You know, Ned, I realize that you're emotionally invested in this lens, and to an extent you have some justification for that because you produce some good images using it. But if someone makes any kind of remark about the Noctilux in any thread, you can be relied on 100% to jump into the fray defending it as if it were your lifeblood. Now here you're starting to argue lexical definitions of the word "fast". So what, if you mean the relation between entrance pupil and focal length, and Roland means depth of field for the same scene, which will obviously be from a different distance given the different focal lengths? An argument which is entirely based on having different definitions of the problem is rarely a productive endeavour. If you spent your time just enjoying that according to your definition, your Noctilux is faster than a mere 35 Nokton, and then using your time to take pictures instead of defending its honour writing text on the Internet, it would sem a lot more productive to me. Last time you told me to "stop spreading bullshіt" about the Noctilux in a thread where I hadn't said anything about it at all. Is it really necessary to be so generally argumentative about it?
Philipp
