Ray
I guess most photographers dont like to see their photographs posted by others without giving the correct reference . Thats why I think your post should come with a link or a name. Question of friendliness between photographers.
Interestingly, I have just been reading some old LFI issues, and in one article about the earlier Noctilux 50mm f/1.2, Leica (Leitz at the time) did require custom matching with body and lens with the f/1.2 lens, because the standard bayonet-mount tolerances were not good enough for that construction. When Dr. Walter Mandler redesigned the Noctilux, he did away with the aspheric elements and dealt with the extravagant precision requirements in the new design, so it is meant to work with the standard tolerances. Still, it certainly would not hurt to send them in together.
bathman wrote:
Ray
I guess most photographers dont like to see their photographs posted by others without giving the correct reference . Thats why I think your post should come with a link or a name. Question of friendliness between photographers.
Believe me, I wish I could . I saw that photo months ago on the Leica-camera forum and now can't remember who the person was that posted it. But the link is actually from my own server account.
If you add a left-bracket before the URL, it will be a link, instead of bringing in the photo. The FM agreement requires this for photos which aren't your own. You can just go back and use the Edit button to add the bracket, no big deal.
I don't have the 90 Summicron but I do have both the 35 ASPH Cron and the 50 ASPH Cron and these are fabulous lenses. There is much good press about the 90 apo asph but lately there seems to be a big wave of opinion that the 75 apo asph is a better choice. Again I can't say from personal experience but the feedback comes from the folks at LHSA so I suspect it is pretty reliable. Given the 1.33 crop factor it would even more favor the 75 to give a FOV equivalent to a 98 mm lens on FF.
So I suspect the ideal "three lens kit" for the digital M may be the 24 (equivalent to a 32mm on FF) and the 35 cron which gives the equivalent of a 47mm lens and the 75 apo asph cron. I have the 24 and absolutely love it and as I said before the 35 cron is just fantastic IMO
I've seen tests from photo.net that showed the 75AA to be sharper than the 90AA but equal to 75/1.4 So maybe that's why more people go for the 75AA, which is also a smaller lens compared to the 90AA and 75/1.4, and cheaper too.
Carsten,
I deleted the link on purpose. But that lens is really sharp in the center...
Don't mean to be rude but what are you doing on this thread. You are not adding information but generally bitching and floating negativism all over the place. It is not your place to comment on someone's personal preferences or their disposable income.
If you think the Digital M has no place for you...........fine, don't buy one. Those who have the disposable income also have the choice as to how they spend it. It is a highly personal decision not too different from buying jewelry for your wife or driving a Benz instead of a Chevy. There is no financial analysis in the world that would lead you to buy a SL 600 instead of a Lexus sport vehicle. You buy one because you can and it is something that will fulfill a dream you may have. So What.........it is your personal decision.
I believe that if you have valid information about the Digital M based on current specs or the Leica lenses you should feel free to post it for the benefit of others. If you just want a forum to piss on Leica as a brand then why don't you start a thread of your own for other like minded persons to share.
From my personal experience I only can comment on 75/1.4 vs 90/2.8.
Overall the 75 seems to give a more contrasty, crisp but IMO also a little harder image. I agree that with 1.3 crop 75 should be more usefull (at least for my purpose). I might be wrong but I also have the feeling the 75/1.4 colors are a bit colder compared to 90/2.8 (again-cant comment on the 90/2.0asph)
Numbers about sharpness and graphs might be one thing, but IMO its more the overall character of a lens which counts.
t_streng wrote:
Rob,
the Noctilux I have picked up few weeks ago hasm serious front focus (on rd1). With all the focus issues on DMR and rd1 (and some other cameras as well) I doubt that it will be possible to focus at f1.0 accuratly.Maybe if one sends in the combination of a certain M and a Noctilux for fitting body and lens together.
How does it focus on a Leica M? Mine has focused fine on many M cameras I have had over the years, from M2 to M7. I think it just might be that the RD1 may not be up to the task of focusing a Noctilux.
Also, at the close focus limit and f1, you have to use a special technique to make sure the image is still in focus when you fire the shutter. The technique involves focusing on the subject then taking your hand off the focus and just sway your body to insure the images stay aligned as you press the shutter release.
woodyspedden wrote:
Don't mean to be rude but what are you doing on this thread. You are not adding information but generally bitching and floating negativism all over the place. It is not your place to comment on someone's personal preferences or their disposable income.
If you think the Digital M has no place for you...........fine, don't buy one. Those who have the disposable income also have the choice as to how they spend it. It is a highly personal decision not too different from buying jewelry for your wife or driving a Benz instead of a Chevy. There is no financial analysis in the world that would lead you to buy a SL 600 instead of a Lexus sport vehicle. You buy one because you can and it is something that will fulfill a dream you may have. So What.........it is your personal decision.
I believe that if you have valid information about the Digital M based on current specs or the Leica lenses you should feel free to post it for the benefit of others. If you just want a forum to piss on Leica as a brand then why don't you start a thread of your own for other like minded persons to share.
I apologize for any reference that pointed to you.
There had been a number of postings by Go4it that were just negative drivel relating to why he would not buy a Digital M. He provided no useful information in his posts but became more pointed and belligerent as time went on.
His final posting on page 5 of this thread took on people who would buy the digital M and lenses as having too much disposable income. By this point I had enough of him and unilaterally decided to ask him to leave the thread. I just don't think we need those kinds of personal attacks.
I replied directly to his post but perhaps I don't fully understand the reply mechanism. My reply went directly to the end of the thread with no reference to the original post. If I am doing this wrong, I would appreciate advice on how to do it correctly.
Woody, just press "quote" instead of "reply", and you will get some quoted material which you can trim if you like, making sure to leave the [ quote ] and [ /quote ] and similar tags.
By the way, woody, that post you replied to was posted in November, 2005 :) I doubt he was still reading. Anyway, he did have a smiley in there...
. I saw that photo months ago on the Leica-camera forum and now can't remember who the person was that posted it. But the link is actually from my own server account.