The 50mm asph summilux is a frustrating tease

[Lieberman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't know what to call this tread. For the most part i is me re-iterating the problems that others have had. On the other, I'm not sure what to do next. I gone through the calibration problem... I've also had the hood problem... ...

 

When the stars align, this lens is absolute magic. Every other time, the focus is slightly off. It has reached the point where it is beginning to ruin my shot discipline; where i set my camera up for continuous shot and i rock my body forward and back hoping one of the images will be in focus - "focus bracketing"

 

How have you dealt with the focusing bracketing issue?

Has anyone switched to the 50mm summicron (or another lens) to deal with the issue?

 

note: I use a MP (film) and a 240 side by side. I keep the summilux on the 240; and the 35 summicron on the MP. However, I do occasionally switch the lenses on the bodies as situations require it.

 

 

See your dealer and try different diopters even if you do not need glasses. Also be aware of the fact that focus shift depends on the aperture you use.

If diopters dont help the camera should be adjusted. My problem of defocus was solved by adjusting the viewfinder plus (!) the position of the sensor in the camera. This can only be done in the factory service plant in Wetzlar.

[Advertisement]

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

[piblondin]

I'm finding myself in the same boat as the OP, unsure if it's the lens or my inability to focus correctly. I'm not totally convinced it's the latter because I find f/4 just as difficult as f/1.4--sometimes it just seems like nothing at all is in focus. (I have no problems with my 35/1.4 at any aperture.)

[asabet]

I'm finding myself in the same boat as the OP, unsure if it's the lens or my inability to focus correctly. I'm not totally convinced it's the latter because I find f/4 just as difficult as f/1.4--sometimes it just seems like nothing at all is in focus. (I have no problems with my 35/1.4 at any aperture.)

 

If you can nail focus with your 35 wide open and can't focus the 50 at f/4, then the calibration is off on either your 50 or your camera, more likely the former.

[South Bird]

It is still a magical lens at f2.8. The plane of focus at f1.4 is so thin that with a close subject you have to pick the eye you want in focus. Try 2.8 and see what happens then move to 1.4 if all is well.

[MarkP]

I think it must be a calibration or user (no offence intended) issue.

 

I have not had problems with focusing accuracy at any aperture (although I tend not to regularly use f1.4) using my 1.4/50 Summilux ASPH (FLE) on my M9, Monochrom or M. Focusing is easier on the M with it's improved rangefinder.

[Leitz.]

On 10/19/2014 at 4:44 PM, Dikaiosune01 said:

I don't know what to call this tread. For the most part i is me re-iterating the problems that others have had. On the other, I'm not sure what to do next. I gone through the calibration problem... I've also had the hood problem... ...

 

When the stars align, this lens is absolute magic. Every other time, the focus is slightly off. It has reached the point where it is beginning to ruin my shot discipline; where i set my camera up for continuous shot and i rock my body forward and back hoping one of the images will be in focus - "focus bracketing"

 

How have you dealt with the focusing bracketing issue?

Has anyone switched to the 50mm summicron (or another lens) to deal with the issue?

 

note: I use a MP (film) and a 240 side by side. I keep the summilux on the 240; and the 35 summicron on the MP. However, I do occasionally switch the lenses on the bodies as situations require it.

I get the point of f1.4 on film but I wouldn’t get it on a digital M. 

I don’t need to worry about ISO, and I know some people like that blurry look but not me. I want to be able to see everything in a photo. I would never shoot at f1.4. F2 is plenty and much easier to focus. I used to have the Voigtlander f1.5. Never again. F2 or f2.8 for me. 

I shoot at f2 maybe 1% of the time anyway. 

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

50 minutes ago, Leitz. said:

I get the point of f1.4 on film but I wouldn’t get it on a digital M. 

I don’t need to worry about ISO, and I know some people like that blurry look but not me. I want to be able to see everything in a photo. I would never shoot at f1.4. F2 is plenty and much easier to focus. I used to have the Voigtlander f1.5. Never again. F2 or f2.8 for me. 

I shoot at f2 maybe 1% of the time anyway. 

Hopefully the OP resolved his issues 8 years ago when this was posted.

Jeff

[Dikaiosune01]

On 2/20/2023 at 12:06 AM, Jeff S said:

Hopefully the OP resolved his issues 8 years ago when this was posted.

Update. 

These days, I cut my teeth on summicrons. I prefer to shoot at F8 and zone focus giving me both speed and accuracy. When i need to shoot wide open, summicrons and F/2.5 summarits give me excellent preformance. 

As the years lapsed, there were fewer and fewer times where I found myself wanting to shoot wide open with the summilux asph. I still have it, but at some point, it might be best to give it a better home where it can be better appreciated for what it is. In the meantime, I keep it as a secondary lens for when I know I need to shoot 1.4. 

[fil-m]

10 minutes ago, Dikaiosune01 said:

Update. 

These days, I cut my teeth on summicrons. I prefer to shoot at F8 and zone focus giving me both speed and accuracy. When i need to shoot wide open, summicrons and F/2.5 summarits give me excellent preformance. 

As the years lapsed, there were fewer and fewer times where I found myself wanting to shoot wide open with the summilux asph. I still have it, but at some point, it might be best to give it a better home where it can be better appreciated for what it is. In the meantime, I keep it as a secondary lens for when I know I need to shoot 1.4. 

I tend to agree, Summicron are great for street shooting. I am working to increase my accuracy at making successful 35mm shots wide open which is more reasonable at f2 than say, f1.4. Any 35mm or 50mm Summicron (or Summarit) provides a great balance between object separation, focusing accuracy plus the compact form factor which make them extremely practical. Many of the grandmasters of photography did not need amazing bokeh for their timeless shots, focusing more on lighting, composition, geometry, etc.  

I tend to use the Summilux and Noct 50/1 as secondary lenses for portraits and when I really want to shoot with "great" subject separation (on purpose) for more "artistic" or creative shots.

The only disruptive lens IMHO is the Steel Rim remake because it is so compact (more so than any of the new Summicrons), reasonably sharp at 2.8 while also allowing the more occasional, artistic shot wide open.