Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/10/21

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

Subject: [Leica] Leica using photographer
From: jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jeffery Smith)
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 23:21:31 -0500
References: <8D09C869AB4981E-10C4-2BF78@webmail-va009.sysops.aol.com> <80F9701439F20347874CE5E4E03C22E9D0D3E477@WhizzMAIL01.whizz.org> <CBFE245D-4E5A-40F5-80BA-40A86A1F217B@gmail.com> <68D61E7E-2932-4071-8F4F-1A81A4693427@gmail.com> <757B5B3A-C933-4CD8-90BE-7085A28FAE08@gmail.com>

Yeah, I shot some low light wide open shots of some of my high school 
classmates about 4 years ago. I thought they were good, but the pics weren't 
received well on the LUG. They really can't compare to the Noctilux picture 
quality, but for an amateur the lens is worth the money. 

Ken Rockwell despises it, but who knows why. I wouldn't consider selling 
mine.

Sent from my iPad

Jeffery L. Smith
New Orleans, Louisiana
USA

On Oct 21, 2013, at 22:58, Steve Barbour <steve.barbour at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On Oct 21, 2013, at 3:05 PM, Jeffery Smith <jsmith342 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> By the way, I picked up the newly revised Voigtlander 50/1.5 Nokton from 
>> Stephen Gandy a short while back, but haven't had a break at work long 
>> enough to allow me to use it. 
> 
> 
> 
> have you used the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f1.1 ? Impression?
> 
> 
>> 
>> Jeffery
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 21, 2013, at 2:16 PM, Steve Barbour <steve.barbour at gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> you guys need to talk with Jeffery Smith
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> s
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Oct 21, 2013, at 12:09 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I have a quantity of 50mm lenses (my most used focal length) from 1950s 
>>>> DR to current FLE, they all have a different look with good and bad 
>>>> points for each ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> john
>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> Overgaard ranks the various 50 mm lenses with the best being the 
>>>>> latest with
>>>>> a floating element. Bear in mind that the differences are subtile and 
>>>>> certainly
>>>>> not apparent on a computer screen. In fact I doubt that you could see 
>>>>> any
>>>>> difference in lens quality short of examining a really large sized 
>>>>> paper print. A
>>>>> good read, though. Thanks, Steve.
>>>>> Larry Z
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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


Replies: Reply from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] Leica using photographer)
In reply to: Message from lrzeitlin at aol.com (lrzeitlin at aol.com) ([Leica] Leica using photographer)
Message from john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster) ([Leica] Leica using photographer)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] Leica using photographer)
Message from jsmith342 at gmail.com (Jeffery Smith) ([Leica] Leica using photographer)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] Leica using photographer)