a Summicron. My question really was to find out if this is true of the Noctilux as well. Erwin Puts seems to feel that the Canon is a better lens than the early Noctilux Again, I have no basis for comparison. Larry Z