[Leica] Used 1.2 Nocti

[john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster)]

It certainly makes the f1.0 (never mind the f1.2) look small and light ;-)

Looking at Puts MTF curves, the f1.2 had better sharpness, particularly in 
the corners, wide open compared to the f1.0 - not sure what the comparison 
was like if the f1.0 was stopped down 1/2 a stop....

john

> -----Original Message-----
> 
> I should have added, that it is a big heavy thing that made my hand ache 
> over
> a few days carrying and shooting, I don't tend to use my lenses wide open
> AND I use flash sometimes.
> Even stopped down to tiny apertures it still seems 'adequate' ;-)
> 
> 
> Cheers
> Geoff
> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
> 
> 
> On 29 December 2013 11:48, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > The one from Solms seems to work OK anyway.;-)
> > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/stvm
> > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/mvm
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> > Geoff
> > http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
> >
> >
> > On 29 December 2013 11:36, Mark Kronquist <mak at teleport.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Why is wetzlar better.  Real life.  Not Germans better than canadians
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >>
> >> On Dec 28, 2013, at 4:46 PM, EPL <manolito at videotron.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >>  Opinions are a dime a dozen.
> >>>
> >>> In fact the Wetzlar f1.2 Noctilux is superior to the Midland f1.0 in
> >>> every way except speed.
> >>>
> >>> It is easily the equal of -- or better than -- the first 50mm
> >>> Summilux too.
> >>> It's a beautiful lens that handles well on the M camera.
> >>>
> >>> Having said that, in the kind of trashy condition of the lens in
> >>> question on eBay, I would not put more than $3500 on it, which is
> >>> obviously not going to get it in today's market.
> >>>
> >>> In my opinion, the price of these lenses has been cooked way too hot
> >>> in the past few years. Ditto for the f1.0.
> >>>
> >>> Methinks one's best bet now for a fast shooter's 50mm would be the
> >>> Summilux ASPH or one of the Voigtlander lenses.
> >>>
> >>> Emanuel
> >>>