syuji_honda Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 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.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_evans4 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 <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> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_elwing Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_c2 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_marshall1 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 The Noctilux should be within the R3A's capabilities, but the closer you get to your subject, the more difficult it will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_evans4 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_shriver Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 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! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_marshall1 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 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 . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roland_haid Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan flanders Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_hicks1 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 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) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syuji_honda Posted March 25, 2005 Author Share Posted March 25, 2005 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_wilder1 Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watts Posted March 26, 2005 Share Posted March 26, 2005 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). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now