Summilux-SL 50 MM F/1,4 ASPH

[luigi bertolotti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Though not at all interested into, I find a bit unpleasant that the designers of this beast seem to have thought something like "given that Zeiss has made acceptable, and maybe even fashionable, a BIG one like the Otus 55, why not to follow their trend ?"

 

On a joke mood (but not too much... )... well this is really a PRO lens... should I go around with it at my neck I'd expect people saying "who hell pretends to be that guy ?"    At least, when happens that I take out a Telyt 400/560 is clear to anyone that it's a long distance lens...  

Edited September 23, 2016 by luigi bertolotti

[jaapv]

I'm sure the size is needed for stratospheric performance, but for my mere mortal photography I have a feeling it would be vast overkill. I fear that the whole philosophy of the system, the very best quality regardless of size, is not what I am looking for in a camera system. I prefer optimal quality in an elegant package.

[Advertisement]

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

[toyfel]

I am not so sure that 'stratospheric performance' cannot be achieved with a smaller lens. However, such a smaller lens is likely to be more expensive. Unfortunately, I would be as uncomfortable with a higher price as I am now with the size of the current SL lenses.

[thighslapper]

I am not so sure that 'stratospheric performance' cannot be achieved with a smaller lens. However, such a smaller lens is likely to be more expensive. 

.... it has ..... with the 50/2 apo.

 

trying to get the same performance with an AF lens is a different matter ..... the position, size and weight of the focussing element is critical...... if AF is to be halfway fast and accurate ...... and squeezing in the motor and all the other stuff dictates the final size. 

[Guest VVJ]

Interesting discussions.  To me one thing has become clear...

 

Many people are willing to "tolerate" the bulk of the zooms for their versatility.  The primes... not so much...

 

I hope Leica is reading as well...

[jip]

There was no real world difference between the Canon 70-200 f4L which had IS and non IS versions. So did the first 70-200 2.8L. With the f4, strictly based on measurements the IS version was *slightly* sharper. But in the real world the real difference was that the IS version suffered less from poor technique and handholding. Canon are the only ones I can remember that have had IS and non IS versions side by side and in all cases the only difference was cost.

 

Any optical differences are insignificant compared to the difference IS makes to getting a steady shot with reduced camera shake.

 

Gordon

 

It's because if you buy those lenses without IS you are basically buying a optical design build for IS without the IS in it  

[jip]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

They took the 70 summarit from the S system and made it 50mm 1.4 haha 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

It's because if you buy those lenses without IS you are basically buying a optical design build for IS without the IS in it

 

I expect that you are possibly correct. I'm not sure but it seems likely. I did have both but sold the non IS immediately upon purchasing the IS version. I know I got more keepers from the IS version.

 

I understand the idea that a group that can move possibly slightly degrades performance. I'm just not sure it's true. Canon's L tele's have gotten better despite the addition of IS. There's probably a size/weight penalty but with modern manufacturing I don't know if a modern IS lens won't be just as good as a non IS version.

 

Then again I still think Leica should have put IBIS in the SL.

 

Gordon

[FlashGordonPhotography]

They took the 70 summarit from the S system and made it 50mm 1.4 haha 

 

I think the 70 is smaller....

 

But the 70 with the SL adaptor (which I have) does look about right.

 

Gordon

[tom0511]

All people post how they love Otus and Sigma ART and then they complain when Leica presents a lens with same size ?!?
However it looks like the Summicrons 35,75,90 might be a little but smaller/lighter.

[jaapv]

Love the Otus and Sigma Art? Errr.. no ~Ugly ungainly lumps....

[steppenw0lf]

I also find the Otus and the Art lenses overkill for an average user like me. But I agree that it is ridiculous to love the Otus and hate the new Summilux SL. I do not worry what others think if I should be using this lens - if they love to make their deduction solely from the way a photographer or any person looks, then it is their problem. By the way I find photographing is not  for "looking good" (the model or subject maybe sometimes yes, ok., but the photographer usually not). Though it llooks often different in marketing campaigns.

 

Even though the Summilux SL is clearly cheaper than the Apo 50, I am still more worried about the price than the looks of the lens and also worried about the usability. So instead of the two "giants" mentioned I would prefer a less stellar performer with a more moderate aperture but with added macro capability. (Summicron 50 Macro)  Compare to the M 4/90 macro. It looks very "humble" on a camera, but offers many things people like in lenses, also very high IQ. But it is unfortunately also very expensive (for its humble appearance). (By the way the Apo50 can be abused for macro with goof IQ, but with limited possibilities as the existing macro ring is too large).

 

At the same time I understand completely that Leica has chosen this format for the 50. It is the current trend that testers expect, it offers high IQ and it is "cheaper" or more economic to build a giant, than proving against the rest of the world, that a design as small as the Apo50 is the best. (It is less risk for the company).

 

As a user or professional you can think it is good they did it this way, because now you can choose what you prefer. Or you could even buy both, as a professional, and even add an Otus 55 to be on the safe side.  

 

As an average user i'd like to buy it, because I am in need of SL primes and a 50 is never a mistake. But regarding the budget I will probably have to rethink several times and currently think I will not buy it. After all I have the R lenses and often they are very nice stopgaps. But there is also the psychological problem - what if I do not buy it now, but only in three years, and what if it costs then twice as much ...   

I am also glad about the roadmap, because the Apo Summicron 90 is always a desirable lens. And I am afraid the price will not be much lower than the 50. So maybe I should save my pennies for this lens - because a 90 gives me usually more keepers than a 50. But again I have the R stopgaps "and don't need any additional lenses".    

Edited September 24, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[Leicaiste]

 

I am also glad about the roadmap, because the Apo Summicron 90 is always a desirable lens. And I am afraid the price will not be much lower than the 50. So maybe I should save my pennies for this lens - because a 90 gives me usually more keepers than a 50. But again I have the R stopgaps "and don't need any additional lenses".

 

 

Two days ago at the Photokina, I had a good look at the mockups of the four new SL lenses on the road map.

 

The only SL lens that seems to have a normal size is the 90/2 Summicron.

 

But there was no mockup of the lens hood.

 

 

[toyfel]

Two days ago at the Photokina, I had a good look at the mockups of the four new SL lenses on the road map.

 

The only SL lens that seems to have a normal size is the 90/2 Summicron.

 

But there was no mockup of the lens hood.

 

 

thanks for sharing that information. Do you recall how big the 35/2 Summicron-SL mockup was compared to the 50/1.4 Summilux-SL? 

[steppenw0lf]

Two days ago at the Photokina, I had a good look at the mockups of the four new SL lenses on the road map.

 

The only SL lens that seems to have a normal size is the 90/2 Summicron.

 

But there was no mockup of the lens hood.

 

 

 

I assume that means the hood is not built-in. This is a step back from the R-models that look very compact and are very well designed with their built-in hood. Too bad ...

[steppenw0lf]

thanks for sharing that information. Do you recall how big the 35/2 Summicron-SL mockup was compared to the 50/1.4 Summilux-SL? 

There is a film/video that shows the current and new lenses. When you stop it, you can see a comparison in one frame.

I will add the link as soon as I find it again. It looked very similar to the 75. (both mock). I guess 1.5 cm less than the 90, 2.5 cm less than the 50.       

 

Currently it is the entry 4 of this website.  (Sep 22, 7.58 am)

https://www.facebook.com/LeicaCamera/?hc_ref=PAGES_TIMELINE

 

Maybe the direct link works, too:

https://scontent-fra3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t42.1790-29/14454804_833053703460760_4727984352594493440_n.mp4?efg=eyJybHIiOjE1MDAsInJsYSI6MTIxMiwidmVuY29kZV90YWciOiJ2M182NDBfY3JmXzIzX21haW5fMy4wX3NkIn0%3D&rl=1500&vabr=464&oh=2a02e02f8161d3829e1bad15af1a557e&oe=57E6A541

Edited September 24, 2016 by steppenw0lf

[toyfel]

There is a film/video that shows the current and new lenses. When you stop it, you can see a comparison in one frame.

I will add the link as soon as I find it again. It looked very similar to the 75. (both mock). I guess 1.5 cm less than the 90, 2.5 cm less than the 50.       

 

 

 

Thanks!

I had seen that video before but must have missed the sequence where they very briefly had the 35/2 in the frame as well.

In the video the 35/2 looks a little bit smaller than the 50/1.4 and slightly fatter and about the same length as the other summicrons . An image shown on reddot forum gives a slightly different view. Well, while the summicrons may be somewhat smaller than the summilux, they are still quite hefty in size. 

 

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!

 

http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2016/09/photokina-2016-day-1-checking-out-the-50mm-summilux-sl-asph-and-multifunction-handgrip/

 

[alan.y]

They took the 70 summarit from the S system and made it 50mm 1.4 haha 

 

No, seriously, I wonder if the SL 50/1.4 is meant to cover a bigger sensor than 35mm full frame, and by extension whether Leica is going to release a medium format SL. The mount seems big enough to accommodate a bigger sensor.

[gpwhite]

Sean Reid Reviews has posted a very nice, concise snapshot report from his time with the SL 50 Summilux at Photokina. For anyone interested in this lens, I do not see how you cannot spend the small amount to subscribe for a year and see his examples and evaluation...  you likely will not have your lens in less than a year, anyways, right Leica? 

 

http://www.reidreviews.com

 

In brief, SL 50 Summilux images look even edgier than those from the APO Summicron 90 ASPH, through my eyes. Surely to be a popular benchmark of a sort, this hunk seems to render at the opposite end of the scale from Karbe's first go at Summilux 50 with the last pre-ASPH version (11868).

 

[i pay Sean the full $38, btw]

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[LocalHero1953]

Interesting discussions.  To me one thing has become clear...

 

Many people are willing to "tolerate" the bulk of the zooms for their versatility.  The primes... not so much...

 

I hope Leica is reading as well...

+1

I don't need a prime 50 for the SL for my use, given that I have the zoom. I am grateful that it is so large that I am not tempted by it either.