Donzo98 Posted March 25, 2017 Share #161 Posted March 25, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) 1.4... 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 25, 2017 Posted March 25, 2017 Hi Donzo98, Take a look here 50mm Summilux-SL ASPH Review. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
FlashGordonPhotography Posted March 25, 2017 Share #162 Posted March 25, 2017 The Eagle has landed.... shot with the Q. Now you have it, what are your impressions? Do you find the focus speed adequate? Balance? Optics? Gordon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted March 25, 2017 Share #163 Posted March 25, 2017 1.4... That's exactly the type of photo I wouldn't expect to take at f1.4 with a 50mm lens if the subject doesn't authorize the photo. I would be standing right in her face shooting that unless it's heavily cropped. If she's aware of it and "posing" I could see using a 50 f1.4. In the end we've different expectations for a 50 f1.4. I don't mind the large size of the 50SL much as I don't need it for street shooting where it would attract attention. I don't own the lens and may not ever given I already have a Summilux M version. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted March 25, 2017 Share #164 Posted March 25, 2017 The Eagle has landed.... shot with the Q. How do you like the lens so far? Which other 50s will you compare with? I keep finding myself wanting AF when using my Summilux M on the SL and therefore am becoming more curious about this lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted March 25, 2017 Share #165 Posted March 25, 2017 There are now four 50mm lenses that, in my view, pushing toward a new design goal. Sharpness wide open across the frame AND good blur with no CA. There's the Otus, the Sigma Art, The Sony FE and the SL 50 'lux. All of these are similar in concept. Performance is relatively close (but not exactly the same). They're all pushing for wide open sharpness across the frame. They're all significantly bigger than what's come before them. Gordon Agree with Gordon here. I will post some pictures showing some of the similarities and differences (there aren't many) between the SL50 and the Sony FE. But just curious to see if you can guess right. What would any of you say is the biggest difference in optical performance between the SL50 and the 50/1.4 Sony FE or the others for that matter? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted March 26, 2017 Share #166 Posted March 26, 2017 Now you have it, what are your impressions? Do you find the focus speed adequate? Balance? Optics? Gordon 1. Size.... pretty much what I expected. Smaller than the 24-90. A non-issue for me. 2. Balance on the SL... fine. No issues. 3. Optics... WOW!!! Blown away by the combo of the SL and 50 SL. 4. AF... crazy accurate. I mean dead on perfect!! Speed and hunting... so so, it certainly could be better. I can live with it though for sure. I'm not coming from an M background... so manual focus is not my thing. Summary... so far... two thumbs up!!! 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted March 26, 2017 Share #167 Posted March 26, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) That's exactly the type of photo I wouldn't expect to take at f1.4 with a 50mm lens if the subject doesn't authorize the photo. I would be standing right in her face shooting that unless it's heavily cropped. If she's aware of it and "posing" I could see using a 50 f1.4. In the end we've different expectations for a 50 f1.4. I don't mind the large size of the 50SL much as I don't need it for street shooting where it would attract attention. I don't own the lens and may not ever given I already have a Summilux M version. . That's my daughter... and she was posing. I cropped out about 25% of the frame. That's how I shoot. I also would never use this for street shooting... that's what the Q is for. The 50 SL has its role for me. I love the ability to isolate the subject using limited DOF. Hoping for a FW update to speed AF... but not holding my breath. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted March 26, 2017 Share #168 Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) Here we go folks - SL50 vs. Sony FE 50 picture gallery. Below you will find two links leading to images comparing the SL 50 with the Sony FE 50 (on the a7II). One link leads to full resolution versions of the files and the other to smaller file sizes. They can be downloaded. They were exported from DNG and ARW files opened in Preview. No tweaks whatsoever, no sharpening, no contrast added, except for the Ferrari SL shot where exposure was increased a bit as it was shot using a slightly faster shutter speed than the Sony one. All the others were taken using the exact same settings on each camera. The SL images look a bit warmer but as we know white balance can be adjusted. Just to get the point about the price difference out of the way first, the Sony FE costs less than one third of the SL50 or, said differently, the SL50 is three and a half times as expensive. I can see why the SL50 is at a 33 percent premium to the Zeiss Otus. It offers AF and state of the art weather sealing and if customers value these features then Leica might as well charge for them (value based pricing - one can charge a premium only if one offers the customer something more than what exists in the market today). But is the SL50 this much better than the Sony FE to charge such a large premium? Well, the answer is it is better in one significant way and those who value this difference will be willing to pay for it. To praise the Sony first. As Gordon mentioned earlier, it’s sharp corner to corner wide open with no significant CA and it renders the out of focus areas nicely. It does show a bit more purple fringing than the SL50 (look at the motorcycle and the Delage) but it’s still impressive how well it is controlled. As far as shooting it with the a7II is concerned, it doesn’t feel too front heavy and with a battery grip it would be perfect ergonomically. The issue is more the cramped layout of the buttons and controls on the Sony but no need to get into this now. One can get used to it and it handles well in manual control. I set the ISO, set the aperture on the lens, changed the shutter speed with the rear wheel, chose flexible spot, and assigned a function key near my right thumb to bring it up and move it around with the scrolling wheel. Then I focused by half pressing the shutter. That’s how I like to shoot and I had fun doing it with the Sony. I just wished that the rear wheel for changing the shutter speed would be a bit more easily accessible and that moving the flexible focus spot around would work a bit faster. A joystick would be perfect for that. As far as the difference in IQ is concerned, everyone can seen for themselves by downloading the pictures. Let me just point out the biggest and most obvious one in optical performance between the two, the 3D look that the SL50 generates. It’s just unbelievable. It’s even better than the Apo 50. And we know how Leica achieved that. Peter Karbe explains it in this interview: http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-50mm-APO-Summicron-M-ASPH-f-20.html It has to do with contrast behaviour, that the contrast is high where the focal plane is, but that it should fall very fast in the front and behind. With the SL50 Leica managed to top what they had achieved so far in this regard. Look at the pair of pictures of the Bugatti. Download the crops and move back and forth between the SL and the Sony pair. There is a 3D-ness to the SL pictures that is not matched by the Sony. Look at the steering wheel, the panel with the instruments, the windscreen. This effect is there in all the SL pictures but it may not be obvious to everyone in the others as it is often more subtle. Look at the roses on the Rolls Royce, for example, the red Ferrari, the black Bentley. That’s what one is paying for when buying this lens. It’s not good blur nor subject isolation. That can be achieved with an iPhone today. Just to complete the post, there is an interesting article here: http://www.artphotoacademy.com/the-leica-look/ It mentions a few paragraphs down that „… the difference between Leica and Zeiss images is that even though they all may look three-dimensional, the former seem deep, yet the latter are more like a flat surface with 3D objects on it.“ After looking at these pictures taken with two great lenses, I couldn’t agree more. Here's the link with the large file sizes https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-883rLt/ And here's the link with the small file sizes https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-WDgzDG/ Edited March 26, 2017 by Chaemono 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted March 26, 2017 Share #169 Posted March 26, 2017 I've just been interacting with a family group aged from 1 to 60. iPhones were much in use, but there is a minimal difference in intrusiveness/noticeableness between an iPhone that has to be held in place for 15-30 secs while focus point and framing are sorted, and an M that can be lifted to the eye and shot with virtually no delay. An SL+SL lens still looks like an offensive weapon when swung into shooting position at close range, IMO. I think its more a problem in the head of the photographer than a problem in the head of the photographed person. More important is how you interact with the photographed person than the size of a lens. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted March 26, 2017 Share #170 Posted March 26, 2017 Here we go folks - SL50 vs. Sony FE 50 picture gallery. Just to check, is it this https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/07/sony-fe-planar-t-50mm-f1-4-za-mtf-and-variance-testing/ lens that you are comparing? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted March 26, 2017 Share #171 Posted March 26, 2017 Just to check, is it this https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/07/sony-fe-planar-t-50mm-f1-4-za-mtf-and-variance-testing/ lens that you are comparing? Yes, it is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 26, 2017 Share #172 Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) 1.4... I like this photo; well composed and the depth of field is bang on - this is where f/1.4 comes into its own. I'm impressed at the level of detail that is retained wide open. As for posing, I'm not sure I understand LD_50's point here (if that was the point). Clearly from the format of the final image, it has been cropped (you say 25%) - that seems reasonably normal to enhance composition. Whether your daughter was unaware you were taking the photo, knew but didn't care, or set it up isn't immediately obvious from the image. IT has a natural air about it. For "street" (or situational or contextual, if you prefer), I still find the combination of a mid range lens (50 or 75) and wide (28) the best for me. I will rarely carry one without the other. If feel no need to get into people's faces (like Bruce Guilden), and something wider than 35mm just lets you include a little more context. For the moment, my lens choices are whether or not to take the VE24-90 or two M primes. Ultimately, that will depend on whether or not I want speed (the primes are faster) and if the size of the zoom is going to be a problem. The size of the camera isn't. That said, the image quality from this lens is rather impressive. I think its more a problem in the head of the photographer than a problem in the head of the photographed person. More important is how you interact with the photographed person than the size of a lens. This is undoubtedly true. The biggest obstacle to taking candid or discrete images (natural?) is the speed with which you take the image. Timing is everything. Edited March 26, 2017 by IkarusJohn Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted March 26, 2017 Share #173 Posted March 26, 2017 I like this photo; well composed and the depth of field is bang on - this is where f/1.4 comes into its own. I'm impressed at the level of detail that is retained wide open. As for posing, I'm not sure I understand LD_50's point here (if that was the point). Clearly from the format of the final image, it has been cropped (you say 25%) - that seems reasonably normal to enhance composition. Whether your daughter was unaware you were taking the photo, knew but didn't care, or set it up isn't immediately obvious from the image. IT has a natural air about it. For "street" (or situational or contextual, if you prefer), I still find the combination of a mid range lens (50 or 75) and wide (28) the best for me. I will rarely carry one without the other. If feel no need to get into people's faces (like Bruce Guilden), and something wider than 35mm just lets you include a little more context. For the moment, my lens choices are whether or not to take the VE24-90 or two M primes. Ultimately, that will depend on whether or not I want speed (the primes are faster) and if the size of the zoom is going to be a problem. The size of the camera isn't. That said, the image quality from this lens is rather impressive. This is undoubtedly true. The biggest obstacle to taking candid or discrete images (natural?) is the speed with which you take the image. Timing is everything. Thanks!! She knew... but didn't care! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted March 26, 2017 Share #174 Posted March 26, 2017 As for posing, I'm not sure I understand LD_50's point here (if that was the point). Clearly from the format of the final image, it has been cropped (you say 25%) - that seems reasonably normal to enhance composition. Whether your daughter was unaware you were taking the photo, knew but didn't care, or set it up isn't immediately obvious from the image. IT has a natural air about it. For "street" (or situational or contextual, if you prefer), I still find the combination of a mid range lens (50 or 75) and wide (28) the best for me. I will rarely carry one without the other. If feel no need to get into people's faces (like Bruce Guilden), and something wider than 35mm just lets you include a little more context. . My point was regarding the concern about using larger lenses for street applications. I mistook Donzo98 for phovsho who was discussing using large lenses in a street or unexpected situation. I assumed incorrectly this was an example to make the point. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 26, 2017 Share #175 Posted March 26, 2017 No problem. As posted above, I think the concern over large lenses in "street" is overrated. Provided you're quick, I don't really think is matters. Certainly, people will look at a large(er) camera with a big lens and automatically assume it's a telephoto, whereas a small(er) M camera with M lenses is less "threatening"; but in my experience, if you're quick, people tend not to notice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancook Posted March 29, 2017 Share #176 Posted March 29, 2017 (edited) Some flare 50mm SL Flare by dancook1982, on Flickr Edited March 29, 2017 by dancook 6 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted March 29, 2017 Share #177 Posted March 29, 2017 Wide open... 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted March 30, 2017 Share #178 Posted March 30, 2017 (edited) 1.4... focus point on camera right eye. Crazy good lens... I sold my Noctilux... Edited March 30, 2017 by Donzo98 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD_50 Posted March 31, 2017 Share #179 Posted March 31, 2017 1.4... focus point on camera right eye. Crazy good lens... I sold my Noctilux... Where would the AF place the focus if you put the eye within a single AF point? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted March 31, 2017 Share #180 Posted March 31, 2017 Where would the AF place the focus if you put the eye within a single AF point? That's exactly why I did.... I put a single point on that eye. Dead on perfect! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.