Jump to content

Please convince me the SL 50/1.4 is better than summilux


leica1215

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The camera focuses wide open anyways so when using SL lenses so I dont think there is any AF speed difference.

I havent checked yetm, but I dont think the slection of active AF points has an influence on AF speed, but I will check. I think the idea is more to reduce the number of AF points if one thinks to have subjects more in the center area of the image. However if theis is the case I rather use "field".

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 366
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Went to the Harry Potter Studio Tour in Leavesden today - https://www.flickr.com/photos/62198876@N02/albums/72157679525245850

 

Mix of 50 SL, 90-280mm and the Q - but the Exif will tell you which is which.

 

few examples

 

32944407850_d260b73bcf_b.jpgYule Ball by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

33287536156_1c65625bbe_b.jpgharry-potter-12 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

33328259325_8db42e2cb2_b.jpgharry-potter-18 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

33200558091_afbcbf03d8_b.jpgharry-potter-43 by dancook1982, on Flickr

Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I received my 50 Summilux SL; already own the 50 Summilux (M). To me, both lenses are extraordinary. What the SL lens offers -- at least for me -- is quick, precise autofocus for those situations where only AF will do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where are people who own or have used the lens, converging on the SL-50's optical performance? Is it an excellent lens (M50 lux reputation) or is it a benchmark setting lens (M50/2 apo)?

 

I'm going to have to make my mind up without trailing either...

 

Thank

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok..i got the 50SL today and AF is quite slow. What is going on?

 

AF is quite slow. That's the way it is.....

 

I suspect that there's something at play in the design. The zooms use a deliberately small group to keep AF fast. I suspect the SL is moving a much larger group for AF and is slower. It's about the same speed as the old Canon 85L.

 

I knew this going in as it's been widely reported and I tested before I purchased. It may not be a fast focuser but the optics sure are nice....

 

Gordon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Where are people who own or have used the lens, converging on the SL-50's optical performance? Is it an excellent lens (M50 lux reputation) or is it a benchmark setting lens (M50/2 apo)?

 

I'm going to have to make my mind up without trailing either...

 

Thank

 

I don't have the 50 AA APO but I do have two copies of the 'lux M. The SL50 lux is a better lens, I feel. A bit better in the centre. A lot better further out. Almost no CA. AF is pedestrian. Optics are stellar.

 

Gordon

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have the 50 AA APO but I do have two copies of the 'lux M. The SL50 lux is a better lens, I feel. A bit better in the centre. A lot better further out. Almost no CA. AF is pedestrian. Optics are stellar.

 

Gordon

hello Gordon, as a pro user, would you mind to share options for flash photography, flash light and off camera flash? I m looking for rather small set up for portrait, the SF64 is too big, and SF40 seems a bit native, I read your have posted flash related post.. thanks for sharing

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok..i got the 50SL today and AF is quite slow. What is going on?

 

- 3 big lenses to move instead of one small light one in the 24-90

- seems to need to move the lens group further than in the zooms

- AF wide open - lower contrast at 1.4 makes AF more problematic

 

ie. an inevitable consequence of trying to make a highly corrected fast lens.

 

actually it's only slow if you are changing from far distance to close up ..... focus adjustments within your target field are then very quick 

 

you will not get fast focus (or lock at all) on fairly featureless low contrast subjects with one point AF ..... unlike the 24-90 which will lock onto a virtually clear sky ......

 

that's the nature of the beast ...... either learn to live with its limitations or move on to something else ......  ^_^

 

ps. I deliberately spent a whole day using it whilst on holiday last week ...... in normal practical photographic use it performed perfectly and was plenty fast enough. 

 

pps. After a lot of experimenting ..... I would set 1/60 as the slowest shutter speed for this lens ....... any less and you will get camera shake. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

that's the nature of the beast ...... either learn to live with its limitations or move on to something else ......  ^_^

oh heck no..i ain't going to learn to live with its limitation. Isn't that the whole point of paying PREMIUM price for native mount for fast AF? the lens goes back to the vendor this morning. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

AF on the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph is even slower. Feel better now?

 

nah...i have the Noctilux-M 50mm f/0.95. It is even slower. :D I bought into SL system for AF. If i want MF, i'm doing just fine with my M240. I might be new here but i do know a thing or 2 about camera. So thanks for that sarcastic respond of yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

- 3 big lenses to move instead of one small light one in the 24-90

- seems to need to move the lens group further than in the zooms

- AF wide open - lower contrast at 1.4 makes AF more problematic

 

ie. an inevitable consequence of trying to make a highly corrected fast lens.

 

actually it's only slow if you are changing from far distance to close up ..... focus adjustments within your target field are then very quick 

 

you will not get fast focus (or lock at all) on fairly featureless low contrast subjects with one point AF ..... unlike the 24-90 which will lock onto a virtually clear sky ......

 

that's the nature of the beast ...... either learn to live with its limitations or move on to something else ......  ^_^

 

ps. I deliberately spent a whole day using it whilst on holiday last week ...... in normal practical photographic use it performed perfectly and was plenty fast enough. 

 

pps. After a lot of experimenting ..... I would set 1/60 as the slowest shutter speed for this lens ....... any less and you will get camera shake. 

 

 

The 24-90 only moves a single, fairly thin (light) element for focus, but the 90-280 moves three larger elements just like the 50, and the big zoom has perhaps the fastest autofocus of the bunch.  You may be right, though, that the distance of travel for the IF elements on the 50 is higher--no easy way for us to tell.  

 

I suspect the gearing on the motor is the main "culprit".  Most people assume that all silent focus lenses use ring type ultrasonic motors, but the recent trend has actually been to use micromotors USM's with traditional gear trains or even conventional stepper motors with quiet gear trains.  The 24-90, for example, uses a stepper motor.  Many newer Canon and Nikon lenses use micromotor USM's rather than ring motors.  If the 50 is using a traditional stepper motor as well, the narrow depth of field (vs. the 24-90) would require very fine gradations in order to set focus precisely enough.  That means relatively low gearing.  That means a long time to get from infinity to near focus.  

 

Personally, I'm not really surprised that the 50 is a bit slower than the 24-90 for making longer focus adjustments.  More mass to move, and more precision required in the movement due to narrower depth of field.  The real surprise to me is that the 90-280 is as quick as it is!  

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh heck no..i ain't going to learn to live with its limitation. Isn't that the whole point of paying PREMIUM price for native mount for fast AF? the lens goes back to the vendor this morning. :)

 

By all means send it back if the lens doesn't suit your purpose.  I am a little surprised, though... What had you intended to use the lens for where the AF speed is going to hold you back?  If it were a lens for sports or something I would totally get it, but with a fixed focal length 50mm I'm surprised your finding it matters?  Or maybe it's just that other systems don't seem to have this limitation, so why pay a premium price for something when it isn't premium in all regards?  Just curious.

 

- Jared

Link to post
Share on other sites

hello Gordon, as a pro user, would you mind to share options for flash photography, flash light and off camera flash? I m looking for rather small set up for portrait, the SF64 is too big, and SF40 seems a bit native, I read your have posted flash related post.. thanks for sharing

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

*thread hijack*

 

depends what you want to do and what you consider small. :)

 

I think the SF64 is reasonably sized for the SL. I only use my SF40 on my M. The SF40 is simple but it's a rebadged Nissin i40 which is a fine little flash. Perfect as a fill flash or in a small room. Not enough power for bouncing in larger environments. It has HSS and FEC which is all I need. And it would work well with fast lenses. But I use the power of the SF64 as Im far more likely to bounce off a wall or something when using on camera flash. Off camera I much prefer a simple wireless manual flash. Nissin and Godox both make excellent but affordable options. I use either a pair of Godox 360's or a multi head Elinchromn set up.

 

Gordon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...