Jump to content

Looking for (wide-open) examples.. 50 lux 1.4 pre-asph (43/46)?


nameBrandon

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've found a good deal on a pre-asph 50 lux 1.4 (43). From what I understand, the 46 is optically the same as well. I was looking for some examples to evaluate sharpness wide open. I know the ASPH is where the sharp end is, but it's not in the budget, sadly. I'm just curious as to how sharp (or not sharp) the 43 version of the 50 lux is.

 

I have the 50 Planar f/2 which I like, but I'm looking for something with a bit more low-light flexibility. I know the 50 lux won't compete wide-open in the sharpness department, I'm just curious how far off it is.

 

I've searched through flickr, but it's a crapshoot with all the differently coded lenses, so if anyone has some example shots I could look at (bonus points for higher resolution, so I can peep a bit) I would really appreciate it.

 

Thank you! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a Lovely lens, I had the 43 and 46 and kept the 46 as it was virtually identical and focusses at 0.7. There is something special IMO about this lens, the few below are all unsharpened and as they left the camera, jpg and RAW.

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!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a Lovely lens, I had the 43 and 46 and kept the 46 as it was virtually identical and focusses at 0.7. There is something special IMO about this lens, the few below are all unsharpened and as they left the camera, jpg and RAW.

 

Lovely shots!! I really like the look of those, especially the bokeh on the last one.

 

I'll have to look into the MFD on the 43.. I assuming if the 46 goes to 0.7, the 43 is just 1m?

 

I'll have to get the tape measure out and see what a 1m MFD means for portraits as far as filling the frame.

 

Thank you again, that is exactly the kind of images I was trying to find on flickr and could not!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

at f1.7. lovely lens, small, easy to focus, most versatile. don't hesitate :)

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!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Rick, great shots!

 

I think I'm sold, and looking at the price of the e46 (used), I'm definitely looking at the 43 now.

 

It's just a matter of deciding if f1/.4 + 1m MFD is worth it over the Planar's f/2 + 0.7m. I'll have to go back through my old shots and see if I can get a feel for how often I've shot < 1m.

 

Tough call.. :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

you'll have to decide if .7 or 1 meter minimum focusing distance is important to you and your subjects. i'd suggest that the lens quality (mine was part number 11114) will allow you to crop if necessary to close the gap between the two lens models. the duck photo, for example, is about 1/4 of the full frame.

 

good luck

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The E46 is also a little quicker to focus and my copy had lower resistance so I preferred it in use as well. I also like this lens with higher ISO wide open, doesn't seem to clash with M9 noise like some lenses seem too, one at ISO1000 again, no NR or sharpening and just the jpg (the AWB looked well out on the DNG, so if I was to develop I'd tone down the reds and improve the complexion, but you can see the lens draw)

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would struggle to find examples, but when I changed from pre-aspheric to aspheric lens it was the corners which improved the most when shooting wide-open with the aspheric (so how important this is will depend on your subject matter). Centrally there was not the same distinct improvement and although its a few years ago now since I used one, I would say that the pre-aspheric still rates as an excellent fast standard lens. Like other fast Mandler designed pre-aspheric lenses, it exhibited fabulous detail and tonal smoothness when stopped down. In an ideal (and financially unconstrained world) it would be nice to own both lenses!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I did find an old one taken with the E43, this was at 1/20th, so a little softer than it might be.

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!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The first lens I bought a couple years ago when I decided to start doing a little photography again was the version 2 Summilux 50mm (chrome E43, focus to 1m). It's a terrific lens -- sharp, but not too analytical, and with nice Mandler era bokeh.

 

This is one of my very first test shots of our local guitar repair guy in the natural light of his shop, taken just a few days after getting the lens. I'd process it differently now. Anyway . . .

 

Note: Wide open at f/1.4. Lowered the contrast a bit from the original.

 

If you're interested in seeing the real detail, here's a link to the full size image. Focused on his eyes.

 

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8329/8145978958_dcb5aa2caa_o.jpg

 

 

8145978958_da9be60b8a_z.jpg

Edited by brusby
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

My one is a very old E43 (1961) ... perfect glass, a lens I'll never give away which is worth to use wide open, be it for you want to enjoy its pleasant OOF...

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!

 

... or for you are in the dark

(both on M8)

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its one of the first lenses i got for my m, i am still not confident focusing on things that are not close by, they seem not to be sharp, could be me. But on close range portraits i love it.

 

All of these were shot at 1.4 or 2.0:

 

14192845897_b2aba624c0_b.jpgL1001543 by malabito, on Flickr

 

14032355337_868237a326_b.jpgL1000972 by malabito, on Flickr

 

14022138737_762a31775d_b.jpgL1000792 by malabito, on Flickr

 

14097201972_662401d7bf_b.jpgL1000317 by malabito, on Flickr

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...