gib_robinson Posted January 14, 2011 Share #1 Posted January 14, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am considering trading in my 50 'cron (current) along with some other gear on a 50 'lux. It's a fairly big leap financially so I am considering whether it is worth it, Obviously it gives me the extra stop and wide open it is supposed to be very good, but what about image quality in the middle stops - f/4-8? Is there a noticeable difference between the current 'lux and 'cron? I am hesitating in part because buying the 50mm 'lux would eliminate the possibility of buying a 35mm 'lux. I use my 35mm 'cron more than any other lens but it does have flare control issues and I would guess the 'lux is better all around -- flare, color, resolution edge-to-edge. I don't need the extra stop as much with the 35 but I covet the flare control and better IQ. I would love some help from experienced users sorting out these issues. Thanks, --Gib Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 14, 2011 Posted January 14, 2011 Hi gib_robinson, Take a look here 50 'lux vs 50 'cron. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pascal_meheut Posted January 14, 2011 Share #2 Posted January 14, 2011 I made the change because I wanted the extra f-stop. I'm quite happy with the 50/1.4 ASPH and I'm using it often wide-open. It is an amazing lens and I have the feeling that it has an extra-something over the cron when it comes to rendering (or drawing as Sean Reid says). But I would not made the change based on any difference between f/4 and f/8. Even if they are some, I doubt you'll see them in printed image as the Summicron is still an excellent lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxJ1961 Posted January 14, 2011 Share #3 Posted January 14, 2011 I agree. I sold my 50 Cron for the 50 Lux ASPH for the extra stop. I use it quite often wide open. Some believe that it is the best 50mm lens ever made This is what Erwin Puts says about the Lux: General conclusion. The new Summilux-M 1:1.4/50mm ASPH is the best high-speed general-purpose lens in the Leica range. Its wide open performance is outstandingly good (in some respects like flare even better than the Sumicron at f/2). Stopped down it is better than the Summicron 2/50mm. It can be used as the universal standard lens and can be deployed without any restrictions in image quality at all apertures and over the whole image field. If you want only one lens for your M camera, this one should be the prime choice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted January 14, 2011 Share #4 Posted January 14, 2011 Middle apertures are the same. But a waste of money if you do not use it wide open or you turn film over to commercial processors. May as well use a 1960 SLR then. None the less, it is the by far best 50 1.4 lens made for Leica or any other 35 mm camera including SLRs. Weight and cost are the downsides. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 14, 2011 Share #5 Posted January 14, 2011 The always recurring question, which 50... I am fortunate enough to have both and they are very different animals. The CRON is unparalleled in edge-to-edge sharpnes while the LUX is simply magical. Both are extremely effective lenses in skilled hands. Putting all things on the scale, I must admit I would vote slightly in favor of the LUX even if I am a fan of the CRON and in well lit conditions it is simply unbeatable (despite having to watch out for some flare...). If you shoot in difficult light conditions and use a narrow DOF to bring out the subjects. The LUX is your baby. If you generally shoot is well lit day time scenes and want unparalleled edge to edge shrapness, stick with your CRON. To be honest you almost can't go wrong if you thake any decision. Good luck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 14, 2011 Share #6 Posted January 14, 2011 I find the SUMMIlux 50 asph a magical lens that usually adds something extra to an image. It often happens that I open an image and find more than I expected:) 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/141685-50-lux-vs-50-cron/?do=findComment&comment=1558622'>More sharing options...
gib_robinson Posted January 15, 2011 Author Share #7 Posted January 15, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) That's a very compelling image Jaap and certainly illustrates the vitality of the lens. Stunning! I do think for various reasons I will go with my original plan which was to trade for the 50 'lux. Thanks, --Gib BTW, Jaap, did you use fill flash or an illuminator? The light in his eyes and on his face is lovely. I don't know how you get that without the second light source. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted January 15, 2011 Share #8 Posted January 15, 2011 Jpegs over the internet sure have quick limitations in terms of illustrating equipment issues. But Jaap's image there is the exception that proves the rule, me thinks. It's the best 50 ever made, by anyone. I don't know that I can remember anyone ever being unhappy with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manicouagan1 Posted January 15, 2011 Share #9 Posted January 15, 2011 In my experience the Summicron is much more prone to flare than the Summilux ASPH. I find that the ability to shoot interiors illuminated by window light without any veiling glare an important advantage of the Summilux ASPH. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted January 15, 2011 Share #10 Posted January 15, 2011 I love the LUX ASPH but some find it too clinically sharp. Something to think about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susapix Posted January 15, 2011 Share #11 Posted January 15, 2011 Seems to me that the biggest issue with the 50 lux is how to get your hands on one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted January 15, 2011 Share #12 Posted January 15, 2011 In my experience the Summicron is much more prone to flare than the Summilux ASPH. I find that the ability to shoot interiors illuminated by window light without any veiling glare an important advantage of the Summilux ASPH. I agree. The Summicron is very prone to nasty flare phenomena which are especially unwelcome in a RF camera – you get no notice until after the fact. The Summilux is remarkably resistant to flare and to internal reflections. This is the main reason why I sold my Summicron in 2005 and replaced it with the 'lux. The rest is icing on the cake. The old man waiting for his morning coffee Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 15, 2011 Share #13 Posted January 15, 2011 I love the LUX ASPH but some find it too clinically sharp. Something to think about. Agree. I much prefer the last pre-asph Summilux for portrait but i use the asph a lot otherwise. Both great lenses IMO. Summicron very good as well, less contrasty than the Lux asph, softer at f/2, smooth bokeh, excellent for portrait. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gib_robinson Posted January 15, 2011 Author Share #14 Posted January 15, 2011 In my experience the Summicron is much more prone to flare than the Summilux ASPH. I find that the ability to shoot interiors illuminated by window light without any veiling glare an important advantage of the Summilux ASPH. I agree. The Summicron is very prone to nasty flare phenomena which are especially unwelcome in a RF camera – you get no notice until after the fact. The Summilux is remarkably resistant to flare and to internal reflections. This is the main reason why I sold my Summicron in 2005 and replaced it with the 'lux. The rest is icing on the cake. The old man waiting for his morning coffee Thank you both. That's a very useful observation. It reminds me that I tend to not to use my 50 Summicron in back-lit situations which I love to photograph with my 28 and 75, neither of which are as flare-prone as my 50 or 35. Flare-resistance is a big plus for me. --Gib Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gib_robinson Posted January 15, 2011 Author Share #15 Posted January 15, 2011 I love the LUX ASPH but some find it too clinically sharp. Something to think about. Agree. I much prefer the last pre-asph Summilux for portrait but i use the asph a lot otherwise. Both great lenses IMO. Summicron very good as well, less contrasty than the Lux asph, softer at f/2, smooth bokeh, excellent for portrait. My wife would certainly agree with you both. I use Canon lenses for her and even then have to avoid the 85 f/1.2 and the 135 :-). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gib_robinson Posted January 15, 2011 Author Share #16 Posted January 15, 2011 Seems to me that the biggest issue with the 50 lux is how to get your hands on one. Yup. I haven't solved that issue yet but I have a good Leica dealer working on it. --G Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted January 15, 2011 Share #17 Posted January 15, 2011 ... back-lit situations which I love to photograph with my 28 and 75, neither of which are as flare-prone as my 50 or 35. Flare-resistance is a big plus for me. Would you please specify which 75 mm lens exactly you are using? By the way, the most flare-resistant lens I ever came across so far is the Leica Summarit-M 35 mm 1:2.5. Great lens in all other aspects, too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 15, 2011 Share #18 Posted January 15, 2011 That's a very compelling image Jaap and certainly illustrates the vitality of the lens. Stunning! I do think for various reasons I will go with my original plan which was to trade for the 50 'lux. Thanks, --Gib BTW, Jaap, did you use fill flash or an illuminator? The light in his eyes and on his face is lovely. I don't know how you get that without the second light source. No - just the natural light Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aesop Posted January 15, 2011 Share #19 Posted January 15, 2011 No - just the natural light ...nice work, Jaap - cracking shot, by any measure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
archi4 Posted January 15, 2011 Share #20 Posted January 15, 2011 Beautiful picture Jaap. The lens rendered beautifully, but you saw both the moment and the light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.