Portraits with the M8 + Noctilux ASPH

In a situation with a the newer Noct at F1 and the shutter at 1/15 second and superiso film; shooting at F1.4 at 1/8; F2 at 1/4; or F2.8 at 1/2 might not get one a decent handheld image due to bluring. At some point one cannot push film any farther; or get a decent handheld shot with super slow speeds. B-ashing the faster lens is always a game; its like b-ashing 10" circular saws; b-ashing 12Lb sledge hammers. Bigger tools are often used for specialized applications. People dont build wren birdhouses with sledge hammers; or normally use a Noct as an all around 50mm lens.

Interesting; there is a filter that culls out b-ashing as an ill word.<BR><BR>Problem with Your Input<BR>

We had a problem processing your entry:<BR>

 

* Find something else to talk about besides other posters<BR>

 

Please back up using your browser, correct it, and resubmit your entry.

Ba/shing?

 

Kelly, As much as like your (mostly) informative posts, all 3 in this thread are just rehash of what you have already posted regarding the Noct.

 

I agree with Bob about the broadsiding. Would you care to elaborate what you mean, Mr. Doane?

<p><em>As explanations I can imagine: 1. the UV/IR cut filter is doing something to the

image, 2. the fact that the sensor is thinner than film is doing something to the image.

</em></p>

 

<p>Interesting thread, since by strange coincidence I happened to buy a Noctilux

yesterday. This is the first picture I made with it, shot on the train on the way home from

the store, and also taken with an M8. It seems sharp enough to me so I assume the M8

sensor size is not a factor in image rendition.</p>

 

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/5988325-lg.jpg" alt="" />

Bob, some of your photos were less than razor sharp. And we all know that no photo of

quality can be slightly out of focus...

You have a career in standup waiting, Ryan. I laughed out loud - which was nice after a long plane flight tonight; thank you sincerely.

 

Neil, that's a great photo.

 

The walls and skin tone in my originally posted photo are very close to what they were in real life. When I hold my hand to the (color-calibrated) screen against my original photo, my hand is more orange than the subject's skin tone in the picture. The "straight-out-of-camera" RAW file was slightly yellower than what you see because I set a ballpark Kelvin white balance which was a little too warm. I corrected the RAW in Lightroom to get a neutral white in the white of the eye, and then tweaked a tiny bit to get the colors to match what I remembered seeing at the time.

Threads about the Noct are always interesting stuff. There are always newcomers excited about the lens, and others selling the old hag as a divorce. As a person who owns about as many power saws as 50mm lenses I dont sell off a tool or try to use the oddball one for all applications. The plane of focus is very small with a Noct wide open and used at close range. When used on a movie camera folks do tests with super fast lenses and get the focus spot on since the burn rate is high for a movie set.

I really liked Andy Middleton's and Trevor Hare's second shot. I thought they were really good. Though I think Neil Ambrose and Paul Hart's efforts with the Noctlux were good, I still think Andy's and Trever's shots were better.

Neil,

thats sharp and "creamy" OOF., Nice

 

ANDY