Leica Apo-Summicron-M 2/50 APSH

[johnbuckley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

LCT - If you have the tab directly in the middle, and turn each lens to left for its nearest focusing plane, and then all the way to the right for infinity, they are very close in overall 'throw,' as defined by the amount of time it takes to travel the full zigzag route (first left halfway, then all the way to the right.) However, they are different. The APO has a longer way to go to get to 0.7 meters, and a shorter way to go to get to infinity. The Summilux has a more equal distance to travel to get to either end. Still, the overall distance, from 0.7 meters to infinity, is just about the same, just apportioned differently.

 

Put differently, having the tab directly in the middle, the focus ring indicates you are focused at between 1.5 and 2 meters on the APO, and at 1.2 meters on the Summilux. Does that help?

[Erik Gunst Lund]

All this talk about focus throw and ease of focus made me fabricate a focus tap for my 50mm Summicron, I made a Latex copy off the 28mm Elmarit Asph, it has the same diameter and works really well

[01af]

Would you say that the focus throw of the Apo 50/2 Asph is significantly shorter than that of the 50/1.4 Asph?

No. It's only slightly shorter.

 

But the focus throw of the Summilux-M 50 Asph already is too short to begin with. "Too short" does not mean accurate focusing was impossible. It means, accurate focusing is more finnicky and less comfortable than it could be when the throw was just a bit longer. The Noctilux, in direct comparison, is much easier and quicker to focus, due to a significantly longer focus throw.

 

Same with Summilux vs. Apo-Summicron in the 75 mm focal length. With enough effort and concentration, accurate focusing of the Apo-Summicron-M 75 Asph sure is doable. But it's so much nicer (hence quicker) to do with the Summilux-M 75 mm. The only thing that actually takes longer with the Summilux-M 75 mm is moving the focus ring all the way from minimum focus distance to infinity (or vice versa) ... due to the long focus throw, you cannot do that in one single swift move but need to change grip at least once. So, one additional second here. But the important thing is being able to make small changes in focus distance both quickly and accurately—and that is MUCH easier to do with the Summilux-M 75 mm.

[lct]

LCT - If you have the tab directly in the middle, and turn each lens to left for its nearest focusing plane, and then all the way to the right for infinity, they are very close in overall 'throw,' as defined by the amount of time it takes to travel the full zigzag route (first left halfway, then all the way to the right.) However, they are different. The APO has a longer way to go to get to 0.7 meters, and a shorter way to go to get to infinity. The Summilux has a more equal distance to travel to get to either end. Still, the overall distance, from 0.7 meters to infinity, is just about the same, just apportioned differently.

 

Put differently, having the tab directly in the middle, the focus ring indicates you are focused at between 1.5 and 2 meters on the APO, and at 1.2 meters on the Summilux. Does that help?

Yes indeed thanks so the 50 apo's focussing issue, if any, doesn't lie in the length of the focus throw per se, as i suspected, since it is similar to that of tabbed 50/2 v4 and 50/1.4 asph lenses. It could lie in the place of the focus tab instead if i understand well.

[johnbuckley]

No. It's only slightly shorter.

 

But the focus throw of the Summilux-M 50 Asph already is too short to begin with. "Too short" does not mean accurate focusing was impossible. It means, accurate focusing is more finnicky and less comfortable than it could be when the throw was just a bit longer. The Noctilux, in direct comparison, is much easier and quicker to focus, due to a significantly longer focus throw.

 

Same with Summilux vs. Apo-Summicron in the 75 mm focal length. With enough effort and concentration, accurate focusing of the Apo-Summicron-M 75 Asph sure is doable. But it's so much nicer (hence quicker) to do with the Summilux-M 75 mm. The only thing that actually takes longer with the Summilux-M 75 mm is moving the focus ring all the way from minimum focus distance to infinity (or vice versa) ... due to the long focus throw, you cannot do that in one single swift move but need to change grip at least once. So, one additional second here. But the important thing is being able to make small changes in focus distance both quickly and accurately—and that is MUCH easier to do with the Summilux-M 75 mm.

 

I have a Noctilux, an APO, and the Summilux. The APO is just as quick, easy, and accurate in focussing as my 0.95 Noctilux. You are incorrect.

[lct]

Comparing tabbed to untabbed lenses is like comparing apples to bathtubs as Michael said above. Some photogs may well favor the longer focus throw of untabbed lenses like 50/1.4 pre-asph or the current 50/2 for instance but this doesn't mean that the focus throw of tabbed lenses like 50/1.4 asph or 50/2 v4 is necessarily too short. The best proof of this is some of us have no focussing problems with those lenses. Probably because we can reach a similar level of speedness and accuracy with a short move of one finger on a focus tab as with a longer move of two fingers around an untabbed ring. Remains to see is the place of the focus tab itself is not problematic on some lenses like the 50/2 apo, but this is another story.

[Bundestrainer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a Noctilux, an APO, and the Summilux. The APO is just as quick, easy, and accurate in focussing as my 0.95 Noctilux. You are incorrect.

 

I'm afraid I disagree but we might conclude that our personal preferences can differ. It's totally subjective and a matter of practice.

[lct]

Matter of calibration as well. Sharp lenses at fast apertures are naturally more demanding.

[01af]

... but this doesn't mean that the focus throw of tabbed lenses like 50/1.4 asph or 50/2 v4 is necessarily too short. The best proof of this is some of us have no focussing problems with those lenses.

To the contrary—the fact that some of us are having problems, or are unhappy about the situation, is the best proof that focus throws are too short. Back when focus throws generally were much longer than today, no-one complained about them being too long.

 

 

Matter of calibration as well. Sharp lenses at fast apertures are naturally more demanding.

And that exactly is why focus throws should be longer, not shorter. And by the way, calibration has absolutely nothing to do with this. It's important, too, but another matter entirely.

[lct]

I disagree. A long focus throw on a tabbed ring is no warranty that focussing will be better, unless the ring can be used normally as well like the dented one of the 50/1.4 asph.

[insomnia]

If they don't ditch the focussing tab I can't see them making the focus throw longer. The tab is useless for accurate focussing (like with fast 50mm lenses or at close distances) anyway, high friction in the lens (as with the FLE ones) only makes it worse, you will "stutter" to your position.

 

It's just good (and popular) for knowing at which distance the lens is currently focussed, but there could be other solutions for indicating that.

 

It's correct what Olaf says, the Noctilux is a joy to focus whereas sometimes it's a bit of a hassle with the 50/1.4 ASPH.

[wizard]

... but we might conclude that our personal preferences can differ. It's totally subjective and a matter of practice.

 

Which is what I said in post #42 .

[lct]

...The tab is useless for accurate focussing (like with fast 50mm lenses or at close distances) anyway, high friction in the lens (as with the FLE ones) only makes it worse, you will "stutter" to your position...

Focus tabs are accurate for decades and your FLEs should not have anomalous friction. Have them fixed in the first place and you will be as happy as i was when i bought my first tabbed 50/2 in 1981. Nothing new under the sun.

[insomnia]

Focus tabs are accurate for decades and your FLEs should not have anomalous friction. Have them fixed in the first place and you will be as happy as i was when i bought my first tabbed 50/2 in 1981. Nothing new under the sun.

 

Maybe I will get accustomed to it in 30 years My 50/1.4 isn't stiff btw. - but I have had very bad ones in hand.

[lct]

Mine was rather bad as well but my 75/2 and 35/1.4 FLE are OK.

[Bundestrainer]

A couple of hours ago I did some test shots comparing the 50 APO and the 50 Lux ASPH. They can be found here:

 

Flickr: - Hilmo -'s Photostream

[marknorton]

Thank you, I think they reinforce just how much we're into the area of diminishing returns.

[Bundestrainer]

Thank you, I think they reinforce just how much we're into the area of diminishing returns.

 

I absolutely agree. The difference between the two lenses is not that huge in my view.

[Guest borge]

A couple of hours ago I did some test shots comparing the 50 APO and the 50 Lux ASPH. They can be found here:

 

Flickr: - Hilmo -'s Photostream

 

Thanks for posting the comparisons!

I actually prefer the overall rendering of the Summilux on all the comparison images you posted. Very surprised by this myself. I have a Lux ASPH and I was considering the APO but after seeing these real life comparisons I think I'm just let go of the idea of getting the APO.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Bundestrainer]

Thanks for posting the comparisons!

I actually prefer the overall rendering of the Summilux on all the comparison images you posted. Very surprised by this myself. I have a Lux ASPH and I was considering the APO but after seeing these real life comparisons I think I'm just let go of the idea of getting the APO.

 

Same here. I sold my APO.