50 f/1.4 vs 50 f/2

[rcoles]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am interested in the 50 f/1.4 for the narrow depth of field. So, I would like to know if the f/1.4 is a lot more difficult to focus wide open than the 50 f/2. I find the 50 f/2 a little more difficult to focus wide open than the 35 f/2.

Thanks

Bob

[Advertisement]

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

[thighslapper]

well..... therein lies 2 answers.....

 

from a viewfinder point of view........ no.....

 

from mechanical point of view.....yes....

 

my 1.4 is (like most if you read the reviews) distinctly stiff and to be honest using it with the finger tab actually accentuates this problem... focussing can be a bit jerky and fiddly.

 

allegedly it's meant to loosen up with use ..... but a fair few folk seem to send them in for tinkering with... with variable results.

 

if you try running this lens in and out with the caps on you will notice that there is a distinct 'vacumn' effect and obviously the moving bits must run to very tight tolerances

 

f2 is silky smooth in comparison.

 

I have both and prefer the images from the 1.4 even though it can be a pain to use......

 

also....... I got an f2 off the shelf the next day but had to move heaven and earth to locate and snaffle a 1.4.

 

hope that helps.....

[UliWer]

I have no issues with the mechanical focussing of the 50 Summilux asph. It's not as smooth as my 50 lux pre-asph., but much smoother than my lenses for 90 or 135 mm. Though one often reads that the 50 lux asph has some stiffness so there may be differences between indivdual examples of this lens.

 

Concerning focussing exactly with the viewfinder, one might find reasons to state a significant difference between F/1.4 and f/2. DOF for f/1.4 is much smaller than for one stop less. On the other hand we are talking about Leica lenses, which are said to have extraordinary sharpness and resolution. If you want to make full use of this, focussing at f/2 must be as exact as for f/1.4. Only if you focus spot on, your lens shows it's maximum performance. May be you won't notice if you are slightly off at f/5.6 but at f/2 you will see the difference.

 

So if you want to compromise, f/2 may be a little bit more forgiving; but why buying a Leica lens if you want to compromise?

[scjohn]

I don't have the 2.0 but the 1.4 is easy and wildly sharp compared to the 1.0 nocti

[ady]

Hallo, I've got both lenses and the answer for is yes! So if I got a moving sujet I prefer the Con.

Ady

[henning]

I've had my 50/1.4 ASPH since shortly after it came out. It's as smooth and even as any Leica lens I've had. It was stiff at first, but not as bad as the 75/1.4 I bought after it had sat on the dealer's shelf a number of years, nor the 90/2 AA for the first year or two.

 

I've bought new Leica lenses since the 70's (in the sixties it was all used) and they have almost all been a bit stiff and cranky for the first while. Take a couple of thousand photos with them and they start behaving themselves.

 

Henning

[MikeD700]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dof at f2.0 with a 50 is already razor thin at close to intermediate distances (<5 m's); at f1.4 it becomes very very difficult to focus accurately, even on a stationary subject.

 

Try it out or study one of the many dof diagrams you can find on the net; you'll see what I mean.

[bocaburger]

In my case it's more equal, because my Cron focuses 30% closer than my Lux. But other than modern high-end AF DSLRs (and only when set to constantly focus, and only when there's enough light, and so on) any manual-focus camera is not easy to nail tack-sharp focus when the DOF is down to an inch or under, unless the camera is on a tripod and the subject is still.

[j_lir]

i have a 50 lux thats the most smooth of all my lenses.

pm me n ill tell you all about it.

[wda]

Focusing at full aperture is critical, no matter which lens applies. Apart from mechanical issues, the laws of physics defines the increasingly slender DOF as the maximum aperture increases.

 

After a year of fruitless waiting, I chose to buy an available Summicron. I am delighted with it in all respects. Unless you intend to shoot a great deal in low-light situations, you may well find the Summicron is all you need. Furthermore, you should have money in the bank for your next lens!

[chriscove]

You would have to prey my 50/1.4 out of my dead hands! It is the my most used lens and by far my fav!!!

[ramosa]

Bob:

 

I had a 50 Cron and recently replaced it with a 50 Lux (both the most recent versions). I do not find the Lux innately more difficult to focus than the Cron. At 2.0, for instance, I think the processes are quite similar--and no more difficult (for me) with one lens versus the other. That said, when you shoot the Lux at 1.4, it is somewhat more difficult than at 2.0, as--of course--you have a narrower depth that can be in focus. It is more difficult, but not prohibitive (in my opinion). Thus, I see the Lux as being beneficial for me--as it offers all the benefits of the Cron, plus the extra stop (which is important to how I shoot).

 

Additionally, I wondered if I would find the somewhat larger size of the Lux to be detrimental. However, I have not noticed this. The Lux feels good on the camera, good in my hands.

 

I have no complaints about the Lux. (That said, the only complaint I had about the Cron was that it was 2.0--and not 1.4.)

 

Both are great lenses. It just depends on how you shoot and whether the extra stop is worth the extra money for you.

 

R

[andrekeli]

Love the 50Lux!!!

 

Just got a copy of mine, after months of searching and waiting....

[luigi bertolotti]

I am interested in the 50 f/1.4 for the narrow depth of field. So, I would like to know if the f/1.4 is a lot more difficult to focus wide open than the 50 f/2. I find the 50 f/2 a little more difficult to focus wide open than the 35 f/2.

Thanks

Bob

Well, to be precise, in itself is not a problem of "difficulty in focusing" : both 50s have the same focusing throw so the action of making the RF to align is virtually the same (even the barrel is similar... things are a little different with lenses that have the old style focusing knob, or have "slower" focusing throw like some old 90mm); of course, the smaller the DOF, the more critical is to obtain a spot-on focus, this is simply a math question, with modern (sharp) lenses... for instance, I have an old Summarit 50 1,5 which i find is "easier" to focus wide open than my Summilux, but is simply a matter of its intrinsic softness at 1,5 (which can be pleasant, many times: I like it as a portrait lens in indoor with M8)

[marknorton]

The 50mm Summicron has the smoothest focussing action of any current M lens (and I have them all apart from the Summarits) and it's an excellent lens. The Summilux has close focus correction which adds complexity and stiffness to the focussing action. I think the M9 and a 50mm Summicron is a classic combination.

[sblutter]

I love them both but the Lux gets heavy over time in the field

 

At 1.4 I try to shoot a few extra frames, bracketing for focus if there's an opportunity. The DOF is very slim indeed.

[cheewai_m6]

i have a 50mm f2, and i've a lot in dark situations at f2, and i've never had any problem with the focussing. i would assume if you can focus at f2, then you'll be fine at f1.4. the rangefinder is more than accurate enough. i seriously don't understand what the problem with focussing at f2 is.

[Guest Overview]

For what it's worth.

I really like the "retro" style Voightlander Heliar 50mm f2 screw mount with M adapter.

It so reminds me of the older lenses I used to use.... infinity lock and all.True, the fact

that one has to hold the focus lock so the whole barrel doesn't turn when changing

f-stops is a bit of bother.... but, hey, just like the old days. This was a limited edition

lens and takes great photos.

Voigtlander Lenses Leica Mount

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[lct]

I am interested in the 50 f/1.4 for the narrow depth of field. So, I would like to know if the f/1.4 is a lot more difficult to focus wide open than the 50 f/2...

At f/2 both 50s focus the same way in my experience. At f/1.4, my hit rates have always been lower with 0.72x Ms, M8 and Epson R-D1. With M9 i don't know. Same results more or less with M3 (0.91x) and M6J (0.85x) but it was with film 6+ years ago and i used the 50/1.4 pre-asph then. FWIW.