Hi all, I was wondering as to the opinion of the forum members what would be the most useful/best lens for low light photography wide open.I figure it would be either the 35mm asph or the 75 1.4 or the noctilux. But which is your favorite? Do you find yourselves leaving the noct and the 75mm home because of the weight? And.... is the 28 f2 asph now a contender? Thank you,

-- Emile de Leon (knightpeople@msn.com), January 18, 2002

Answers

This question has been endlessly debated over the past year... I suggest you explore the archives thoroughly. And when you've reviewed every comment, the truth of the matter is that you will find that each of the lenses you mentioned, with the addition of the 50 Summilux, make great -- no, make that excellent -- low-light "wide- open use" lenses. Your choice will ultimately boil down to which focal-length you prefer using.

:)

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), January 18, 2002.

My favourite low light lenses are just these two, the 28/Summicron 2.0 ASPH and the Summilux 50/1.4. I think the new 28/2.0 will replace any of the 35mm lenses (2.0 or 1.4 ASPH) as THE wide angle lens to have. The 50/1.4 continues to be my all time favourite lens because of the focal length and the results it produces. Yes everybody loves to talk about the legendary Noctilux 50/1.0 but the reality is that with the cost, heavy weight and, really, be honest, how often does anybody shoot at 1.0 with great results consistently. The 50/1.4 is the best of all worlds. I have several other leica lenses but these two get 90% of my photography.

-- Steve LeHuray (steve@icommag.com), January 18, 2002.

N

-- Tony Rowlett (rowlett@mail.com), January 18, 2002.

Ditto (what Tony said!)! :-)..............................

-- Muhammad Chishty (applemac97@aol.com), January 18, 2002.

I'm with Steve on this. 50/1.4 Summilux is what I'd have (if I could afford it). So far I am getting along pretty well with 50/1.5 Nokton:

-- Alexander Grekhov (grekhov@wgukraine.com), January 18, 2002.

Duh!.. That's what I meant ot post:

-- Alexander Grekhov (grekhov@wgukraine.com), January 18, 2002.

Alexander Grekhov, Great image! I love the moon. Somber and Intense all at once. The hose, interacting with the trees and including the man. The Bi- Directional light. Great Image!

-- Rob Schopke (schopke@attbi.com), January 18, 2002.

Rob, thanks for the compliments. That's not the moon, that's floodlights from the firetrucks. There were couple of fires in my apartment complex some time ago, more picures are available here

-- Alexander Grekhov (grekhov@wgukraine.com), January 18, 2002.

That(N)must be for Noctilux.....The 28f2 sounds interesting....could you post some images? Thanks!

-- Emile de Leon (knightpeople@msn.com), January 19, 2002.

Alexander- Were these metered through the lens?

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), January 19, 2002.

and what kind of film, or filter, to deal with the artificial lighting?

-- Tse-Sung (tsesung@yahoo.com), January 19, 2002.

Emile,I've put about 25-30 rolls of film through my M6 and 35mm 1.4 ASPH in 2 weeks.I have to say that the 'lux has been a godsend.Even wide open the results are superb.I have used this lens to photograph people in bars and poorly lit rooms and have had no problems.1/15 th at f1.4 has produced perfectly sharp prints.I have in fact just ordered the 50mm 1.4 'lux,thats how impressed I am!

I must say that I was a bit sceptitcal about this 'bokeh',however if I compare the results of the leica lens to that of a picture taken on my Nikon 35mm f2 I have to say the leica does have a nice 'look' in the OOF areas.

So,you pay your money and you takes your choice.........

-- Phil Kneen (philkneen@manx.net), January 19, 2002.

The real ace in low light is Minox GT-E

It can do what not other camera can do.

The shutter can stay open up to several minutes, and automatically close when the exposure is up. Most camera can stay open only about 10 sec.

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), January 19, 2002.

Frank, yes, those were metered through the lens on M6 (f/1.5, 1/60, ISO 640).

-- Alexander Grekhov (grekhov@wgukraine.com), January 19, 2002.

Noctilux.

-- Tom Bryant (boffin@gis.net), January 19, 2002.

Martin, You meant the Minox's metering system is off the film? If that is the case, I think I will buy one. Regards,

-- tom tong (tom.tong@ckh.com.hk), January 19, 2002.

Definitely the Noctilux of the wonderful Voigtlander Nokton which is a blast along with their Ultron. f1.4 is fairly good although shooting f1 is better in lower light settings like candlelight.

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), January 20, 2002.

I would find the noctilux hard to use in low light because the narrow angle of view makes it unsuitable for use indoors, which is where my lowlight photography generally gets done. The 35/1.4 is great when I have enough distance from my subjects, but I have to admit that the 24 gets most of my indoors work, which makes it my lowlight lens, I guess. This often means long handheld exposures (camera balanced on my knee). The following shot was probably 1/4 sec, a fluke.

Syed Abbas recounts having seen a mass grave of Hazaras in Shah Jui.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 20, 2002.

I don't own any of the "heavy metal" yet, but the one I WILL get is the 35 f/1.4 ASPH.

I don't know if the 28 'cron is a contender yet - you only gain 1/2 stop of hand-holdability over the 35, and lose a full stop of real speed. But what the heck - it's faster than the 2.8 and at least 1 stop (if not 2) more hand-holdable than an SLR 28 f/2.

-- Andy Piper (apidens@denver.infi.net), January 20, 2002.

Rob...was this shot full frame? If it was ...WOW...great shot....no distortion in the corners and what a look! Thanks!

-- Emile de Leon (knightpeople@msn.com), January 20, 2002.

Emile, that's why I love the 24.

-- rob (rob@robertappleby.com), January 20, 2002.

Low ligth, but where?

Agree with Robīs point of view, his picture shows it, great!

I personaly prefer a wider but darker lens, than brigther but longer and not so well balanced one.

I loved my 21/4 at 1/8, and would love the 35īlux.

-- r watson (al1231234@hotmail.com), January 22, 2002.