is f2 fast enough?

[Richard G]

I actually have an f1.5 lens too. The one time I really wanted the shot was my good friend's inaugural professorial lecture. I found out too late for any planning, but happened to have the C Sonnar and M5 with me. Loaded with Rollei Retro 100........ I sat in the front row, anchored the camera on the front railing and fired away at some ridiculously slow shutter speeds, 1/2 and 1/4s, hoping to catch a moment of stillness in the lecturer. I got one great shot, finishing the roll. Bill Pierce talks about these slow shutter speed stopping the action podium shots in The Leica Manual. So unless you're willing to experiment and improvise, one stop more is only going to get you out of trouble occasionally.

 

[Richard G]

And love those low light shots Helen, but especially the nightclub one.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

The used market abounds with Pentax Spotmatics with 50mm f1.4 lenses......excellent low light photography at little cost.

Should I consider only the 8-element Super-Takumar, or is the 7-element version good enough? 😉

Chris

 

[mdarnton]

For me it's more about size than speed. My 50 collapsible Summicron has been used more because I carry the camera when that's on. Faster lenses don't get used because they don't get out of the house much. M4 and Summicron fits under my jacket or coat in the winter easier than anything else I have, so it gets out more. 50/1.1 Nokton gets almost no use, not because I wouldn't but because it's huge and heavy and not with me. F2 is sufficient. My other fave is 21/4, for the same reason: size, not speed. And I do shoot mostly available light, indoors.

 

[David Hughes]

Should I consider only the 8-element Super-Takumar, or is the 7-element version good enough? 😉

Chris

Hi,

It's much, much more than good: well, my one is...

Regards, David

 

[Dogman]

I just use what I have whenever I need it.

 

[dee]

in the old days ... Rokkor 50 f1.4 was heavier then 50 f1.7 , and 45 f2 even lighter , great to have each , but the 45 almost always won out .
Of course , with an SLR , faster lenses are easier to focus .
With the ability to stretch ISO , 2.8 seems adequate .
dee

 

[helen.HH]

And love those low light shots Helen, but especially the nightclub one.

Hi Richard, very cool, Thanks for that. best Wishes- H !!

 

[ray*j*gun]

For rangefinder shooting my fav 50 is my CV Color Skopar... small sharp and quick to focus. Certainly fast enough. I have faster lenses but the size and weight keep them on the shelf most of the time.

 

[FrozenInTime]

You can get small, fast and light - but they come with excess quirky-ness : MS optical 35/1.4 , 50/1.1

 

[tunalegs]

Here's one with f/6.3 and 400ASA:

Tokyo Night by Berang Berang, on Flickr

This of course was the limit for such a slow lens, 20 minutes later it would've been useless for anything but the brightest lit storefront.

You'd be surprised how far you can go with f/2 and 400ASA. I actually sold my only f/1.4 lens recently, didn't need it often, and the extra weight and size were sort of annoying for general use.

 

[johnf04]

Should I consider only the 8-element Super-Takumar, or is the 7-element version good enough? 😉

Chris

If economy is your interest, you won't care.

 

[sepiareverb]

"Ancient" thread resurrected!

I shoot a lot of RPX25 and Rollei Ortho 25 (at ISO 20). I regularly use an f/2.0 lens with these films. If one shoots digital M an ND filter is required (IMHE) for using f/2.0, sometimes even to use f/4.0.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

If economy is your interest, you won't care.

Actually I'm quite satisfied with my Super-Takumar 55mm f/2! 😱

Chris

 

[Richard G]

For me it's more about size than speed. My 50 collapsible Summicron has been used more because I carry the camera when that's on. Faster lenses don't get used because they don't get out of the house much. M4 and Summicron fits under my jacket or coat in the winter easier than anything else I have, so it gets out more. 50/1.1 Nokton gets almost no use, not because I wouldn't but because it's huge and heavy and not with me. F2 is sufficient. My other fave is 21/4, for the same reason: size, not speed. And I do shoot mostly available light, indoors.

This is my thinking too. With digital I am mostly suing f2.8 lenses for the same reason, especially the Elmar M collapsible 50. My 21 is f4.5, the C Biogon. quite compact. I mostly also don't take a bag but just one camera and one lens.

 

[Pioneer]

You can get small, fast and light - but they come with excess quirky-ness : MS optical 35/1.4 , 50/1.1

If I even think that I may need a fast aperture then the MS Optical 50/1.1 is the lens I grab. It may be quirky but it certainly gets the job done and it is way smaller than many of my f/2 lenses. It is a Sonnar so it does have some focus shift but this is pretty easy to work with.

 

[Mackinaw]

I just picked up on this thread and haven’t read all of the posts.

To me, lens speed is more than the size of the lens opening, lens character comes into play too. Saturday I shot some engagement photos of my nephew and his fiancé. I used my M240 along with my 75mm Summilux. I shot most of the pics at F1.4 because I wanted the unique signature the Summilux gives wide-open. In this case, F2.0 wouldn’t have been enough.

Jim B.