Jump to content

M9 50/1,4 ASPH and close range sharpness


Leicakillen

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I often take close range images of e.g flowers - at 0,8-1,0 meters. I very often get truly excellent results when using my 90/2,8 Elmarit-M or the very handy 50/2,8 Elmar M. A couple of months ago I bought a Summilux 50 ASPH. When using this for close range at 2,8-4 the results have been somewhat disappointing - not that biting Leica-like sharpness. At the same time I have had some problems with the RF adjustments - so I thought it was due to this. However yesterday I read in LFI 4/2006 that the 50/1,4 ASPH is SOFT at close range and !!?? My 50/2,8 should be sharper than Summilux at close range?! A surprise for me - I got the impression that the Summilux was better in all ways!!

Could anyone of you confirm this? How big is this soft range for the Summilux - up to 1 meter - 1,5?? Is it only when using apertures of 1,4-2,8? Does the new Summicron have this soft tendency as well?

 

Thanks for any input and help,

 

/Anders

Link to post
Share on other sites

....However yesterday I read in LFI 4/2006 that the 50/1,4 ASPH is SOFT at close range and !!?? My 50/2,8 should be sharper than Summilux at close range?! A surprise for me - I got the impression that the Summilux was better in all ways!!

...

 

Are you sure, they said so in the LFI-article? As far as I remember they said the old non-asph 50 Summilux was soft at close focus, whilst the Elmar was always excellent in this range, and the new asph Summilux was the first to top the Elmar.

 

Maybe my remembrance is wrong, as I havn't got the maganzine at hand. I cannot confirm the 50-lux asph to be soft at close distances. Though it can be tricky to get the right focus freehand at close range and with max aperture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you sure, they said so in the LFI-article? As far as I remember they said the old non-asph 50 Summilux was soft at close focus, whilst the Elmar was always excellent in this range, and the new asph Summilux was the first to top the Elmar.

 

On page 42 LFI 4/2006 I read in a test of the Summilux-M 50/1,4 ASPH " At one meter range and f/1,4 a certain softness cannot be denied, while a f/5,6 the reproduction ...gains fantastic plasticity".

 

/Anders

Link to post
Share on other sites

O.k.! Well, if one would deny a "certain" softness at f/1.4 I'd ask what he was talking about.

 

I am not sure what the "softness-results" would be if you compared the 50 lux asph at f/1.4 and the Elmar at f/2.8, though I am rather sure if you compare both at f/5.6.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My Summilux 50 ASPH is slightly off focus even though it has been to Leica once for calibration. Are you sure that your is spot on? A small focus error is most visible at close range.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adan in a thread 'In Praise of the Mandler lenses' [Customer Forum]: "Whether by chance or by design, it [the 50mm Summicron] has very good close-up performance (.7 meters), one reason why I prefer it to the 50 'lux ASPH, which is incredible at infinity @ f/1.4, but has always gone soft for me in the under-1-meter range."

 

This was what I found, notwithstanding focus checks showing the focus was accurate at short distances. Excellent lens above 3m; but recently I found a preaspheric black paint Summilux which eclipsed the more up to date ASPH I had (now sold!) in pretty well every respect. In fact for flowers at close distances my v4 Summicron 35 was much sharper.

There is always the question of sample variations but at around 700mm @ f1.4 the depth of field is minuscule.

 

Wall at 45 degrees to axis of lens (50 Summilux preasph) f1.4, c700mm. Focus on BluTack blob.

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lux 50 asph, f/1.4, 0.7 meter. Good enough for me.

(R-D1, 800 iso, 100% crop & FF, hand held)

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I think I may know what your issue is. If you focus and recompose at the closest focusing distance the chances of achieving correct focus is very slim, even if you compensate. Also at this distance I have seen signs of 'glow' or softening of fine details especially if what you're shooting is backlit and not a flat plane. This is not a fault of the lens, but rather an engineering feet almost imposible to overcome in lens design. This is the closest lens to perfect in 50mm, and nothing comes close.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I think I may know what your issue is. If you focus and recompose at the closest focusing distance the chances of achieving correct focus is very slim, even if you compensate. Also at this distance I have seen signs of 'glow' or softening of fine details especially if what you're shooting is backlit and not a flat plane. This is not a fault of the lens, but rather an engineering feet almost imposible to overcome in lens design. This is the closest lens to perfect in 50mm, and nothing comes close.

 

Thanks very much leicashot. Your image is perfect - exactly the kind of quality I am looking for ( 3k? - I take it!)!! If this is at 0,7 m and full open or 2,0 then this proves I am wrong - this is NOT soft. Hmmm - hope I do not have a bad version of the Summilux.....

 

BTW - nice girl too!!

 

/Anders

Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, Puts has a similar opinion in his report: "When you are in the close up distances from 0.7 to about 1 meter, the floating element can improve matters quite a bit, but then at the wider apertures we get soft images. For best quality in this focusing range, we need to stop down to /5.6 or smaller to get good imagery."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice pic but f/2. Problem is at f/1.4 according to the OP.

 

That is a rather confused post. Firstly which photo is at f/2?

You cannot validly compare the performance of any lens at f/1.4 to another at f/2.8 for example (the OP's other mentioned lens).

The Summilux 50 ASPH is specifically designed for better close performance as well.

Web versions in any event of course provide only general impressions and are subject to many other variables.

If you are referring to the photo just above your post of the people with made up 'zombie like' injuries plus the 100% crop , it looks to be a very decent illustration to my eyes. The poster says that it was shot wide open.

Link to post
Share on other sites

EXIF says f/2 no?

 

Lightroom sometimes interpret my shots at 1.4 as 1.7 or 2.0. I guess the way lightroom figure out the aperture based on exposure it´s not as accurate as electronic transmission from DSLR´s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I often take close range images of e.g flowers - at 0,8-1,0 meters. I very often get truly excellent results when using my 90/2,8 Elmarit-M or the very handy 50/2,8 Elmar M. A couple of months ago I bought a Summilux 50 ASPH. When using this for close range at 2,8-4 the results have been somewhat disappointing - not that biting Leica-like sharpness. At the same time I have had some problems with the RF adjustments - so I thought it was due to this. However yesterday I read in LFI 4/2006 that the 50/1,4 ASPH is SOFT at close range and !!?? My 50/2,8 should be sharper than Summilux at close range?! A surprise for me - I got the impression that the Summilux was better in all ways!!

Could anyone of you confirm this? How big is this soft range for the Summilux - up to 1 meter - 1,5?? Is it only when using apertures of 1,4-2,8? Does the new Summicron have this soft tendency as well?

 

Thanks for any input and help,

 

/Anders

 

Those close range shots are more of an SLR subject, and therefore rangefinder lenses won't be calibrated for that. That's my thinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes i was on PSE but CS3 says f/2 as well.

LCT,

 

With either software it's only reading the exif value of the camera's estimation of the f/stop based on the difference between the blue dot reading and the exposure I believe.

 

To my eye the picture has shallow enough depth of focus to be f/1.4 and I'm prepared to take Leicashot at his word.:)

 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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