Chaemono Posted January 1, 2017 Share #41 Posted January 1, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've changed the color profile in all three images that the link below leads to to be consistent using the embedded one now. The false color in the third image which is with the in-camera software corrections applied has to do with the raw conversion of the DNG file in LR or C1 and is not the result of digital corrections by Leica. The first image is from a DNG file exported from the Preview App on a Mac. The Preview App shows no false color in either the DNG file with the digital corrections applied or the DNG file with the opcodes removed. In this regard, it does a much better job in raw conversion than either LR or C1. https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-XMbRqd/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 1, 2017 Posted January 1, 2017 Hi Chaemono, Take a look here Please convince me the SL 50/1.4 is better than summilux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted January 1, 2017 Share #42 Posted January 1, 2017 The Noctilux blows the others away Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted January 1, 2017 Share #43 Posted January 1, 2017 The Noctilux blows the others away Good joke for a good start to a happy new year! By the way, how can I get more "emogees"? I have seen others here, but do not know how to get access to them. ??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted January 1, 2017 Share #44 Posted January 1, 2017 the crops are not in order ...... so you can have fun sorting them out ...... When are you going to resolve the order of the lenses/images ? The differences are just minor - but it is cold outside, so heated/hot discussions about "the best" are very welcome. By the way, shouldn't you have selected a piece closer to the edge/corner to enhance/enlarge the differences ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted January 1, 2017 Share #45 Posted January 1, 2017 I would have thought a quick look would easily identify the SL-Summilux .... and the 50 apo. The former DOES have a particular look, just as promised. Not knowing which is which provides a perfect unbiased comparison ........ once you know you will see what you want to see. I renumbered these images on import and accidentally sequenced them by size rather than capture time, so when I uploaded the images in number order I was initially very confused as the differences were not as I expected. After 5 minutes I had 5 out of 7 correctly identified by 'guesswork' .... when compared to the original EXIF info in LR. Not telling until someone has a stab at which is the SL 50/1.4, Noctilux, 50/1.4 and 50 apo..... or states they cannot see any difference.... which makes life very cheap for you if that is the case ..... Not interested much in corner performance .... and this subject has nil in the plane of focus at the peripheries anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted January 1, 2017 Share #46 Posted January 1, 2017 Well the Noctilux is No 4, because it has those characteristic blue rings around the highlights Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
anickpick Posted January 1, 2017 Share #47 Posted January 1, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) It would be much easier, if you had chosen a spot in the outer 2/3 of the frame. Well, a guess: 6 is Summilux SL 2 is Apo Summicron M 3 is Summilux M Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daedalus2000 Posted January 1, 2017 Share #48 Posted January 1, 2017 My guesses (although I have not used extensively (or at all) any of these lenses) 1) Noctilux 2) APO 3) Lux - m 4) Tri-elmar 5) Zeiss pllanar f2 6) SL-50 1.4 7) 50/2.8 colapsible Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted January 1, 2017 Share #49 Posted January 1, 2017 posted the answers on the 50/1.4 images thread ..... just to make it harder to cheat ..... anickpick and daedalus win coconuts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted January 2, 2017 Share #50 Posted January 2, 2017 Good joke for a good start to a happy new year! By the way, how can I get more "emogees"? I have seen others here, but do not know how to get access to them. ??? TheMods dont like emogies Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted January 2, 2017 Share #51 Posted January 2, 2017 I will stick to my guns The Noctilux can do everything that the Summerlux and Summercron can do plus some more............its a no brainer The Noctilux wins hands down Just pop out and get the adapter and be done with it Happy Christmas neil Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
anickpick Posted January 2, 2017 Share #52 Posted January 2, 2017 In my opinion the Noctilux only shines in optimal, very controlled light situations. The Noctilux is the only modern Leica lens that has so much CA that it is often impossible to take care of in post. Often the ugly artefacts force you to render the image in bw. Also, the Noctilux has to be stopped down to f4 in order to get anything really sharp in the outer 2/3 of the frame. So no, the Noctilux cannot do everything the Summilux or the Apo Summicron can. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS Posted January 2, 2017 Share #53 Posted January 2, 2017 In my opinion the Noctilux only shines in optimal, very controlled light situations. The Noctilux is the only modern Leica lens that has so much CA that it is often impossible to take care of in post. Often the ugly artefacts force you to render the image in bw. Also, the Noctilux has to be stopped down to f4 in order to get anything really sharp in the outer 2/3 of the frame. So no, the Noctilux cannot do everything the Summilux or the Apo Summicron can. I disagree. You've already stated that once the Noctilux is stopped down to f4 it's the same as the sumerlux and summer Ron ..... which in my opinion it's better. so like I said before it can do the same plus more............. you can't open up the summercron to 0.95 because it's and f2 something same with the sumerlux. The proof is in the pudding Noctilux at f5.6 on the SL 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! Noctilux wide open Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Noctilux wide open ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/267776-please-convince-me-the-sl-5014-is-better-than-summilux/?do=findComment&comment=3177327'>More sharing options...
jrp Posted January 2, 2017 Share #54 Posted January 2, 2017 I think with the majority of Leica lenses we are quibbling about very minor differences that make little real world difference. I'm impressed by those that got the right answers. I found it hard to compare the shots because of the flashing Christmas tree lights and the 404 pixel crop. Focusing on the brown stars inside the ball is probably the easiest point of comparison. But the point is well made: the differences at this scale are hardly night and day. Did you notice any differences in the rendering / look of the overall picture? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted January 2, 2017 Share #55 Posted January 2, 2017 Unfortunately taking a photo of an xmas tree at f1.4 is a particularly stupid thing to do as 80% of it is out of focus...... so all the photos look equally awful..... and of course the Tri-elmar at f4 is by far the best ! It was just a handy indoor subject far enough away and with a small detail I could focus on accurately to compare the lenses. ps. I am not standing around in temperatures close to zero repeating this outside at my local church (as I did before) ...... so don't even ask ...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted January 2, 2017 Share #56 Posted January 2, 2017 Having no SL lenses at present but both the 50 SX and the APO 50 SC, the question I am wondering about is how the 24-90, used at 50, which might well be its sweet spot, handheld with OIS, compares with the 50 SL, also handheld, after several holiday brandies. Both at f/4. That's a test that can be carried out in comfort. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daedalus2000 Posted January 2, 2017 Share #57 Posted January 2, 2017 I'm impressed by those that got the right answers. I found it hard to compare the shots because of the flashing Christmas tree lights and the 404 pixel crop. Focusing on the brown stars inside the ball is probably the easiest point of comparison. But the point is well made: the differences at this scale are hardly night and day. Did you notice any differences in the rendering / look of the overall picture? For me one interesting thing was how I was immediately drawn to no 2 (APO) and then to no 6 (SL-lux). They looked "special" to me (which is dangerous for my wallet.... :-) ). I shot a couple of frames with the APO once and then I gave it back to the saleperson saying "I do not think I will ever be able to see any difference...", but obviously I was wrong. For example look at no 1 and no 2 together and you can see the difference. No 2 (the APO) just "pops out". It has a special almost 3d sharp rendering... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted January 2, 2017 Share #58 Posted January 2, 2017 I've shot depth-of-field tests with the APO compared against some excellent R lenses, ... and it is no comparison. There's extra micro-contrast through out the middle tones. Also, in some recent test shots, it seemed that I could go down to f/11 to get extra depth of field, with no loss of resolution on center, very crisp detail in the deeper parts of the shot, and very gentle bokeh in the closer parts. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted January 2, 2017 Share #59 Posted January 2, 2017 Interesting that the Zeiss Distagon, which is technically a close rival to the APO does not do better in this test. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jared Posted January 3, 2017 Share #60 Posted January 3, 2017 They are no match. The Summilux-SL 50 is far superior to the Summilux-M 50 (look at the MTF graphs) and a comparison with the Apo 50 is more interesting (much closer IQ). Looking at the MTF charts is definitely interesting. Based purely on Leica's published data, not based at all on real-world results, here is what I would expect from the Summilux-SL 50: - Acutance should be very high on the new 'Lux-SL, even wide open, all the way to the edge. It is significantly higher than the 'Lux-M, especially in the corners. It is even a bit higher than the 'Cron-M APO at the center of the field when both lenses are shot wide open, and that's giving the 'Cron-M APO a full stop head start. - Resolution in the center of the field is excellent, exceeding even the 'Cron-M APO wide open. By f/2.8 they are comparable. However, there is a fair amount of off axis astigmatism in the new 'Lux which degrades the resolution as you move away from the center of the field. The 'Cron-M APO does not share this characteristic, and should have better off axis resolution at comparable f-stops. The 'Lux-M is not in the same league as the other two in terms of pure resolution. - I agree that the 50mm APO is the closer competitor. The new 'Lux is much better than the 'Lux-M which was already one heck of a lens. - When compared to the 50mm APO, both acutance and resolution are slightly higher in the new 'Lux on axis, but the APO does not have the astigmatism of the 'Lux so the APO should be a touch better in resolution off-axis at comparable f-stops. The APO is essentially perfect across the entire field at f/4 (just starting to show diffraction at f/5.6), while the 'Lux-SL is only perfect in the central 50% or so of the field. The 'Lux, of course, is a full stop faster. Obviously, this is all based PURELY on the MTF graphs, so it won't account for handling, throughput, sample variation, flare resistance, bokeh, color cast, etc.. There is only so much you can learn from a set of MTF charts, and even then you don't know how close actual lenses are to producing the results seen in the charts. Still, it can give you a general idea what you might expect. On paper, the lens should be capable easily out-resolving the sensor in the SL, even at f/1.4, at the center of the field. Looks like a great lens if you don't mind the cost, size, and weight. Obviously, the only way to know for sure if it will meet YOUR particular requirements is to try one out. It's good enough on paper, though, that I suspect you'd need absolutely perfect technique to find its limitations--tripod mounted, shutter delay, perfect focus, etc. - Jared - Jared Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.