NZDavid Posted July 13, 2013 Share #1 Â Posted July 13, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have a 35 Summicron Asph and a 2/50 Summicron Rigid. I also have a 90 Elmarit which is superb for portraits. For pictures of people with the 35 and 50, what difference is there with the extra stop of the Summilux? Often it is good to include some background detail for environmental portraits but sometimes it is better to isolate the subject. Examples welcome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 13, 2013 Posted July 13, 2013 Hi NZDavid, Take a look here 35 and 50 Summicron vs. Summilux for portraits?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
hoppyman Posted July 14, 2013 Share #2 Â Posted July 14, 2013 Hi David. I guess that this is influenced by what you regard as environmental portraiture? In my experience with the Summilux 35 and 50 you really need to be stopped down to some degree if you want to show background content as more than very OoF anyway. Maybe you are talking about broader framing/compositions than I though? Â My thoughts of course are not intended to be definitive statements, just contributions to the discussion. Â le paradis du chocolat photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com Levitating Izzy photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com L002.jpg photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com For her personal project on young women's self images photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com Natascha in profile photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com Emily 2 photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com I actually rarely use them wide open due to the amount of DoF I am after (nor the 75 or 90 for that matter). Perhaps I am contrarian there, I don't personally enjoy the "Nocti effect" for example. Â When you are getting close in with either focal length of course you need to manage perspective effects as well. Each can work for half to full length type framing of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted July 14, 2013 Author Share #3 Â Posted July 14, 2013 Delightful photos, Geoff, and how does Izzy levitate so nicely!? You reminded me that the 35 'cron is excellent for portraits of people and settings, often composed at speed. I now use this lens most. But those pics with the 1.4/50 Summilux-Asph are dangerous! I am seriously tempted by this lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfhrased Posted July 14, 2013 Share #4 Â Posted July 14, 2013 Delightful photos, Geoff, and how does Izzy levitate so nicely!? You reminded me that the 35 'cron is excellent for portraits of people and settings, often composed at speed. I now use this lens most. But those pics with the 1.4/50 Summilux-Asph are dangerous! I am seriously tempted by this lens. Â The main difference I find is that it's considerably harder to get both eyes in focus at the same time with my 50 1.4 than it was with my 50 2! I mean, in terms of differences other than the phenomenal bokeh the 1.4 has.. go on, you know you want one. Â portrait with the 35 1.4 portrait with the 50 1.4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted July 14, 2013 Share #5 Â Posted July 14, 2013 Delightful photos, Geoff, and how does Izzy levitate so nicely!? You reminded me that the 35 'cron is excellent for portraits of people and settings, often composed at speed. I now use this lens most. But those pics with the 1.4/50 Summilux-Asph are dangerous! I am seriously tempted by this lens. Â Glad you like the examples. I am using my 35 and 50 quite a bit of late with studio lighting too. That are stopped down further for that application. I never subscribed to the viewpoint that they must only be used wide open. Heresy I know These are art nudes and some lingerie so don't look if that offends. http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/art Lingerie set Photo Gallery by Geoff Hopkinson at pbase.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted July 14, 2013 Author Share #6 Â Posted July 14, 2013 Thanks Geoff, very arty and focus is bang on! The Summilux also has a nice look stopped down. Thanks, too, phfrased, lovely shallow DOF and point taken re focusing carefully on the eyes; that can be tricky with any lens. I am getting fuissier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted July 14, 2013 Share #7 Â Posted July 14, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi David. I guess that this is influenced by what you regard as environmental portraiture?In my experience with the Summilux 35 and 50 you really need to be stopped down to some degree if you want to show background content as more than very OoF anyway. Maybe you are talking about broader framing/compositions than I though? Â My thoughts of course are not intended to be definitive statements, just contributions to the discussion. Â le paradis du chocolat photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com Levitating Izzy photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com L002.jpg photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com For her personal project on young women's self images photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com Natascha in profile photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com Emily 2 photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com I actually rarely use them wide open due to the amount of DoF I am after (nor the 75 or 90 for that matter). Perhaps I am contrarian there, I don't personally enjoy the "Nocti effect" for example. Â When you are getting close in with either focal length of course you need to manage perspective effects as well. Each can work for half to full length type framing of course. Â The portrait of Natascha is exquisite. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfhrased Posted July 14, 2013 Share #8 Â Posted July 14, 2013 The portrait of Natascha is exquisite. Â Agreed - very well done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted July 14, 2013 Share #9 Â Posted July 14, 2013 Thanks. Natascha is a successful and beautiful model and delightful, inspiring woman. That actual shot (from a workshop) can fairly be said to be earned. Natascha at one point perched on a bathroom sink to have her face at the high small window and me backed into the shower cubicle to get back to the minimum focus distance! The shot is edited in developing of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted July 14, 2013 Share #10 Â Posted July 14, 2013 I have a 35 Summicron Asph and a 2/50 Summicron Rigid. I also have a 90 Elmarit which is superb for portraits. For pictures of people with the 35 and 50, what difference is there with the extra stop of the Summilux? Often it is good to include some background detail for environmental portraits but sometimes it is better to isolate the subject. Examples welcome. The main argument for a Summilux is for use when lighting is dire and you have reached what you consider the acceptable upper limit setting for ISO. After years of yearning, I added a 50 Summilux but retained my two 50 Summicrons (1966 +2009). In truth, I still use the Summicron more often but enjoy taking the faster lens out to exploit its faster aperture. Â For environmental portraits I find that I need to stop down a little, depending on situation and relative distances, in order to obtain a more realistic balance of relative sharpness between subject and background. I rarely need the Summilux for acute isolation effects. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted July 14, 2013 Share #11 Â Posted July 14, 2013 I have a 35 Summicron Asph and a 2/50 Summicron Rigid. I also have a 90 Elmarit which is superb for portraits. For pictures of people with the 35 and 50, what difference is there with the extra stop of the Summilux? Often it is good to include some background detail for environmental portraits but sometimes it is better to isolate the subject. Examples welcome. The main argument for a Summilux is for use when lighting is dire and you have reached what you consider the acceptable upper limit setting for ISO. After years of yearning, I added a 50 Summilux but retained my two 50 Summicrons (1966 +2009). In truth, I still use the Summicron more often but enjoy taking the faster lens out to exploit its faster aperture. Â For environmental portraits I find that I need to stop down a little, depending on situation and relative distances, in order to obtain a more realistic balance of relative sharpness between subject and background. I rarely need the Summilux for acute isolation effects. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marc G. Posted July 14, 2013 Share #12 Â Posted July 14, 2013 there is a severe difference in character between e.g. a 50 summicron and the 50 summilux asph. rendering of out of focus areas for example. this is where the summilux lenses usually shine. the performance of the 35 and 50 1.4 asph lenses is a bit better in case of the 50 (measured against the 50 summicron version 4 and 5) and simply better in the 35mm focal length. this shows in size and cost of the lenses. Â I love the 50 summilux for portraits. it's a lovely lens and a great all round performer. it's usually glued to whatever leica I currently take pictures with, be it the M-E or the M6ttl. for portraiture it would probably make more sense to use your 35 summicron asph along side with the 50 summilux asph. 35 for environmental stuff where you usually have to stop down for DOF and a 35 provides you with more than a 50. and the 50 with the 1.4 aperture where you get even more shallow DOF. Â (in case you're interested in my pics, you can find a lot of examples with the 50 summilux asph here, just look at the provided EXIF data) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shade Posted July 14, 2013 Share #13 Â Posted July 14, 2013 I find that the 35 are never my favorite for portraits, be it a cron or a lux. However the 50 lux asph is my most favorite. The cron is no slouch. Technicalities aside, the extra stop provides an extra shallower dof that separates the subject even more, while not entirely destroying the background. Of course this is also case by case scenario, I would not hesitate to stop down to include more background detail if I want to.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ansel_Adams Posted July 14, 2013 Share #14 Â Posted July 14, 2013 Am I wrong in thinking there is very little to differentiate one from the other in terms of how they render if you stop down a couple of stops? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfhrased Posted July 15, 2013 Share #15 Â Posted July 15, 2013 Am I wrong in thinking there is very little to differentiate one from the other in terms of how they render if you stop down a couple of stops? Â Probably not wrong, unless you want to talk about sunstars. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jankap Posted July 15, 2013 Share #16 Â Posted July 15, 2013 I have a 35 Summicron Asph and a 2/50 Summicron Rigid. I also have a 90 Elmarit which is superb for portraits. For pictures of people with the 35 and 50, what difference is there with the extra stop of the Summilux? Often it is good to include some background detail for environmental portraits but sometimes it is better to isolate the subject. Examples welcome. Â Ask Thorsten Overgaard too. He doesn`t understand you, if you talk about 4, 5.6 or 8. He works wide open only, with 1.4 and 0.95 lenses. Â With excellent results, also portraits! Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roguewave Posted July 15, 2013 Share #17 Â Posted July 15, 2013 David, in general I must agree with most of the other comments. The Summicron 50 is particularly clean & sharp for straight ahead head shots, even wide open at f2.0 . I recently used one for a series of portraits in B&W. The Cron is superb in many other uses. If I had to choose, I would and have purchased the 50 Summilux and sold my 50 Cron. You can get nearly the same image stopped down 2 or 3 steps with the Lux. In my B&W tests, it was hard to choose which particular elements were more outstanding than others. Â The real value of the 50 Summilux is shooting it wide open. There is so much air & space in the delicate transitions into the oof areas. There's just nothing else like it in the 35mm format. Yes a Nocti is sublime, but it is not a reliable tool that lets you predict the outcome. It can be VERY fickle, but that's ok as well. Â You won't go wrong with either lens. In fact, they make a wondrous tandem, covering the waterfront. Just enjoy the beauty proffered by these magical prisms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share #18 Â Posted July 16, 2013 Thanks for all replies so far, it does seem as if the 50 Summilux is worth considering, but which version? Asph or non-Asph, early version or later? For portraits perhaps the slightly softer less contrasty look and the bokeh of older lenses would help, but pop and sparkle matter as well, something the latest lenses deliver, especially in color. Then, when stopped down, the lens should still perform well and not lag behind the Summicron. Or are the differences minimal? We are fussier when viewing on screen these days! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted July 16, 2013 Share #19  Posted July 16, 2013 More heresy from me perhaps, but I don't hold with the viewpoints that contrast or sharpness or colour or bokeh are fixed values in practice with these (or any lenses) now that our capture is digital. Shooting transparency film might require a different answer though!  Here's the 50 again, is one sharper??? .... ;-) Black Milk "wet look black suspenders" photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com Halves photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com   All of these lenses are capable of great results (and as previously admitted, my Summiluxes seldom actually get used wide open. Your aperture choices may vary ;-)  Personally I am interested in the most predictable accurate focus across the range of apertures and distances with my cameras the way I use them and prefer to resolve as much as possible within my shooting scenario then adjust those values in my developing. Most especially with portraiture. In the instance of bokeh I could demonstrate dramatic differences from the very same lens for example. I'd qualify that by adding that OoF points of light do typically have specific characteristics according to how well the lens is corrected though, which shooters may or may not like!  Now if you REALLY want to talk about great portrait lenses I think we have some 75 threads as well! ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted July 16, 2013 Author Share #20 Â Posted July 16, 2013 You're quite right, Geoff, it's the look you like that matters. Becs is a stunner (not so sure about the haircut for most people but on her it's great). Tricky backlight and exposure. That first one is lovely and has a nice dreamy look so I am picking that is an older lens, a 50? Others are super sharp and sparkly but with detail just where you want it. Results with the 75 are superb. I find the 90 is also a great performer. I absolutely agree nailing the focus and exposure makes a big difference, but then I am used to slide film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.