The closest competition to this lens would be the M-Summilux at almost double the price and half the size. But I doubt the Leica would be even close optically.
rirakuma wrote:
wow if its really 1.2kg that is bloody heavy
I own a 1050g (lens caps included) 50 mm lens. It is a bit faster than this Distagon, but not so much if you account for vignetting and pixel vignetting.
Feb 16, 2013 at 07:11 AM
Lars Johnsson Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
edwardkaraa wrote:
The closest competition to this lens would be the M-Summilux at almost double the price and half the size. But I doubt the Leica would be even close optically.
The Summilux is about the same price. I also don't think it will be close to the 55/1.4 wide open. It's the 50/2 AA that's double the price and should be the closest competitor, though obviously not f/1.4.
While I appreciate the 'optical performance at all costs' approach, I personally don't have the back to carry heavy equipment in my day-to-day kit. Perhaps if I were a studio photographer I could leave it there.
BJNY wrote:
]
Carsten, would you post a photo showing aberrations you love, please?
Argh, you caught me I wrote that wrong. It isn't the aberrations I love, of course. What I wanted to write was that I love the look so much, in spite of the aberrations, I wouldn't want to trade for a lens with less aberrations, if it took away even a single iota of the look.
rscheffler wrote:
The Summilux is about the same price. I also don't think it will be close to the 55/1.4 wide open. It's the 50/2 AA that's double the price and should be the closest competitor, though obviously not f/1.4.
carstenw wrote:
Argh, you caught me I wrote that wrong. It isn't the aberrations I love, of course. What I wanted to write was that I love the look so much, in spite of the aberrations, I wouldn't want to trade for a lens with less aberrations, if it took away even a single iota of the look.
So you love the look, because of the aberrations (not in spite of).
thrice wrote:
While I appreciate the 'optical performance at all costs' approach, I personally don't have the back to carry heavy equipment in my day-to-day kit. Perhaps if I were a studio photographer I could leave it there.
with this lens you could probably just leave the tripod behind and shoot at a really high shutter speed. should make up for some of the weight.
Toothwalker wrote:
So you love the look, because of the aberrations (not in spite of).
carstenw wrote:
Erm, I did write "in spite of"...
I don't think Toothwalker means that your love is because of the aberrations, but that the look is because of them. You cannot take away the spherical aberrations and maintain the look of the Planar 50.
