kevin m
Veteran
Any other comment is of dubious value.
Careful, or you'll talk yourself out of a career, Roger. 🙂
Tomasis, she never got the M3. We'll just have to make do with Volvos and Canons, I suppose. 😀
Any other comment is of dubious value.
Dear Kevin,Careful, or you'll talk yourself out of a career, Roger.
ANY discussion of Noctiluxes brings out extremists of all colours: "It's perfect", "It's too expensive", "It's worthless."
It's just a lens. It does what you want or it doesn't (it does for me). You can afford it or you can't (I can't).
Any other comment is of dubious value.
Cheers,
R.
Kind of an expensive lens to shoot snaps of babies, though. The problem is that most photos I see shot with the Noct aren't done in such carefully controlled situations as your example. They are grainy, soft street shots or in bars handheld at silly show shutter speeds.
Ummm... That's pretty much what I was saying.Hm, not really. I heard its boke is swirly. I also heard it's soft. Then I heard it lacks contrast and then again, I heard it vignettes like crazy. I also heard it's not worth it right when it was 2000$.
The funny thing is, none of the above fit my sample. I chose not to let the bashers (non-owners, please) to propagate the BS. It has nothing to do with being an extremist and all to do with simple comon sense.
Sure, I'm serious. The Noct is only special wide open. Every click of the aperture ring down brings it into wider and wider company with much less expensive lenses that take every bit as good photos. It's just an my opinion, of course, but why pay $5,000 for a Noct if you are going to shoot it at anything but wide open?
Same thread. Same people. Same opinions. Same Noctilux.
Today is the 10th anniversary of the end of Seinfeld, btw.
YADA YADA YADA!
Because you don't want to keep swapping 50mm lenses?
All right, tomorrow (barring mishap) I expect to go to Paris with two 50mm lenses (f/1 and f/2.5).
Very few people will have only an f/1, but I'd rather have only an f/1 than only an f/2.5 -- and I think an f/1.5 is an excellent compromise if you can't be arsed to keep swapping. But f/1 seems like a logical choice to me.
Cheers,
R.
Same thread. Same people. Same opinions.
Check Ebay for Noctilux. There are many going to 13-14k. Photo Village has a new one for 10k. Just crazy. I guess it's us who do it. I know I had one for awhile and liked it but very hard to facus at F/1.0.
kevin, it isn't a mystique for photoghraphers, maybe mystique for consumers. You speak for consumers, huh? For us, photographers, matters the actual widest aperture i.e. F1.0´of the desired lens. Canon 0,95 sucks pretty big for me due its size and weight at first! For the second, it comes uninteresting signature from canon compared to Nocti. It lacks Leica glow 😀 (believe or not). That may a be issue for some people who cares for sharpness like hexanon 1.2. Noctilux wins overall with its signature.
So when I look first at mechanics (like acceptable size, weight, handling, ergonomics, build quality), second for signature, glass type.
Third comes last is price. As I said above, that is least obstacle for me to purchase the lens.
I wonder what do you think about prices of Porsche cars. Are those overvalued or holds its value well? Prices of used porsche older than 993 are holding well. This reminds me of leitz products.