Noctilux F 1.0 and CV Bessa R2A/R3A. Do they work fine?

[syuji_honda]

I love the photos taken by Noctilux at F1.0. I'm thinking about

getting the Noct for my CV Bessa R3A. Do they work with no problem

in focusing etc.?

[peter_evans4]

<p>I find it hard to believe that, wide open, such a lens would work with no problem with <em>any</em> body (unless of course you were shooting things that obligingly stayed still or were a long way away). How are you at focusing at f1.4 or thereabouts? (I'm pretty awful.)</p>

[james_elwing]

I think the RF may not be accurate enough to focus at full aperture. If you are trying a particular f1 lens, just take a few test shots at full aperture and various distances before buying.

[andrew_c2]

Someone had posted, a few years ago, that they could accurately focus a Noctilux wide open on a Hexar RF. This notwithstanding that almost everyone and their dog here has said that a Bessa R2 and Hexar could not give consistent focus. It is indeed possible to focus a Nocti on a Bessa R3a, but if you do, it will be because of a good guess; much less consistently than with an M3 or a Bessa T. Speaking of that, you might want to pick up a Bessa T for your Nocti shots, if you do indeed get one. An extra body (cheap, small and light for an M) wouldn't add to much more of your carrying weight with the Nocti! Regards

[bill_marshall1]

The Noctilux should be within the R3A's capabilities, but the closer you get to your subject, the more difficult it will be.

[peter_evans4]

If I were after this effect, I think I might instead spring for an old 85/1.2 Canon FD lens. I happen already to have a body that it would fit; but even if I didn't the total price would be competitive with that of the Noctilux.

[john_shriver]

I don't really think you have enough EBL (effective baseline) in the rangefinder to accurately focus a Noctilux. The 0.72X Leica finders have an EBL of 49.32 mm, the R3A has only 37mm. The R2A is really hopeless with an EBL of 25.9 mm. (Really, the "right" finder for a Noctilux is the 0.85X Leica, or an M3 with 0.91X.)

 

Also, if you have a Noctilux, you should really have the lens and camera calibrated against each other for best results. Of course, this depends on whether accurate focus is part of the look you're looking for.

 

Of course, the 1:1 (1X) finder in the R3A would certainly be a plus in working with a Noctilux in the dark, since you can leave both eyes open if you can shoot right-eyed. (I'm left eye dominant.)

 

If you like swirly miasmic bokeh like the Noctilux, consider a good sample of a Summar or Summitar. The Summar will also duplicate the vignetting of the Noctilux, the Summitar doesn't vignette that much. But, oddly, in my tests so far, the Summitar has had stranger bokeh (swirly) than the Summar, at least in color. (In black and white, it may be different.) Of course, neither lens is going to be as sharp in the middle wide open as a Noctilux. A Summar wide open isn't sharp anywhere!

[bill_marshall1]

John the 1:1 magnification of the R3A makes its effective base length almost 50% longer than the R2A. At 37.1 mm, the EBL is almost as long as the M6 or M7 with the .58 magnification (40.1 mm) & I haven't heard any complaints about its ability to focus the Noctilux - other than the normal issues of dealing with such shallow DOF.

 

Cheers . . .

[roland_haid]

The formula for the rangefinder baselenght B (optical) is provided (and derived) in the book "Die photographische Kamera" of J. St�per (1961), it is B=e*f2/k*z. Here e is the resolution of the eye (e=0.0003), f2 is square of focus, k is Aperture, z is the circle of confusion (0.03). The focus lenght of a Noctilux is a little bit longer than 50mm, so you need B=27mm (53mm focus). Here you see that the Voigtl䮤er R/R2 (B=25mm) is not working reliably, the R3A (B=37mm) should do wihout problem. The formula does not care about mechanical precision, so it should be regared as the minimum value.

[dan flanders]

I suppose like the Honeybee's ignorance of aerodynamics my ignorance of optics has pulle me through, but I fail to see why the ability of the Nocti to focus accurately via the rangefinder should be an issue. In a RF camera with a Leica type lens the focusing cam travels only a fixed distance through the total focusing excursion of the lens. Thus the RF is going to indicate the focusing distance according to the displacement of the cam follower. If the helicoid of the lens mount is accurately selected according to the total excursion of the lens in focusing it is difficult to understand why the limited DOF of the lens would be a factor in its focusing accuracy. Am I missing something?

[roger_hicks1]

Dear Syuji,

 

Having used both the R3A and the f/1 Noctilux -- unlike, I suspect, most people responding to this thread -- I'd report that an R3A is marginal with the f/1.5 Nokton (though a lot better than an R2 thanks to the higher magnification) and probably not a good bet with the f/1. Of course a certain amount depends on your eyesight.

 

Cheers,

 

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

[syuji_honda]

Thank you everybody. I'll try with R3A and see how it works. By the

way, I don't have neither the Noct and R3A yet.

[alan_wilder1]

You might find it interesting that the R2A/R3A take old(smaller) Nikon SLR thread eyepeice accessory items. This means you can use their 2X eyepeice magnifier and double the effective baselength of the rangefinder.

[watts]

I don't have an R3a but I do have an Epson RD-1 which has the

same finder (as far as I know). I also have a Noctilux and use it

routinely between F1.0-1.4 at around 1m with the RD-1 without

problems. The EBL is sufficient for a 50 at F1 and the 1.0x mag

finder really helps here (I have found that, for me, a shorter

baselength with a higher mag finder is easier to focus reliably

than a longer baselength with a lower mag finder, despite

possibly having a similar EBL).