Summilux-SL 50 MM F/1,4 ASPH

[LD_50]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I also like the idea of a few "standard" filter sizes across the lens range. 82mm for the larger lenses and something quite a bit smaller (52mm?) for the slower primes would make for an easier time fitting filters.

[kikouyou]

+1 sreppenwolf

Edited September 28, 2016 by kikouyou

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[waterman1]

According to the new article in Red Dot Forum, the SL Summicrons will have 67mm front diameters.  Some great information, nice job by David Farkas.

[steppenw0lf]

Link to the Karbe interview:

http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/09/setting-a-new-standard-with-leica-sl-lenses-a-discussion-with-peter-karbe-at-photokina-2016/

[ZHNL]

Marketing crap!

 

Link to the Karbe interview:

http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/09/setting-a-new-standard-with-leica-sl-lenses-a-discussion-with-peter-karbe-at-photokina-2016/

[pop]

Marketing crap!

 

No? Really? Next, you'll be telling us that they don't make those beautiful lenses for the pure joy of it but that they are going to sell them - for money!

[jrp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One key point to come out of this is the suggestion that the T lenses point to the standards and characteristics that we can expect from the new SL ones.

 

Are there any  resources that could illustrate the point?

[LocalHero1953]

One key point to come out of this is the suggestion that the T lenses point to the standards and characteristics that we can expect from the new SL ones.

 

Are there any  resources that could illustrate the point?

I read from that that the T lenses are the current level along with the Q and SL  zooms, and the new SL lenses will be the next level - whatever that means. I can't help thinking that these millennial lenses will be totally compromised by the fatal flaws in my own technique.

[ZHNL]

No? Really? Next, you'll be telling us that they don't make those beautiful lenses for the pure joy of it but that they are going to sell them - for money!

I was just comment about the interview. and mainly the answer from Mr Karbe. 

 

The description is shallow shallow... like interviewing some kind of marketing guy. First build a huge 50lux lens and then talk about how they can't make a constant aperture zoom because of size. I bet it is not gonna smaller than Canikon 16-35 f2.8 lens in the end. f3.5~f4.5 starting from 16mm? that is a consumer zoom lens spec.  And why the hell f2 lens looks like f1.4? no detail. Again, f2 is budget lens spec for 35/70/90. I will keep a keen eye on their APO performance. and 90APO-summicron M/R, 135mm APO-M, really should remove APO label compare to some real APO lenses. 

 

and what the hell of new standard, redefine everything means? I have no problem with Leica but I have problem with over promise and under achieve. 

[LD_50]

First build a huge 50lux lens and then talk about how they can't make a constant aperture zoom because of size. I bet it is not gonna smaller than Canikon 16-35 f2.8 lens in the end. f3.5~f4.5 starting from 16mm? that is a consumer zoom lens spec. And why the hell f2 lens looks like f1.4? no detail. Again, f2 is budget lens spec for 35/70/90.

 

The goal for the 50 Lux was not reduced size. The goal for the Summicrons and the wide zoom included reduced size (see reduction from 82 to 67 filter size). Is it really difficult to understand the separate goals for these lenses?

 

An f2 max aperture is not necessarily a budget spec. See the 50 APO. A larger aperture certainly will increase size and price given all else attempting to be equal, but high performing primes with smaller maximum apertures would be welcomed by many landscape and street shooters. I'm included in this group. I'd often prefer smaller primes (with smaller max apertures) even if price remains high to get high quality.

 

I imagine a line of Otus primes with something like f2.8 max apertures would be very well received if not for the marketing psychology built around larger apertures.

[thighslapper]

I was just comment about the interview. and mainly the answer from Mr Karbe. 

 

The description is shallow shallow... like interviewing some kind of marketing guy. First build a huge 50lux lens and then talk about how they can't make a constant aperture zoom because of size. I bet it is not gonna smaller than Canikon 16-35 f2.8 lens in the end. f3.5~f4.5 starting from 16mm? that is a consumer zoom lens spec.  And why the hell f2 lens looks like f1.4? no detail. Again, f2 is budget lens spec for 35/70/90. I will keep a keen eye on their APO performance. and 90APO-summicron M/R, 135mm APO-M, really should remove APO label compare to some real APO lenses. 

 

and what the hell of new standard, redefine everything means? I have no problem with Leica but I have problem with over promise and under achieve. 

 

pardon ?

 

I thought Mr Karbe's explanation was quite clear and easily understandable. He explained quite clearly that the changes result in a more compressed DOF giving increased modelling and increased 3D effect .... making F2 look like f1.4 ..... all perfectly logical. 

 

Leica have explained ad nauseam in the past why they do not favour fixed focal length or fast zoom lenses and why they will not compromise final optical quality by constraining size or other parameters. If they cannot get the quality they desire in a lens at f2.8 they will not make it. Leica design all their current lenses so that performance wide open is virtually the same as other apertures. Few other lens manufacturers can claim this. 

 

Also, Leica have made a number of lenses which are APO quality but didn't label them as such because they did not fit their stringent restrictions. 

 

Leica to my knowledge have never made claims about their lenses that have not been substantiated by subsequent use and testing. 

Edited September 29, 2016 by thighslapper

[ZHNL]

 

I was just comment about the interview. and mainly the answer from Mr Karbe. 

 

The description is shallow shallow... like interviewing some kind of marketing guy. First build a huge 50lux lens and then talk about how they can't make a constant aperture zoom because of size. I bet it is not gonna smaller than Canikon 16-35 f2.8 lens in the end. f3.5~f4.5 starting from 16mm? that is a consumer zoom lens spec.  And why the hell f2 lens looks like f1.4? no detail. Again, f2 is budget lens spec for 35/70/90. I will keep a keen eye on their APO performance. and 90APO-summicron M/R, 135mm APO-M, really should remove APO label compare to some real APO lenses. 

 

and what the hell of new standard, redefine everything means? I have no problem with Leica but I have problem with over promise and under achieve. 

 

pardon ?

 

I thought Mr Karbe's explanation was quite clear and easily understandable. He explained quite clearly that the changes result in a more compressed DOF giving increased modelling and increased 3D effect .... making F2 look like f1.4 ..... all perfectly logical. 

 

Leica have explained ad nauseam in the past why they do not favour fixed focal length or fast zoom lenses and why they will not compromise final optical quality by constraining size or other parameters. If they cannot get the quality they desire in a lens at f2.8 they will not make it. Leica design all their current lenses so that performance wide open is virtually the same as other apertures. Few other lens manufacturers can claim this. 

 

Also, Leica have made a number of lenses which are APO quality but didn't label them as such because they did not fit their stringent restrictions. 

 

Leica to my knowledge have never made claims about their lenses that have not been substantiated by subsequent use and testing. 

 

Anybody whoever claim f2 lens looks like f1.4, show me.

 

Is 50APO looks like f1.4 lens? I am seeing a f2 lens. 

 

I personally tested 90mm APO M, it shows much worse CA correction to my eyes compare to three APO lens I have. (135APO ZF, OTUS and 120 contax645 APO) And there is a recent thread here show the CA performance of135mm tele-elmar APO compare to Zeiss 135 APO, there is no comparison. 

 

If you are talking about Leica lens with APO performance but not labeled, I hope you are not talking about 50lux ASPH, I'd say Leica did a right thing didn't label it. I have that lens, it is one of my favorite 50mm, but APO is not the reason. 

 

Again, I am a Leica User and consider myself a loyal Leica customer, but please stop this Market crap. Following these market talk without thinking is the reason Leica can come away high price tag with f3.5-4.5 consumer zoom spec. 

[LocalHero1953]

.....................

 

Again, I am a Leica User and consider myself a loyal Leica customer, but please stop this Market crap. Following these market talk without thinking is the reason Leica can come away high price tag with f3.5-4.5 consumer zoom spec. 

ZHNL, I'm not sure what you think marketing actually is? It is providing potential customers with information to persuade them to buy something: either your services or a product. Have you never had to do that yourself? Marketing can include lies, truth, facts and opinion.. I'd say this interview piece includes some useful facts and a fair amount of opinion. Given the source, I'm willing to listen to the opinion. I've heard Peter Karbe's opinions before now and learned from experience not to discount them. You're giving a lot of opinions here yourself, but I don't know enough about you to value them one way or another.

[ZHNL]

ZHNL, I'm not sure what you think marketing actually is? It is providing potential customers with information to persuade them to buy something: either your services or a product. Have you never had to do that yourself? Marketing can include lies, truth, facts and opinion.. I'd say this interview piece includes some useful facts and a fair amount of opinion. Given the source, I'm willing to listen to the opinion. I've heard Peter Karbe's opinions before now and learned from experience not to discount them. You're giving a lot of opinions here yourself, but I don't know enough about you to value them one way or another.

The APO performance of mentioned lens is fact; The APO label is fact; The f3.5-4.5 aperture of 16-35 is another fact. And huge size of 50lux Sl is fact as well. F2 lens looks like F1.4 is an opinion before it is become a fact. And most likely it will be an opinion or market trick forever. Of course should I call redefine the performance or set a new standard opinions before become facts?

 

I don't care how you value my opinion but just don't want be a cheerleader without clue.

[zlatkob]

The APO performance of mentioned lens is fact; The APO label is fact; The f3.5-4.5 aperture of 16-35 is another fact. And huge size of 50lux Sl is fact as well. F2 lens looks like F1.4 is an opinion before it is become a fact. And most likely it will be an opinion or market trick forever. Of course should I call redefine the performance or set a new standard opinions before become facts?

 

I don't care how you value my opinion but just don't want be a cheerleader without clue.

 

 

Why don't you reserve judgment until you can see whether the lens performs as he claims?  You may be right and you may be wrong.

[adamdewilde]

If you're referencing my post that highlighted the differences between the Leica and Sigma, weather sealing was just one difference between very similarly sized lenses. They are not the same optical design and actual performance differences are still TBD.

 

The real point is that a high quality 50 f1.4 lens with auto focus isn't going to be much smaller than what is already available. To make it smaller isn't just an engineering challenge, it's also a question of how expensive the lens is intended to be (as Jeff S mentioned in an earlier post. The Sigma being similarly sized and much cheaper is the counterpoint to the idea that maximizing profit drives lens size.

 

 

Yes, but the flange distance of the SL is shorter then the M. It doesn't have anything to do with bayonet size. 

Also the 50 Summilux-M is small. And good. The best for a VERY long time. And you're telling me that they cannot add an AF motor and keep the size down. Heck add a techart adapter and you'll have your AF and it'll still be smaller and better then all the other AF 50mm lenses on the market.

Edited September 30, 2016 by adamdewilde

[adamdewilde]

I was just comment about the interview. and mainly the answer from Mr Karbe. 

 

The description is shallow shallow... like interviewing some kind of marketing guy. First build a huge 50lux lens and then talk about how they can't make a constant aperture zoom because of size. I bet it is not gonna smaller than Canikon 16-35 f2.8 lens in the end. f3.5~f4.5 starting from 16mm? that is a consumer zoom lens spec.  And why the hell f2 lens looks like f1.4? no detail. Again, f2 is budget lens spec for 35/70/90. I will keep a keen eye on their APO performance. and 90APO-summicron M/R, 135mm APO-M, really should remove APO label compare to some real APO lenses. 

 

and what the hell of new standard, redefine everything means? I have no problem with Leica but I have problem with over promise and under achieve. 

 

 

+1

 

This has been Leica from day one since Andres took over. 

Got lucky with the M9 and everything was downhill from there.. Remember when the SL came out last year. They were talking like they invented EVF technology. Really they treated the SL like a revolution in photography, denied that Sony and Olympus and every other EVF camera existed.

 

As I said on another forum. This 50Lux-SL is still a compromise.. I've been sent a few DNG files to play with from a friend (no I can't post them). The digital corrections are almost as bad as with the Q. How with a straight face can Leica justify the size/price with those digital corrections baked in? It doesn't make sense to me.

[adamdewilde]

 

I was just comment about the interview. and mainly the answer from Mr Karbe. 

 

The description is shallow shallow... like interviewing some kind of marketing guy. First build a huge 50lux lens and then talk about how they can't make a constant aperture zoom because of size. I bet it is not gonna smaller than Canikon 16-35 f2.8 lens in the end. f3.5~f4.5 starting from 16mm? that is a consumer zoom lens spec.  And why the hell f2 lens looks like f1.4? no detail. Again, f2 is budget lens spec for 35/70/90. I will keep a keen eye on their APO performance. and 90APO-summicron M/R, 135mm APO-M, really should remove APO label compare to some real APO lenses. 

 

and what the hell of new standard, redefine everything means? I have no problem with Leica but I have problem with over promise and under achieve. 

 

pardon ?

 

I thought Mr Karbe's explanation was quite clear and easily understandable. He explained quite clearly that the changes result in a more compressed DOF giving increased modelling and increased 3D effect .... making F2 look like f1.4 ..... all perfectly logical. 

 

Leica have explained ad nauseam in the past why they do not favour fixed focal length or fast zoom lenses and why they will not compromise final optical quality by constraining size or other parameters. If they cannot get the quality they desire in a lens at f2.8 they will not make it. Leica design all their current lenses so that performance wide open is virtually the same as other apertures. Few other lens manufacturers can claim this. 

 

Also, Leica have made a number of lenses which are APO quality but didn't label them as such because they did not fit their stringent restrictions. 

 

Leica to my knowledge have never made claims about their lenses that have not been substantiated by subsequent use and testing. 

 

 

 

More then 50% of Leica's APO lenses are mislabeled. I'm thinking you have your facts in reverse

Up until two months ago I owned 22 current M lenses (a few duplicates to be fair). And I've spent the last... Well since the M8 was released using M lenses. I don't buy into any of the hype or nonsense. I just use what I like.

 

I've heard so much misinformation over the years it's ridiculous. But the funny thing is, lately from Leica, only excuses as to why they don't do this or that. And really poor excuses at that. 

[LocalHero1953]

This has been Leica from day one since Andres took over. 

Got lucky with the M9 and everything was downhill from there..

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[thighslapper]

I'm not sure how you can state this when there is actually no measure of 'APO-ness' and it is up to each manufacturer to decide where they put the bar.

 

Complete eradication of Chromatic and Spherical aberration is well nigh impossible ...... it's just what level you consider it negligible ...... and whether that applies to real world photography or critical bench testing.

 

For once we need the opinion of the lamented 'Mr Cat' whose absence from this forum is sadly missed ......   

 

Anyway ...... all will be revealed and arguments settled when the final production lenses ship ...... and until then we can toss this one about for amusement