>>3326459Are they really sharper sooner though? I can’t wrap my head around the physics of why they would be, unless it’s more due to larger lenses having different lens element designs. I know firsthand from SLR land that (as an example) an old Nikkor 50/1.2 is softer than a Nikkor 50/1.4 at f/1.4 often, and there’s no difference at f/2 (and when there is, it favors the f/1.4).
I guess they’re good for low light and portraits, but I also guess that one stop difference (noctilux vs some 1.4 or 1.5 lens) sounds like more than it is except for slide film, and even then I don’t see why to shoot slide in the dark.
I guess I would rather favor compactness, viewfinder blockage, weight, and ergonomics over speed these days, in that order. The smaller the camera the more likely I am to bring it these days.
Pic related, the M3 and Sonnar 50mm f/1.5. Fast as I would ever want, and nearly the size of an average 35mm. Genuinely beautiful too. Can’t wait to waste money on it in 6 months
