50mm Summilux has some real competitors

[james.liam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I love this. A new lens that no one has seen, that isn't shipping yet, and already everyone has an opinion about its quality, its desirability, its price, whether the competition will prove it lacking or of limited advantage, etc etc. 

 

I wish I could see the future so clearly! 

 

 

Maybe so but there is a basis for expectations. The M 50 Summilux, released in 1994, was designed during the last days of film. It was and is superb, no CaNikon OEM has ever come close; corpulent contenders Otus and Sigma are only now reaching that level of performance a dozen years on. The reasonable expectation is that size will no longer play the limiting factor and Leica must better that stellar design at the wider apertures.

[Advertisement]

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

[ramarren]

There is basis for the expectation that the new lens will be of superlative quality, yes.

 

But there is absolutely no basis upon which to judge the lens at this time. All such speculation is just hot air and makes no sense.

[steppenw0lf]

The size is obvious from what is known (pictures, interviews, a little shorter than the 24-90, fixed length, same diameter, 82mm filter, weight probably not too far away). Leica says it is designed for maximum optical performance, and sharpness will reach new top values (neue Bestwerte).

The price or its whereabouts are also not completely secret - it cannot be (much) lower than the Summilux-M 50. The upper limit is "non-existant" or rather the price of the Apo 50.

This is already enough information to see it will be a "reference lens" and Leica announces it as such. But unfortunately it is not what I was hoping for. (Actually now not hoping anymore ...   )  ( But this is my fault. ;-)

[phongph]

Hi All!

Please advise when SL Lux 50 f1.4 is released?

Have a nice day!

Thanks!

[ramarren]

The discussion has been about performance primarily. 

Shifting ground to size and weight comparison ... If you expect a Summilux-M 50 sized lens, you will be disappointed. That much is obvious from the preview photos show last October. 

[Suteetat]

I think the biggest competitor to 50/1.4SL will be Leica's own 50/2 apo. 50/1.4SL has AF advantage  but 50/2 apo is much much smaller and lighter. Focus peaking and magnifier certainly make AF less important.

If it performs less than 50/2 apo, personally I don't see any reason to get it, if it is equaled to 50/2 apo, I am not sure that AF alone would convince me to get it since I already have 50/2 apo.

I had 50/1.4 Summilux for Leica M which I sold awhile ago. Already having 50/2 apo, Noctilux 0.95 and a few other more interesting 50-58mm range (not neccessarily better but with different character)

my 50/1.4 lux got left at home more often than not. I really hope that 50/1.4SL will bring something special performance wise to offset the size and weight.

 

Looking at lenscore.org test, Otus is certainly up there wiht 50/2 apo using the same 200mp sensor for testing. I assume that quality wise, 50/1.4SL should at least be very close so with no size and weight benefit and no AF, I am not sure that Otus would be a direct competition as much as 50/2 apo though.

[jonoslack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry, Wilson, but the WATE is the answer for me. The probable size and cost of a new lens  (maybe weight of 1 kg and cost of 8k to 10k dollars) makes it useless for me. And so maybe also for a lot/some other prospective buyers.

All this only for the AF that nobody needs in a UWA lens ...     

 

Remember how many complaints there were about the price of the SL (More than 10k for a AF starter kit). And now again the most expensive (and rather exotic) zooms.  "Cheap" primes are more attractive and would probably find a much bigger market. Look at the reaction of the "foto crowd" towards the X1D. But maybe this is just a short-lived phenomenon.   (Of course I do not know, so take it with a grain of salt.)

 

I would even prefer a "alternative" entry midrange AF zoom, a SL 28-75 with constant 3.4 or 4. For beginners like me.    But less so than the "handy" primes.

HI Stefan

I couldn't agree more about this - the WATE is fine for me - and by the way, if you want a small zoom then the T zooms work very well on the SL . . .

Back to the WATE - it makes it possible to go from 16-280 with three lenses and excellent quality all the way.

 

But I still like my 28 summilux - and I still shoot it wide open (it's great on the SL too)

[jonoslack]

Maybe so but there is a basis for expectations. The M 50 Summilux, released in 1994, was designed during the last days of film. It was and is superb, no CaNikon OEM has ever come close; corpulent contenders Otus and Sigma are only now reaching that level of performance a dozen years on. The reasonable expectation is that size will no longer play the limiting factor and Leica must better that stellar design at the wider apertures.

Actually the current 50 Summilux is a Peter Karbe design from 2004 . . But perhaps you meant the pre-Asph version from Mandler?

[scott kirkpatrick]

For Leica's health, I'm happy to see all the pictures appearing from 24-90 and 90-280 purchasers, but on a recent trip, my most-used SL lenses were the SX 28 (usually not wide open -- I want to catch them all) and APO-SC-R 90.  I didn't have the SX-80-R or the APO-Macro Elmarit-R 100 with me, but each of those has a very special character on the SL when needed.  The mid range to me is M country (or recently, Fuji X Pro2).

 

scott

[james.liam]

Actually the current 50 Summilux is a Peter Karbe design from 2004 . . But perhaps you meant the pre-Asph version from Mandler?

 

Meant to write 2004, sorry Jono.

[wlaidlaw]

For what a WATE would cost to re-buy, it is not wide enough. I will soldier on with my 18SEM and 16mm Zenitar until such time as Leica bring out a true SL wide angle zoom. I am sure it will come at some point and I would guess sooner rather than later. If it is later, I will just buy a Canon 11-24/f4 and the Novoflex adapter. 

 

Wilson

[jonoslack]

I wonder how long it will take Leica to realize that a set of small AF primes would make the SL very sexy (even if only humble Summicrons instead of Summiluxes).  (28, 50, 90 or 100, maybe even 135).

.

 

HI Stefan

They know this - I know they know, they really do, but I also know that it's not technically feasible - I don't think it's to do with the rear mount, but the difficulty of reasonably fast focusing and therefore a reasonably powerful motor to move all the glass. The only other alternative would have been to re-invent screwdriver lenses (where the motor is in the camera body). 

 

Good, Small, Fast Focusing, Full Frame autofocus lenses don't exist - I suppose the 55 f1.8 Sony lens is the nearest example, but it's hardly small. Putting out flawed lenses (and they would have to have some kind of compromise built in if they were to be smaller) is just a non starter for Leica - they'd get torn to shreds over it - look at the X-Vario lens - it's a great lens, but it was crucified because of it's slow aperture.

 

If you're willing to sacrifice some quality then of course you can use Leica T lenses (which are small, and which focus pretty fast on the SL as well) - most of us managed quite well with the 10mp of the M8, and of course, the SL sensor is much better than the M8. 

[dkCambridgeshire]

HI Stefan

They know this - I know they know, they really do, but I also know that it's not technically feasible - I don't think it's to do with the rear mount, but the difficulty of reasonably fast focusing and therefore a reasonably powerful motor to move all the glass. The only other alternative would have been to re-invent screwdriver lenses (where the motor is in the camera body). 

 

Good, Small, Fast Focusing, Full Frame autofocus lenses don't exist - I suppose the 55 f1.8 Sony lens is the nearest example, but it's hardly small. Putting out flawed lenses (and they would have to have some kind of compromise built in if they were to be smaller) is just a non starter for Leica - they'd get torn to shreds over it - look at the X-Vario lens - it's a great lens, but it was crucified because of it's slow aperture.

 

If you're willing to sacrifice some quality then of course you can use Leica T lenses (which are small, and which focus pretty fast on the SL as well) - most of us managed quite well with the 10mp of the M8, and of course, the SL sensor is much better than the M8. 

 

 

Hope all the armchair lens designers are reading this! 

 

dunk

[svenjosh]

Hope all the armchair lens designers are reading this! 

 

dunk

 

I don't believe anyone needs to be a lens designer to make a request for smaller lenses. f/2 lenses are going to be smaller than f/1.4 lenses any given day. The strong point of Leica as a camera company are its optics and lens design. If it fails to innovate in its strong point, the long term success is going to be affected.

[dkCambridgeshire]

I don't believe anyone needs to be a lens designer to make a request for smaller lenses. f/2 lenses are going to be smaller than f/1.4 lenses any given day. The strong point of Leica as a camera company are its optics and lens design. If it fails to innovate in its strong point, the long term success is going to be affected.

 

 

They will still need as wide diameter mount as the other SL / T lenses and will also  require a large AF motor for fast AF. There will never be M sized fast AF lenses.

 

dunk

[jonoslack]

I don't believe anyone needs to be a lens designer to make a request for smaller lenses. f/2 lenses are going to be smaller than f/1.4 lenses any given day. The strong point of Leica as a camera company are its optics and lens design. If it fails to innovate in its strong point, the long term success is going to be affected.

 

 

You can take it as read that the requests have been made directly - and of course f2 lenses will be smaller, but the difference is going to be less, proportionately than the difference between 50 f1.4 and 50 f2, because although the motor required for moving the glass will not be much smaller (if you want to retain fast autofocus). 

 

Maybe they'll find some way to do it? but to be honest, if you reduce the size of the lens by 30% and lose a stop and some quality, who is that going to impress? What we really want is M sized lenses, and that simply isn't going to happen. On the other hand, we're lucky, we have the lovely M lenses and that great big EVF to focus with. 

 

It's a mistake to conflate the design criteria of the A7 and the SL - each camera was conceived without reference to the other, and where Sony have had small size at the core of their design philosophy, as far as I'm aware that was never part of the remit of the SL.

[svenjosh]

Jono,

 

 I clearly get what you are saying. My comment was not meant for you. I  was just replying to Dunk that it is not unreasonable for a lot of photographers to expect smaller lenses.The only thing that a Leica user would willingly give up is one stop of aperture speed. So the expectation is for Leica to come up with some form of solution to satisfy the expectation. 

 

As far as AF goes, I love my SL with 24-90 including its size which fits my hand perfectly. My M lenses from 16-90mm work beautiful so personally I am satisfied. But generally speaking, I think Leica should have released a set of f/2 lenses before embarking on 1.4 lenses. There is going to be a lot of complaints regarding focusing accuracy with 1.4 lenses anyway. So both for size and AF purposes, f/2 would have been better. I understand they are not going to M size lenses but at the least if Leica can avoid Otus sized lenses, they will be lot more successful with the SL series.

[dkCambridgeshire]

The SL 50/1.4 lens was decided on from the outset /beginning of the SL development programme https://uk.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-SL/Lenses/LEICA-SUMMILUX-SL … and for a number of reasons. Thus unreasonable to expect the lens to be held back so that a 50/2 could be launched first. A 50/2 SL lens will likely be announced in time but would require at least 18 months to design/develop-test/manufacture/market. Leica Camera AG's resources in the broadest sense of the word are not as 'broad' as those of its competitors - and Leica has other priorities and targets to consider too. 

 

dunk

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[pgk]

Good, Small, Fast Focusing, Full Frame autofocus lenses don't exist......

 

Fast autofocusfocus requires as small, light and inertia free moving lens parts as possible. Fast aperture lenses inevitably have larger bits of glass in them than smaller aperture lenses. So the two requirements oppose each other, and the solution is to produce Internal Focus lenses which only require a relatively small amount of glass (the IF section only) to be moved, but this complicates the design and makes it bigger. There seems to be a belief amongst some that lens designers are actually magicians rather than people who actually have to work within the bounds of what is actually technically possible ......

 

When Leica produce apo lenses corrected for octarine we'll be sorted .

[jrp]

The M lenses' USP is their size.  They are also of v high quality, but the fast ones do suffer from various optical aberrations (typically fringing at high contrast boundaries).  They will, however, continue to work in 50 years' time, as they require no electronics to make them go.

 

The SL lenses can afford to have a more relaxed design, but what are we gaining in return for the additional weight?  AF.  OIS (in some cases).  Reduced aberrations.  Thing is, with modern sensors, fast lenses are not as compelling as they were when ISO 400 film was as good as it got.   So the high quality zooms were a good way to start the system.  I can understand why Leica might want to build a signature/statement 50mm f1.4 but unless it produces Noctilux-like rendering, without the aberrations, I won't be getting one.

 

If I think, "what would I be bothered to carry with me, if I already had the zooms?", the answer would be a wide angle zoom of comparable quality, a long macro (200mm or 100mm or 85mm PC), or a short perspective control lens (24mm or 17mm) for architecture.  I'm not sure that I would want to carry several even f2 lenses if I already had a comparable M series lens of lower weight.  Currently, I find myself accompanying the zooms with the lines of the 21mm M Summilux (for its ability to blow the background beautifully), the 50mm APO Summicron (for its ability to take night shots without adding masses of fringing), the Noctilux (for taking 1970s style soft porn focus shots), the 18mm SEM or the 15mm Voigtlander (for really wide angles, obv), the 28mm or 35mm Summilux (for environmental / night shots, where the Summicron is too short).  So additional lenses have got to do something for me that these don't.

 

Yes, the Sony system started off compact, but their (and Zeiss's) top of the line lenses are no smaller than SLR lenses, and often bigger.  That is the main reason that I have rather parted with the Sony line, despite the technological superiority to Leica in almost every way other than the EVF.  That said, Zeiss has found a sweet spot with the Batis line, combining high performance and OIS in a bulky, but light body.  An A7rII + Batis 85mm, 25mm with a lens or two like the 28mm f2 or 35mm f2.8 with the 55mm f1.8 is hard to beat, for the weight, if you need AF.