APO 50 Summicron vs 50/1.4 ASPH (moved from ... central flare)

[L1913]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Apologies for the off topic question, but why would someone choose the APO 50 Summicron over the 50/1.4 ASPH? Why is the APO more expensive than the 1.4? I thought the faster lenses were harder to make/more expensive?

[Advertisement]

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

[Bill W]

From what I understand, the APO 50 is a very compact lens with very exact tolerances in such a design for an APO lens and therefore is very costly to actually produce. I might be a little off on my explanation.

[L1913]

How does image quality compare to the 1.4? Are there any advantages to the APO?

[01af]

The Apo-Summicron clearly is the better lens. It is sharper off-center, has smoother out-of-focus rendition, and less lateral chromatic aberration. It's a very 'transparent' lens. However the jury is still out on the question whether it's more flare-prone.

[helged]

The Apo-Summicron clearly is the better lens. It is sharper off-center, has smoother out-of-focus rendition, and less lateral chromatic aberration. It's a very 'transparent' lens. However the jury is still out on the question whether it's more flare-prone.

 

I tend to agree. At f2, APO-50 excels all lenses I have had/have access to. Af f2, this includes flare, which is almost non-existent. Sharpness is great and the out-of-focus rendering is beautiful.

 

The lens flares (but not necessarily worse than e.g. 50 Summilux) when highlights hit the frontal lens elements at an angle of about 15 degrees. The transition between flaring and no-flaring is quite distinct, so visual inspection through the EVF (for M240, that is), easily uncovers this.

 

The in-built lens shade is on the short side, so some might add on a longer lens shade.

 

Some copies of the lens generates reduced central contrast/internal flaring - others not (see twin thread).

[L1913]

Again apologies, I am very much an amateur, but won't a simple UV filter solve issues with flaring? Or does putting a filter over the lens destroy the benefits of the Leica glass?

[Bill W]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This all should have stayed in the original thread. The issue is still the APO 50. I have not been able to make mine exhibit the same issues. I am not a lens tester of course.

[MarkP]

This all should have stayed in the original thread. The issue is still the APO 50. I have not been able to make mine exhibit the same issues. I am not a lens tester of course.

 

 

Fantastic that you have not had the problem.

If you are a lens user you are a lens tester

[jankap]

Apologies for the off topic question, but why would someone choose the APO 50 Summicron over the 50/1.4 ASPH? Why is the APO more expensive than the 1.4? I thought the faster lenses were harder to make/more expensive?

 

Just have a look at the technical data (MTF, etc.) provided by Leica (see the homepage).

Jan

[Shade]

Its a great lens for sure but I personally honestly have no idea what advantages it might give to my daily photography and professional photography when compared to the summilux ASPH. The weight itself is almost the same with a summilux FYI, and while its slightly shorter, I dont find its compactness a very much benefit.

 

It is indeed a very very sharp lens with detailed micro contrasts, but I find my summilux ASPH at F2 provides indifferent results (yes I have tested one for a very short time - my opinion MAY change after a longer usage time)..

 

When one said the bokeh is smoother, I find it subjective, I dont find anything harsh at all with my Summilux asph, so Im not sure how you define something smoother than the Summilux ASPH.

 

Of course you need to understand that the summilux ASPH in reality is also an APO lens (yes leica confirmed this in an article somewhere), and given the floating design, it also provides better "accuracy" when shooting at all apertures. So I personally still think the Summilux (APO) Asph is still a pinnacle in Leica's 50 line-up (lets not bring the noct in, its IMHO a specialty lens).

 

The APO Asph cron is no slouch thats for certain. Is it better? Thats for you to decide. For my line of work and hobby, no - its not better. At least not that I can see, or not that I am willing to spend extra money on. I still prefer the SUMMILUX asph as my main lens.

 

Note: there are some reports of the Apo Cron flaring just like the non-apo versions. In my REALLY short time of usage I have not been able to produce it.

[Erik Gunst Lund]

.....

Of course you need to understand that the summilux ASPH in reality is also an APO lens (yes leica confirmed this in an article somewhere), and given the floating design, it also provides better "accuracy" when shooting at all apertures....

 

Just for the record, the APO Summicron also has a floating lens element.

[01af]

I dont find its compactness a very much benefit.

That's right. While it is smaller than the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph, the difference hardly is a reason to switch. If compactness is paramount to you then better go for the Summarit-M 50 mm or Elmar-M 50 mm.

 

 

It is indeed a very very sharp lens with detailed micro contrasts, but I find my Summilux-M 50 mm Asph at f/2 provides indifferent results (yes, I have tested one for a very short time—my opinion MAY change after a longer usage time).

Your opinion WILL change after a longer usage time.

 

At the frame's center, there's not much (hardly any) difference between Summilux and Apo-Summicron at apertures like f/2 and f/2.8 ... but at an image height half-way between center and corner, and farther out from there, the difference is surprisingly big.

 

 

When one said the bokeh is smoother, I find it subjective, I don't find anything harsh at all with my Summilux-M 50 mm Asph, so I'm not sure how you define something smoother than [this].

Shoot the same subject with both lenses so there's some out-of-focus foreground and background, and the different bokehs will jump right out at you. There is absolutely nothing 'subjective' about it. In fact, the smoother bokeh and more natural transitions from sharp to blurred at the depth-of-field limits are the primary reasons why someone would prefer the Apo-Summicron over the Summilux. The improved sharpness is very nice, too, but of secondary importance in my opinion.

 

 

Of course you need to understand that the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph in reality is also an apo lens (yes, Leica confirmed this in an article somewhere) ...

Yes, it was in an interview David Farkas held with Peter Karbe back in 2008. Mr Karbe said the Summilux's level of chromatic aberration correction was high enough to justify an 'Apo' name ... but they refrained from actually calling it 'Apo-Summilux' because back then, they felt it would sound funny for a 50 mm lens.

 

Anyway, the Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph's level of chromatic aberration correction is even higher than the Summilux's (as you can actually see in pictures when looking closely), so from today's point of view, the former having an 'Apo' designation and the latter not does make sense.

 

 

... and given the floating design, it also provides better 'accuracy' when shooting at all apertures. So I personally still think the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph is still a pinnacle in Leica's 50 line-up ...

The Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph incorporates floating elements, too. And no, they don't provide better accuracy, or performance, across all apertures but across all focus distances.

[Shade]

Olaf, your responses are much appreciated and I will have to find myself a longer loaner to try it out.. Unfortunately we do not have the luxury of leica rentals in my country so that is definitely out of the question!

[algrove]

Shade-If you can afford it and do not need 0.95 or 1.4 often, it IS the 50 to get right now. I did not realize 01af owned one. Congrats.

[jaapv]

Again apologies, I am very much an amateur, but won't a simple UV filter solve issues with flaring? Or does putting a filter over the lens destroy the benefits of the Leica glass?

Putting an (UV) filter on a lens -any lens- will increase flare, not reduce it.

[01af]

I did not realize 01af owned one.

Oops!? How did you realise this? Because in fact, I don't own one.

[Paul J]

Putting an (UV) filter on a lens -any lens- will increase flare, not reduce it.

 

And by quite alot some times. Flare and reflections too.

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!

[algrove]

Oops!? How did you realise this? Because in fact, I don't own one.

 

Oops, Thought so.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[01af]

And by quite alot some times. Flare and reflections too.

I like the "Canon" picture best.

[algrove]

I also vote Canon for this example.