Jump to content

24mm 1.4 Summilux


srv333

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently picked this lens up. Everything feels great about it, as expected. I do enjoy the picture quality that the lens produces but my only concern is how "soft" the said images are at 1.4 I know the theory and all that behind wide angle lenses at 1.4 but to me this seems a little too soft.

Long story short, I am curious to other peoples thoughts on this lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One shoots f1.4 or f1 because one needs the light. If one shoots wide open as a diversion for a lack of talent, it shows right away.

 

The 24 lux is acceptable wide open. And it's stellar if f1.4 is indispensable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One shoots f1.4 or f1 because one needs the light. If one shoots wide open as a diversion for a lack of talent, it shows right away.

 

The 24 lux is acceptable wide open. And it's stellar if f1.4 is indispensable.

 

Hmmm, didn't ask questions that required trolling as well. Not sure what aperture control has to do with talent. I am just used to a different quality standard from Leica lenses and this appears to be a little off at 1.4 and was asking others their take on it...

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

OPp: it might be helpful if you posted some images shot wide open to illustrate your issue

 

Good point....

Just a quick snap i just took to show what i am talking about.... I focused on "fruit loops"

 

The focus area has a glow to it... Just seems off to me but maybe I am being too picky for this?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by srv333
Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't see a glow. but these at-home extremely close range wide open focus tests aren't ideal at testing the real performance of the lens. You might try to intentionally mis-focus slightly to the left and then to the right and see if the results are better. If they are, you probably should send it in for an adjustment. If it isn't, I would suspect that the lens is functioning normal

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i don't see a glow. but these at-home extremely close range wide open focus tests aren't ideal at testing the real performance of the lens. You might try to intentionally mis-focus slightly to the left and then to the right and see if the results are better. If they are, you probably should send it in for an adjustment. If it isn't, I would suspect that the lens is functioning normal

 

I have shot a few around the "streets" and they are ok.. as long as I don't crop in....

 

Thanks for your help and info!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't see a glow. but these at-home extremely close range wide open focus tests aren't ideal at testing the real performance of the lens. You might try to intentionally mis-focus slightly to the left and then to the right and see if the results are better. If they are, you probably should send it in for an adjustment. If it isn't, I would suspect that the lens is functioning normal

 

Or perhaps the RF is slightly out too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

could it be because of some shake induced by low shutter speed?

 

kinda looks like that to me

 

I think i was around 1/125 on the shutter speed. I have come to the conclusion that at this wide of an angle of lens, this is just going to be how it is. I shot on the street with it and the results are good. I guess I have just been spoiled by the 35 lux and expected the same from this lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Astigmatism and normal for the design. The 24 Summilux is known to have it until at least f5.6. It's impossible to avoid it on a fast wide designs like this and If are buying the 21 and 24 Summilux for ultra performance wide open you may be disappointed.

 

You will see it's more pronounced in certain lighting and with certain textures and close up focusing.

 

The elmar and super elmar are the performance options and are very hard to fault in that regard.

Edited by Paul J
Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, that's odd.

 

The CV 21mm 1.8 is perfectly capable of razor-sharp wide-open images at very close range, (down to 0.5 metre, in fact) suggesting that astigmatism-induced softness is not an inevitable result of fast wide-angle lenses.

 

Admittedly it's 1.8 as opposed to 1.4, but should that really make that much difference?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Admittedly it's 1.8 as opposed to 1.4, but should that really make that much difference?

 

Of course f1.8 is not even a half stop between f2 and f1.4. It's closer to f2.

 

It's good to note that the summilux 21 is sharper wide open then the summilux 24.

 

Also, let's not forget that Leica could and does produce BS products. The problem is, people automatically think that it's the best, even when it OBVIOUSLY isn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course f1.8 is not even a half stop between f2 and f1.4. It's closer to f2.

 

...........

 

Agreed, but if we start thinking 1.8 isn't fast, especially for a 21mm lens, we really are allowing ourselves to be spoiled.

 

Anyway, the point was being made in relation to astigmatism specifically, and honestly I don't know whether and when it becomes an unavoidable feature of lens design.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, but if we start thinking 1.8 isn't fast, especially for a 21mm lens, we really are allowing ourselves to be spoiled.

 

Anyway, the point was being made in relation to astigmatism specifically, and honestly I don't know whether and when it becomes an unavoidable feature of lens design.

 

Why did you cut out the part where I said that it is possible that Leica produces subpar products? Take away the blind veneration and there we are left with many optics that are only normal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did you cut out the part where I said that it is possible that Leica produces subpar products? Take away the blind veneration and there we are left with many optics that are only normal.

 

I don't disagree with that at all: it seems very sensible and correct to me.

 

It's just that it was a different matter from the specific one about astigmatism that Paul raised and that I was following up on. You're free to make your own points without my responding to every detail.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did you cut out the part where I said that it is possible that Leica produces subpar products? Take away the blind veneration and there we are left with many optics that are only normal.

 

That is not normal. I really hope it is just user error.

I never tried a 24 Lux, but most El-Cheapo modern 24/1.4 lenses are better than that on the axis.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not normal. I really hope it is just user error.

I never tried a 24 Lux, but most El-Cheapo modern 24/1.4 lenses are better than that on the axis.

 

I think what I should do is find someone locally that has this lens and try both on my body and compare the results...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which camera were you using? Which means of focus - RF, live-view?

 

The box top is still getting sharper all the way to the "Kellogg's" logo - looks like your point of absolute focus may have not been on the box at all, but at or past the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...