Andrew CD
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Leica Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 Asph v2 (CF) optical changes | |
BastianK wrote:
For the asking prices I would not only expect them to get it all right, I would expect them to sprinkle some fairy dust over it and offer the best and fastest customer service in the world on top of that. Rereleasing decades old designs with only minor alterations and worse flare resistance than some of the recent Chinese lenses is not that.
---------------------------------------------
cbass wrote:
Now back to being serious. Maybe I am a crazy person, but it seems to me that when it comes to low light or flat dull light that Leica lenses usually do better here than the competition. They are able to maintain great color saturation and brilliance where other brands can look dull and muddy.
Leica has released some incredible lenses that in some cases did not have any serious competition for decades in the past. Yes, times have changed, and the competition now has equal or better designs. And yes, Leica is now selling aging designs at premium prices making it hard to pay their asking prices.
You also have to keep in mind that the rangefinder system forces Leica to make compact lenses which often limits the number of elements and makes design more difficult. Look at the Summilux vs the Otus. The Otus is slightly better than the Summilux, but it came decades later, and the size is huge in comparison. The Otus has 12 elements to work with to correct for aberrations and the Summilux has 8.
The reality is that to this day you still can't correct all aberrations and choices and compromises need to be made.
...Show more →
---------------------------------------------
philip_pj wrote:
Shooting into the sun may not feature highly for many traditional photographers. If I do it, it's a mistake or an unfortunate circumstance. So I cut the Leica fan reviewers a bit of slack because they at least understand that the factors contributing to the imaging balance cannot be reduced to a mere scientific examination. It's no crime to be less than wonderful at some part of the mission statement, if you perform fine in other, more critical areas.
Some good, thoughtful discussion. I have taken the liberty of quoting extracts from these posts. All good points and, it seems to me, by no means mutually exclusive.
I started this thread because I am seriously considering buying either the CV f/1.2 Nokton or a Summulix Asph (2004 or 2023 CF), so wanted to better understand the difference between the versions of the Lux. Thinking about some of these points and re-reading the excellent Lux vs Nokton vs CV APO comparison has been invaluable and really helped crystallise my thoughts. I had just about decided against the Nokton and nearly bought a Lux two weeks ago, but didn't quite manage to pull the trigger.
As @cbass rightly says, this is about compromises. I have tried to consider which of the lenses' strengths and weaknesses are most relevant to what I want the it for, which is to complement the CV f/2.0 APO (which I have had for some time and regard as perfect for landscapes) — I would like a faster lens that will be good for anything other than landscapes and has a more pleasant and characterful rendering but is still capable of producing modern, high resolution images. (Not quite a Sonnar, in other words ….  )
Of the differences between the Lux and Nokton that matter most to me, the trade-off is higher resolution at MFD and size versus flare resistance and flatter field. What @BastianK says about customer service is also a relevant; a recent, rather disappointing experience with Leica’s customer care in London did not exactly encourage me to rush to spend £4,000 (GBP) on a new lens.
And if I had to pick one thing from this trade-off, it would be flare resistance. I do appreciate that many people view how the Lux flares as an important part of its character (indeed, I wonder if Leica have consciously chosen to retain that, to some extent, in the new version?), but I do sometimes like to shoot with the sun in the frame or with a backlit subject (a bit naff, maybe, but there it is). A modest, agreeable level of spherical aberration when wide-open would not be totally unwelcome, either.
So, although the Summilux is clearly, in many respects, a marvellous lens (and I can completely understand the attraction, even if it is essentially a twenty year old design), I’m back to thinking that, despite my preference for the size and shape of the Summilux, the right answer — for me, as a complement to the APO — is probably the Nokton. Am I missing anything?
Andrew
|
I guess I’m just quite easily distracted by shiny things …. 
