Has anyone had a chance to compare the Sigma 50mm f/1.2 to the Summilux-SL? The Sigma is smaller, lighter and has a better minimum focus distance. I'm wondering how the subject falloff and rendering compare, though.
saxguy wrote:
Has anyone had a chance to compare the Sigma 50mm f/1.2 to the Summilux-SL? The Sigma is smaller, lighter and has a better minimum focus distance. I'm wondering how the subject falloff and rendering compare, though.
Based on the samples I've seen, the Sigma lens offers impressive resolution, contrast, and smooth rendering. If you appreciate a modern aesthetic, it's difficult to overlook. Plus, it comes at a compact and budget-friendly price point.
On the other hand, the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Lux-SL is built like tank and stands out for its incredible sharpness and distinctive rendering. It's personally my favorite SL lens, and I find it worth carrying around despite its size.
saxguy wrote:
Has anyone had a chance to compare the Sigma 50mm f/1.2 to the Summilux-SL? The Sigma is smaller, lighter and has a better minimum focus distance. I'm wondering how the subject falloff and rendering compare, though.
You could be interested by the 50mm S Pro f1.4 as well. This lens is severely underrated and can be found at very good price.
I own the 50mm S Pro and I had the 50mm GM f1.2 and the Summilux SL. The 50mm S Pro is the best 50mm AF lens for me.
The S Pro is sharper at f1.4 with beautiful bokeh, it becomes as sharp as the 50mm APO Summicron SL at F2. The best of both worlds.
Compared to the Summilux, it focus slightly faster and has better contrast resistance againt direct light. Both the Lux and the S Pro have great colors, nicer than the 50mm GM in my opinion.
The SL Summilux is slightly less sharp, but the difference is in bokeh, and it's tricky, the Summilux has slightly nicer close bokeh, but the S Pro has slightly nicer far bokeh. 99% of people will never see the difference.
I never tried the Sigma yet, but I always ended up seeling my Sigma lenses, they are sharp most of the time, but something about the colors is not to my taste. I prefer Zeiss/Leica and sometimes Panasonic colors like on the 50mm S PRO.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Based on the samples I've seen, the Sigma lens offers impressive resolution, contrast, and smooth rendering. If you appreciate a modern aesthetic, it's difficult to overlook. Plus, it comes at a compact and budget-friendly price point.
On the other hand, the Leica 50mm f/1.4 Lux-SL is built like tank and stands out for its incredible sharpness and distinctive rendering. It's personally my favorite SL lens, and I find it worth carrying around despite its size.
It's funny, it's the only lens I have that I've been asked multiple times what lens I used when people look at images made with it. There is a certain signature to its rendering.
For my two cents, from the images I’ve seen, the SL has a more distinctive rendering which I prefer in terms of the structure off that plane and colors/contrast.
saxguy wrote:
It's funny, it's the only lens I have that I've been asked multiple times what lens I used when people look at images made with it. There is a certain signature to its rendering.
Me too
I just grabbed one of these Sigmas for a new SL2 I have coming. Should be here in a couple days. Weighs the same as the Cron APO, well 745 grams compared to the Leica at 740 grams which I found surprising.
I've owned a couple SL-Summilux's and love them.
Anyone shooting with this lens on a Leica?
Keunish wrote:
You could be interested by the 50mm S Pro f1.4 as well. This lens is severely underrated and can be found at very good price.
I own the 50mm S Pro and I had the 50mm GM f1.2 and the Summilux SL. The 50mm S Pro is the best 50mm AF lens for me.
The S Pro is sharper at f1.4 with beautiful bokeh, it becomes as sharp as the 50mm APO Summicron SL at F2. The best of both worlds.
Compared to the Summilux, it focus slightly faster and has better contrast resistance againt direct light. Both the Lux and the S Pro have great colors, nicer than the 50mm GM in my opinion.
The SL Summilux is slightly less sharp, but the difference is in bokeh, and it's tricky, the Summilux has slightly nicer close bokeh, but the S Pro has slightly nicer far bokeh. 99% of people will never see the difference.
I never tried the Sigma yet, but I always ended up seeling my Sigma lenses, they are sharp most of the time, but something about the colors is not to my taste. I prefer Zeiss/Leica and sometimes Panasonic colors like on the 50mm S PRO....Show more →
I originally had a7r3+gm 50 f1.2, now I changed to sl3.
I am considering selling the a7r3+gm f1.2
How should I choose a SL3 large aperture lens?
Changing the lens will make me feel like I've upgraded? Although I think the GM 1.2 is already very good
[The SL Summilux is slightly less sharp, but the difference is in bokeh, and it's tricky, the Summilux has slightly nicer close bokeh, but the S Pro has slightly nicer far bokeh. 99% of people will never see the difference.]
Can it be interpreted as the Summilux's close-up bokeh is creamier(cream bokeh)? And the S Pro's distant bokeh is creamier?
Does the Leica bokeh have a bit of rotation?
In addition to taking portraits, I also care about taking landscape photos. Which is better, f1.4 when the aperture is fully open or f8 when the aperture is narrowed?
Do you think there is a difference in micro contrast and three-dimensional sense?
S Pro only costs 1/3 of Leica, which is tempting, but not the final consideration.
Or would you recommend the Sigma 50mm f1.2 or the Leica 50mm APO? But I already have a 35mm APO. If I were to buy another APO, I would consider the 21mm, 75mm, or 90mm.
I'm the OP. I had a chance to use the Sigma 50 1.2. It was very good and it has the advantage of a closer minimum focus distance. For all out rendering, though, the Summilux SL wins. If you're taking portraits go with either the 50 Summilux SL or the 75 APO. In terms of f8, you won't notice much of a difference between the Luz and APO. The Lux is basically an APO lens and as you stop it down it performs similarly to the 50 APO.
I've owned the 21, 35, 50, and 75 APO and the 50 Summilux. I currently use the 21 and 75 APO and fill the gap with the Q343.
The 50 Lux is plenty sharp, don't worry about it vs the GM (I used to shoot the a1 with the 50 1.2).
Sadly, I'm selling my Lux-SL, which I've had for many years. I'd rather have an extra body at the ready with the Q3 43. I was letting one of them go and chose to keep the Q3 43 - although I'll miss the rendering of the Lux.
Sorry, I recommanded you the 50mm S pro but a lot of copies are impacted by the white dots issue, I have this issue with one of my S Pro lenses.
So if you want to buy this lens used, you should check inside it with a flashlight to see if everything is clean.
But like the issue can appear after some time, maybe the more expensive Summilux is a better buy.
I recently purchased the Sigma DG DN f1.2 for my SL2-S. The first thing I noticed was the build quality. It’s outstanding! The tapered lens barrel and adjustable aperture is reminiscent of more vintage lenses, but switch to auto and it’s the best 50mm I’ve used. I owned the RF 50mm 1.2, but this lens has as much character and rendering as the RF, if not a tad more refined. It’s so much lighter too. Leica has Sigma rebadged lenses
using Leica’s name, so that should say something about Sigma’s quality!
