Re: Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO
brick33308 wrote:
for me, and I'm sure not necessarily for others, my reason for preferring the Leica 50/1.4 Summilux over the Voigtlander 50/2 APO is to shoot the 50 lux wide open in low light and to produce images in that regard that I don't see the Voigt producing at f2. If I ever want great resolution at mid-field and corners, I'd likely not be interested in the dreamy/soft/glow of shooting the 50 lux wide open, and therefore wouldn't have any problem stopping down to f4 or greater. To me this creates an all purpose 50mm lens, similar to the 35 steel rim reissue that I bought for the same reasoning.
Very valid point. I still think that the 50/1.4 Summilux Asph can be used perfectly well, stopped down, for landscapes, as can the CV 50/1.2 (actually, for landscapes, I'm reasonably confident that the Voigt. would be better), but the CV f/2 APO is in a different league for that purpose. (I dare say that it's safe to assume that the Leica f/2 APO is also in that league, but I have no experience of it.) And the real, unique strengths of the 'Lux and Norton are in creating dreamy / soft / glow / subject separation images, as you say.
So there is clearly an argument to have both an f/2 APO and an f/1.4 (or faster). Not that I would dream of having more than one 50mm M-mount lens. Absolutely not. That would just be silly. I always strive to be sensible.
Apr 05, 2024 at 10:36 AM
Previous versions of Andrew CD's message #16516556 « Leica 50/1.4 Lux vs Voigtlander 50/1.2 Nokton vs 50/2 APO »
