Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/02/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?
From: steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 22:46:33 -0800
References: <CAF8hL-HzJtqvN4NcSDZm3OWC4muPktx+hqXYVrm4NxFjfOeDoA@mail.gmail.com> <87E9ACCC-43A1-49B9-8DEE-9BEF85802742@gmail.com> <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E93DEAFC4E@WHIZZMAIL02.whizz.org> <CA+=0raDXigWgWoiO3=o_Ca9yytFuC8bZ=4n=Le83aBeBXSkLYQ@mail.gmail.com> <000001cce6e4$8e4b1900$aae14b00$@chiaroscuro.co.nz> <027a01cce6e9$a10ca270$e325e750$@earthlink.net> <AB84C0F1-CF26-4C41-98A7-544CB8D1EA3E@shaw.ca> <028f01cce6ed$1483a070$3d8ae150$@earthlink.net> <CAAsXt4Ob14NwyPU0fDTV9ONe3Un+5m1cNC9SeaCVUOL5ZavmDA@mail.gmail.com>

On Feb 8, 2012, at 10:37 PM, Robert Adler wrote:

> Well I'll open my Kimono here.


oh my Bob, let's see, do I remember how to blush?

> I just bought a use Nocti; last generation before the 0.95. It's being
> coded and matched to an M9 in NJ. I paid $6,500. There. I said it. I feel
> better already!

ouch, I should have hung onto both Noctilux I used to own!

> I don't think I would have been willing to fork over $2,300 less for a
> product with unknown performance and from a manufacturer without a long
> history of quality. If after a year I hear that it's a better lens than the
> Nocti I bought, fine. I'll kick myself around the block a few times while
> looking at the images caught over that year.
> But for quality of lens, I'll talk Leica and put my money where my mouth 
> is.
> 
> And as far as Erwin Putz, he's no god, but he does know lens measurement
> and has the historical perspective and experience to compare. So I do trust
> his measurements and his opinions drawn from them to a degree. After that
> it's up to the photographer.
> 
> The only new lens I bought was the new 21/3.4, in large part based on
> Erwin's enthusiasm but also based on need (I don't tend to that wide in low
> light), size (an incredibly compact 21) and cost (relative to the 1.4).
> 
> So all things being pretty equal (this lens vs the Noctilux) I'll give
> Leica a big benefit of doubt on their lens quality.
> Just my opinion, since I have nothing else to do until my kit arrives...
> :'-(

soon...you'll love it , I know you will, can't wait to see the results...


Steve


> 
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:38 PM, Frank Filippone <red735i at 
> earthlink.net>wrote:
> 
>> I stand somewhat corrected......
>> 
>> What I should have said is:
>> 
>>> Price is listed as $8350 HKD..... in 4/3 mount.
>>> 
>>> That is $1076 by today's exchange rate.
>>> 
>>> US Price is $4288 USD for an M mount.
>>> 
>>> That is a LOT of HK labor hours for a different mount.......even with RF
>> Coupling.
>> 
>> Keep in mind the cheapest CV lens has this coupling, and it is the 21/4 P
>> Color Skopar M mount at $419 with lens elements......
>> Hard to justify a $3K up lift in cost because of RF coupling.
>> 
>> Frank Filippone
>> Red735i at earthlink.net
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: lug-bounces+red735i=earthlink.net at leica-users.org
>> [mailto:lug-bounces+red735i=earthlink.net at leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
>> John
>> Collier
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 9:27 PM
>> To: Leica Users Group
>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?
>> 
>> A 4/3 mount wouldn't require coupling to the rangefinder. I would assume
>> that the M mount version is coupled.
>> 
>> John
>> 
>> On 2012-02-08, at 10:13 PM, Frank Filippone wrote:
>> 
>>> Price is listed as $8350 HKD..... in 4/3 mount.
>>> 
>>> That is $1076 by today's exchange rate.
>>> 
>>> US Price is $4288 USD for an M mount.
>>> 
>>> That is a LOT of HK labor hours for a different mount.......
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Bob Adler
> Palo Alto, CA
> http://www.rgaphoto.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from rgacpa at gmail.com (Robert Adler) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)
In reply to: Message from richard at richardmanphoto.com (Richard Man) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)
Message from lluisripollquerol at gmail.com (Lluis Ripoll) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)
Message from msadat at gmail.com (mehrdad) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)
Message from john at chiaroscuro.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)
Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)
Message from jbcollier at shaw.ca (John Collier) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)
Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)
Message from rgacpa at gmail.com (Robert Adler) ([Leica] Nocti/0.95 is so 2009. How about a 2 LBS T0.95?)