I have been shooting 16-bit RAW mode in the M9 and letting Lightroom 3.3 do a straight conversion to JPEG. I am not doing any additional processing on these- they are as straight from the camera as you can get. I use Photoshop 7.0 to resize the image, no adjustments to color balance.
This M9 does a great job, and the Noktons are a great match for low-light. The Infantry museum at Ft Benning allows photography, but not "Flash Photography". The attendent stated "I have to ask you to turn the flash off on your camera". I answered, "this camera does not have a flash". She looked confused and asked "how do you take pictures?" I had the 35/1.2 on it- no problem.
menos
Veteran
Thanks very much for the thoughts on the 35 Nokton guys!
I had it on the camera Today and tried to figure, if it is worth another 35mm.
It surely has a nice image rendering.
I saw Today though, that it makes little sense from a practical standpoint to add it, as it is slower to focus, compared to the Lux, heavier and quite bulkier. The lux is a quicker to use lens all around.
I also do not get around of liking the classic shaped scalloped focus rings, not to speak of the lens hood system.
It has been the nicest Voigtlander lens I have handled so far, nicer even than the 50 1.1.
Brian, your images here being not further altered are a proof of how beautiful the lens renders.
I had it on the camera Today and tried to figure, if it is worth another 35mm.
It surely has a nice image rendering.
I saw Today though, that it makes little sense from a practical standpoint to add it, as it is slower to focus, compared to the Lux, heavier and quite bulkier. The lux is a quicker to use lens all around.
I also do not get around of liking the classic shaped scalloped focus rings, not to speak of the lens hood system.
It has been the nicest Voigtlander lens I have handled so far, nicer even than the 50 1.1.
Brian, your images here being not further altered are a proof of how beautiful the lens renders.