erl Posted March 9, 2014 Share #81 Posted March 9, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here is a theory of mine, although I am too lazy to actually analyze it myself! Generally I consider the maximum ISO for any camera to be a stop too far. eg. The M9 at max of 2500ISO is 1 stop too many. I try desperately to never pass 1250. My theory is the same for max aperture. Whilst I do use the Noctilux at f1, I try to sit at 1.4. What that does is give a bit of breathing space so that in desperation I can go 1 stop more. Applying that to the Summilux (which I don't have) means f2 would be maybe an optimum aperture. At 1.4 you have your back against the wall with no where to go! This may be a totally flawed argument, but if true would sort of put an end to Noct detractors who say it is pointless unless used wide open all the time. That f1 could just be the headroom to make 1.4 sing? OTOH, I could just be singing to myself. My problem is, I just make pictures rather than analyzing them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 9, 2014 Posted March 9, 2014 Hi erl, Take a look here Summilux or Noctilux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
MarkP Posted March 9, 2014 Share #82 Posted March 9, 2014 I agree. I think that backing off that one to two stops significantly improves contrast, resolution, and just enough leeway in DOF. there are always a lot of optical (and financial ) compromises going to that maximum f-stop. However, sometimes I really need it rather than pushing ISO or dropping shutter speed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrozenInTime Posted March 9, 2014 Share #83 Posted March 9, 2014 I agree. I think that backing off that one to two stops significantly improves contrast, resolution, and just enough leeway in DOF. there are always a lot of optical (and financial ) compromises going to that maximum f-stop. That normally works but the f/1 Noctilux, or at least the one I had, suffered from enough focus shift going from f/1 to f/2 to make the situation worse not better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted March 9, 2014 Share #84 Posted March 9, 2014 That normally works but the f/1 Noctilux, or at least the one I had, suffered from enough focus shift going from f/1 to f/2 to make the situation worse not better. Yes, but with a bit of practice one learns to accommodate for the focus shift. The EVF on the M240 makes using these lenses with focus shift and/or shallow DOF much easier - I almost never miss focus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted March 9, 2014 Share #85 Posted March 9, 2014 Here is a theory of mine, although I am too lazy to actually analyze it myself! Generally I consider the maximum ISO for any camera to be a stop too far. eg. The M9 at max of 2500ISO is 1 stop too many. I try desperately to never pass 1250. My theory is the same for max aperture. Whilst I do use the Noctilux at f1, I try to sit at 1.4. What that does is give a bit of breathing space so that in desperation I can go 1 stop more. Applying that to the Summilux (which I don't have) means f2 would be maybe an optimum aperture. At 1.4 you have your back against the wall with no where to go! This may be a totally flawed argument, but if true would sort of put an end to Noct detractors who say it is pointless unless used wide open all the time. That f1 could just be the headroom to make 1.4 sing? OTOH, I could just be singing to myself. My problem is, I just make pictures rather than analyzing them. I agree with your theory although for me it is 1 stop too many in ISO and half a stop in aperture. I'm basically a 1.7 guy with Summiluxes. One exception to the rule: I mostly shoot at 2.0 with my SAA 90. This theory does not apply to Elmarits either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted March 9, 2014 Share #86 Posted March 9, 2014 This theory does not apply to Elmarits either. ..or most of the slower lenses, for example the 3.4/21 SEM or 4.0/90 Macro-Elmar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted March 9, 2014 Share #87 Posted March 9, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I shoot a lot wide open, for certain things I shoot mostly wide open. I rarely use 1.4 - 2. I also particularly like it at 2.8 - 5.6 . The sharpness combined with the contrast and colour with moderate bokeh makes it something I use a lot at these apertures as well. I will often use it 8-11 in the studio, the results are so incredible, I really wouldn't not want to use it at these, personally. The only thing I will add is it would be nice to have a faster shutter to accommodate these fast lessees without having to faff about with ND filters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted March 18, 2014 Share #88 Posted March 18, 2014 Recently got the 50 lux ASPH and just love it, its on my M240 permanently since I got it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted March 19, 2014 Share #89 Posted March 19, 2014 The Noctilux/0.95 will be the last lens I sell. It has served me well. It is hard to find another lens which renders like it; not even the Nikon 200mm/2VR. They are different and they are tools: each made for their own use. Noctilust ... Fulfilled! Leica 50mm/0.95 ASPH Noctilux - a set on Flickr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted March 19, 2014 Share #90 Posted March 19, 2014 My bet is that you will keep the Summilux and trade the Noctilux. Franco never Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.