mike dixon Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 "Look at the bright lights in the background. That's what I hate. That's not Leica." If that's a reference to the oval shape of the out-of-focus highlights (off-axis coma), then you're simply wrong stating that's "not Leica." My 50/1.4, 75/1.4, and (no longer owned) 90/2 all display significant off-axis coma at wide apertures. That's physics . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james_.1 Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 My 35 lux asph does it too! <center> <img src=http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=1392895&size=md> </center> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabophoto Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 Mike, >>If that's a reference to the oval shape of the out-of-focus >>highlights (off-axis coma)... the oval shape of the highlights is simply caused by vignetting; it has nothing to do with coma. Carsten http://www.cabophoto.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_lau1 Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 I love the lens, wouldn't want to sell it.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eliot Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 Ken. I wouldn't sell unless you need the money. You will almost certainly regret it and later buy it back at a loss. It is a unique lens that does things no other lens can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas k. Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 It sure is "a unique lens that does things no other lens can do." I've never seen such severe abberations from any other lens! My 55mm f1.2 Nikkor, bought used for $120, produces better technical quality than any Noct shots I've seen in print and on the web, though it is 1/2 stop slower. But the bottom line is: only you can decide whether to keep it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_kastner Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 Ken, it's now late (2 days later) but here's my response. I don't own one (on purpose) but I tried one out for 3 days. I'd say the advantages of a Nocti (swirly, dizzy, OOF areas) means it is an okay lens. BUT... use it (buy it) only if you already have a 2/50 or 1.4/50 or 2/40 or any 35 etc etc as a "normal" (most-used) lens. The Nocti is then -- and remains -- a special lens for every now and again, NOT at all a "number one" lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 $120, produces better technical quality than any Noct shots I've seen in print and on the web. Interesting. For that sort of money ,i will seek one out, and buy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stefano_ferrando1 Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 Beg your pardon for my ignorance, but sometimes I don't understand certain kind of comments. If the Noctilux is a so terrible lens, why is it used? If the Noctilux has ONLY a specifical use, that is to say use it at f:1, well... I must be really a stupid using it as a general purpose lens. If the out of focus is so awfull, maybe I don't know what out of focus is. For Ken's question: don't sell the Noctilux. It is not for the lens itself, but for every piece of Leica equipment. If you sell, you'll buy it again, sooner or later. Best regards, Stefano. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas_t Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 Ken: I've owned two Nocts, an older one and a new one I sold to a fellow forum member. It does take some getting used to in terms of size. But when you think of what a F5 looks like and weighs, I think us Noct owners sometimes talk ourselves into thinking it is heavier than it is. Sure it is no summicron. But if you like capturing night shots, bar scenes, anything where a flash will do you in or give you away, you should keep it. Ask yourself what sort of photography you favor and then decide what equipment you need. Not the other way around. If you are a nightowl like myself, I'd encourage you to keep it. If you don't plan on shooting more than a handful of times under those unique low-light conditions, then get a summicron and push process your film. Better yet, use 3200 film. Give it some more time before you sell ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly_flanigan1 Posted March 30, 2003 Share Posted March 30, 2003 The Noct is just another tool. The central core is F1; which is 2 stops faster than the F2 Summicron. It gathers 4X more light; and for a given film; fills the shadows alot more. If a Summicron fits your bill; sell the Noctilux. But when all the magic fast film; and magical development yields images that are underexposed; the Noct still delivers 2 stops extra light. The comment "use faster film" doesnt cut it when one is already using fast film; and the images are lacking with an F2 lens. <BR><BR>Many users of the Noctilux have problems with sharp focus because their cameras rangefinder is off; or only calibrated at infinity. They get frustrated with poor photos; and then sell the lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gee-bug Posted April 1, 2003 Author Share Posted April 1, 2003 I haven't sold it yet, and probably won't anytime soon. I keep getting "oooh" pictures using it. Here's an example of when f1 clearly wasn't required, but definitely added some effect. This was taken using a Heliopan 8X ND filter.<br> <img src="http://www.photo.net/photodb/image-display?photo_id=1399290&size=lg"> 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