cyra wrote:
....still pondering about wheter I should rather go for a Summilux 50. They are much more expensive though which makes me hesitant.
I like the rendering, and your images are special, Samuli.
Cyra, thanks. I don't know what kind of use you plan for the Leica 50, but if you want buttery Leica bokeh then Summicron is not your lens, it has pretty harsh bokeh, one of the worst in all 15+ 50mm lenses I have. I love the lens for it's colours and the bokeh is nice closed down to f/4-5.6, but as you understand it's not anymore shallow bokeh. I don't know about Summilux but I have understood it also has some bokeh harshness issues, but Leica people here could show it with samples, or prove there isn't none.
The Summilux-M is real nice but I don't know can Summilux-R even get close, at least the older versions, which will fit to 5D.
I quickly collected some images over years to show characteristics of Leica Summicron-R 50mm f/2 in photography what I do. Usually only good samples are shown (and in so small size that any lens defects can be hidden easily) in forums and bad sample pictures are very hard to find. I hope Leica fans don't get offended, but below are some bad samples as well, I tried to compensate by also showing why I like this lens - Description/Exif info texts above thumbnails are links to bigger versions of photos:
Samuli: great photos and writeup on the strengths/weaknesses of the 'Cron 50. The colors in your first photo with the leaves really are spectacular.
Here are a couple more shots from the Summicron-R 35/2, stopped down to ~f5.6
I think the 'Cron 35 shares many of the rendering characteristics of the 'Cron 50. One thing, though, is the far corners are always weak even rather stopped down (field curvature, I think, since once in a while you can get sharp corners with just the right subject distance placement; not possible when focus is farther away, since the corner focus ends up somewhere way past infinity). I do love the central sharpness (which extends over most of the image with a little stopping down) and colors from this lens. http://praetoriusphoto.images.s3.amazonaws.com/fmforums/20110624_cron35_river.jpg http://praetoriusphoto.images.s3.amazonaws.com/fmforums/20110624_cron35_rocks.jpg
JohnJ wrote:
I would agree completely with the above. The 50 Crons strengths are resolution, with excellent (strong) color saturation with low(ish) cotrast.
In the samples below, all 3 50/1.4 lenses have 'better' bokeh than the Cron at F2.
John: For Bokeh you're right, but it's at the expense that the other lenses (except the Contax) are far less sharp. They are smooth in focus and out of focus.
The Summicron is gone already. Someone was faster then me.
...more time to think about what Leica lens to get as a first and maybe only (at least for now). Thanks very much Samuli for the bokeh samples. I see what you mean. There are some unpleasant things going on in some of them. I will look through more images in older threads and see what I am looking for. I am actually quite happy with my 5 Zeiss lenses. Just tempted by photos like those from Morpheus and many others to look into Leica a bit.
I am off now, need to pack to go on a mountain trip tomorrow morning for some days...
mpmendenhall wrote:
Here are a couple more shots from the Summicron-R 35/2, stopped down to ~f5.6
I think the 'Cron 35 shares many of the rendering characteristics of the 'Cron 50. One thing, though, is the far corners are always weak even rather stopped down (field curvature, I think, since once in a while you can get sharp corners with just the right subject distance placement; not possible when focus is farther away, since the corner focus ends up somewhere way past infinity).
I found a pic showing the weakness of the extreme corners of the 35 cron. IMHO it's not field curvature but different permance sagittal vs. tangential.
Samuli - I take it that your shots were with the Cron 50 v2 and I agree that King of Bokeh this lens is not. It is more to do with the Leica render profile and color.
As for the Lux 50 E60, it has a very good Bokeh and to answer your question as to how it compares with the M version is the following according to E.Puts: the new 1,4/50 Summilux-R defines the current state of the art of large aperture standard lenses. It outclasses the previous version of the 1.4/50 Summilux-R by a clear distance. It edges ahead of the current Summicon-R and improves upon the current Summilux-M 1.4/50. Nonscientific comparison pictures with the Summicron-M show comparable performance in most picture taking situations however. The current Summicron-M is still the high speed standard lens to beat.
I personally do not own or tried the M Lux 50, I also never did bother to test the Lux 50 v2 and the Cron 50 v2 for Bokeh and would reserve Bokeh for other longer lenses eg Lux 80. Even the 90AA is not exactly up there for it's Bokeh.
In case anybody is interested or curious to see a "non pro" comparison shots between the Bokeh of the Lux 50 E60 vs the Cron 50 v2, then I could give it a try over the weekend...time permitting.
Continuing on from the 50 Cron Bokeh thing from above...
Note however that the Leica has pretty much the same bokeh as the ML 50/2 (below) so maybe the effect on the Bokeh, the aperture vignetting, is an effect of the physical size of the lens itself and common to all lenses of this size/construction. In other words, maybe all 50/2 lenses have worse bokeh wide open then 50/1.4 lenses stopped down one stop due to the physically smaller lens and it's vignetting effects wide open.
H.Lux wrote:
I found a pic showing the weakness of the extreme corners of the 35 cron. IMHO it's not field curvature but different permance sagittal vs. tangential.
Check out my earlier post with closeup of leaves on this thread from the 'Cron 35. Here, spots in the lower-left and upper-right corner are in critically sharp focus, despite being a wider aperture shot (~f2.8?) where the corner problem is usually more severe. Shots like this (I've seen the effect in other photos, too) are what make me suspect field curvature. There is definitely some saggital/tangential asymmetry going on in the out-of-focus corner regions, too, but this is not inconsistent with field curvature being the underlying cause.
Here's a shot that shows the U-shaped focal plane of the 'Cron 35 field curvature pretty clearly. The center focus is on the two people, but look on the ground/leaves on the left edge and you can see the line of focus zooming backwards at a steep diagonal. Similarly on the right, it follows the rock backward. http://praetoriusphoto.images.s3.amazonaws.com/fmforums/20110624_cron35_fieldcurve.jpg
mpmendenhall wrote:
Check out my earlier post with closeup of leaves on this thread from the 'Cron 35. Here, spots in the lower-left and upper-right corner are in critically sharp focus, despite being a wider aperture shot (~f2.8?) where the corner problem is usually more severe. Shots like this (I've seen the effect in other photos, too) are what make me suspect field curvature. There is definitely some saggital/tangential asymmetry going on in the out-of-focus corner regions, too, but this is not inconsistent with field curvature being the underlying cause.
I agree. I just mounted my 5DII with the 35 Cron on the tripod, aligned it horizontally as well as I could quickly. Focusing with liveview and 10x lupe, I found that the corners had 65cm distance between the floor and sensor (?) while the center is 75 cm above the floor. (according to the meterstick the distance is 72cm)
Almass wrote:
Samuli - I take it that your shots were with the Cron 50 v2 and I agree that King of Bokeh this lens is not. It is more to do with the Leica render profile and color.
As for the Lux 50 E60, it has a very good Bokeh and to answer your question as to how it compares with the M version is the following according to E.Puts: the new 1,4/50 Summilux-R defines the current state of the art of large aperture standard lenses. It outclasses the previous version of the 1.4/50 Summilux-R by a clear distance. It edges ahead of the current Summicon-R and improves upon the current Summilux-M 1.4/50. Nonscientific comparison pictures with the Summicron-M show comparable performance in most picture taking situations however. The current Summicron-M is still the high speed standard lens to beat.
I personally do not own or tried the M Lux 50, I also never did bother to test the Lux 50 v2 and the Cron 50 v2 for Bokeh and would reserve Bokeh for other longer lenses eg Lux 80. Even the 90AA is not exactly up there for it's Bokeh.
In case anybody is interested or curious to see a "non pro" comparison shots between the Bokeh of the Lux 50 E60 vs the Cron 50 v2, then I could give it a try over the weekend...time permitting.
...Show more →
Almass, thanks for information. I don't know about Leica versions, it has serial number 3633### and has build in hood, and naturally E55 thread.
I have understood that current version (E60) of Summilux-R doesn't fit to 5D, only some of the older revisions (which don't perform as well as the current one what everybody things performs well, "reference for other 50mm SLR lenses" etc.).
cyra wrote:
...more time to think about what Leica lens to get as a first and maybe only (at least for now)........Just tempted by photos like those from Morpheus and many others to look into Leica a bit.
I would recommend Elmarit-R 90mm f/2.8. I know it's has nothing "special" in it, so it's not very interesting, but it just performs damn well and I could not find any bad bokeh photos shoot with it. Below examples, some shoot in very bad conditions (concerning bokeh) and bokeh still managed to be pleasant. It's also sharp wide open (enough for A3 prints) and gets even more sharper at f/5.6. Only bad thing is the aperture shape, at f/5.6 it clearly shows sometimes.
I don't think this lens is very well available, I got mine from FM-member. I'm not using it much, but I don't want to sell it.
Finally figured out how to post photos as links ---> click below thumbnails to open larger version of same image.
I have bought a ML 50/2 few weeks ago and the first impression was that it somehow reminded me of Leica 50/2.
Just as you said and showed in your comparison, and I agree, the bokeh is somewhat nervous at f2 but becomes very nice at f2.8 and the blur is softer than with faster lenses.
I find my ML 28/2.8 have the similar look to ML 50/2. It's quite sharp but not that it screams sharpness. Wonderful colors are what I see first. Kind of soft but not unsharp at the same time.
From your samples of Mamiya glass (and others too) I am beginning to think that Leica, Yashica and Mamiya 645 lenses in many cases share the similar look.
I have one (E55 50/2) coming next week, I got lucky as the seller's colleague sold the one I bought..so he is sending me a ROM version instead. Same optically I know, but I like 'recent' lenses - less damage, all things considered.
After poring over hundreds of Summ 50/2 images, I want it for the clarity, highlight handling, tremendous (and highly credible) colour, tonal gradation and image 'centrality' which assists for portraits and street work IMO - central emphasis not all-of-frame sharpness. I recall an Alt thread by one of the regular posters comparing the (last but one from memory) Summilux R 50/1.4 with the Summicron R 50/2 for a range of apertures. There was no discernible bokeh difference at f4, and that person wanted the Summicron also for the high impact portrait ability with 'acceptable' bokeh.
Now, technical issues with respect to above thread comments. I can contribute this piece from Erwin Puts (writing in 2003): 'stopped down to f4 the lens delivers its best performance. Over an image area with a diameter of 24mm (Phil: so out to the short edges) excellent quality can be seen.
Brilliance, edge sharpness and resolution smoothly work together to create images with crisp rendition and almost a 3-dimensional effect.'
Regarding wide open performance (f2): 'At an image height of 12mm the line is split in two different lines for tangential and sagital image plane. This behaviour often indicates the presence of astigmatism (horizontal and vertical lines are sharp in different position of the image plane) and coma. Especially the curve for 20 lpmm is responsible for the somewhat soft definition of the finer image details in the outer part of the negative.'
My conclusion: The residual aberrations never really clear up, making the Summicron R less than ideal for landscapes that demand fine detail across the field. If you want great corners in a Leica normal FL, use the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f2.8, the MTF of which looks very Zeiss-like at f5.6. This 50 cron (and the 35 cron by the look of above images) followed Leica's frequently observed emphasis on performance 5-15mm from image centre, for general photography at short-medium focal distances. Adding my thanks for the fine images provided above.
philip_pj wrote:
My conclusion: The residual aberrations never really clear up, making the Summicron R less than ideal for landscapes that demand fine detail across the field. If you want great corners in a Leica normal FL, use the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm f2.8, the MTF of which looks very Zeiss-like at f5.6. This 50 cron (and the 35 cron by the look of above images) followed Leica's frequently observed emphasis on performance 5-15mm from image centre, for general photography at short-medium focal distances. Adding my thanks for the fine images provided above.
Good information! I just realized reading what you wrote that I have not actually shoot anything else than bokeh test with fullframe sensor, all landscapes I have ever shoot have been with 1.3x crop or even worse 1.6x crop and therefore not telling much about lens actual performance for landscapes.
philip_pj wrote:
I recall an Alt thread by one of the regular posters comparing the (last but one from memory) Summilux R 50/1.4 with the Summicron R 50/2 for a range of apertures. There was no discernible bokeh difference at f4, and that person wanted the Summicron also for the high impact portrait ability with 'acceptable' bokeh.
That'd be me...back in July 2009. I found the summicron high resolution, highly contrasty and saturated, and while technically superb, was lacking in character, especially bokeh. I sucumbed to my lust and recently got a 50'lux of the same vintage (sn: 3,1xx,xxx ish) and was amazed at the difference. the e55 50'lux showed the quintessential leica glow that ironically the mandler designed 50'cron lacks. most notably, the 50'lux maintains high contrast wide open. I've never seen such high performance at f/1.4
In the end, that aperature test wasn't very representative of real world drawing.
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
Almass, thanks for information. I don't know about Leica versions, it has serial number 3633### and has build in hood, and naturally E55 thread.
I have understood that current version (E60) of Summilux-R doesn't fit to 5D, only some of the older revisions (which don't perform as well as the current one what everybody things performs well, "reference for other 50mm SLR lenses" etc.).
- Serial # 3633xxxx is a Cron 50 E55 ie v2 from 1993.
- The Lux 50 E60 which is the only E60 version fits the Nikon D3x and D3s.
I assume it should also fit the Canon 5D and others as well.
The Leica R lens which has a mount issue and needs shaving the mount or the camera mirror is the Lux 35 and not the Lux 50.
Almass wrote:
- The Lux 50 E60 which is the only E60 version fits the Nikon D3x and D3s.
I assume it should also fit the Canon 5D and others as well.
The Leica R lens which has a mount issue and needs shaving the mount or the camera mirror is the Lux 35 and not the Lux 50.
can't speak for this lens, but nikon cameras are less likely to have collisions than canon cameras despite the bigger mirror box, so you can't make that assumption.
If you aren't aware of it, the 'cron does much much better for bokeh when stopped down to f2.2 than wide open. Try it. It becomes very nice, all brightlines and harshness go away etc.
>>I would agree completely with the above. The 50 Crons strengths are resolution, with excellent (strong) color saturation with low(ish) cotrast.
In the samples below, all 3 50/1.4 lenses have 'better' bokeh than the Cron at F2.
(according to the meterstick the distance is 72cm)
) of Summilux-R doesn't fit to 5D, only some of the older revisions (which don't perform as well as the current one what everybody things performs well, "reference for other 50mm SLR lenses" etc.).
