50mm Summilux-SL ASPH Review

[LD_50]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That's exactly why I did.... I put a single point on that eye. Dead on perfect!

That's great. Seems eye tracking AF would be pretty helpful with faster lenses.

[Advertisement]

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

[caissa]

Comparing the 4 new high-res 50mm lenses (Zeiss Otus, Sigma, Sony, Leica SL 50), for me the Sony lens is not interesting, only the other three that can be attached to the SL.

The Otus and the Sigma have no AF on the SL, so the SL 50 is the only one remaining to get more than what we already have with the M lenses.

I find it (after 2 days use) an incredible lens. Outstanding just as much as the 90-280, but not half as useful/flexible. (After all it is only a 50, though I would never call it a nifty-fifty.)

The problem is the "wideness" (88mm) of all these lenses. Leica has probably long ago decided that a 82mm filter size is professional and tried to make the best and produce all professional lenses at this size (one filter size for all). At the same time they decided to stretch this 88mm diameter over the whole length of the lens so that a common adapter (ASTAT-SL) could be used to attach them to a tripod. But this results in lenses that are difficult to hold for a long time. (My hands are big, but people with smaller hands could have a problem.) It is no problem for the 90-280, but worse for the shorter lenses. (The 16-35 will probably also be of that size).

In my eyes it was a good idea, but in the end unfortunately a bad solution.

Looking forward to the 67mm (filter thread) lenses, the Summicron primes. I am expecting a lot, mainly that they are much more "userfriendly" (the extraordinary optical quality I take as granted from Leica). Unfortunately there are none with OIS.

 

So regarding optical quality, the SL 50 is unbeaten (especially at f 1.4). For a professional the only choice. But for a fun photographer there is only one reason (the smaller price), to choose instead of the Apo 50 the "cheaper" SL 50. In many situations the Apo 50 is simply more fun. The Summilux-M is no match (sorry), the normal Summicron 50 is simply a reasonable all-rounder, but maybe not special enough for a professional. The Noctilux is a different story and cannot be compared with "ordinary" lenses. But the SL 50 is definitely closer to an "ideal 50" than the Noctilux, but also not so "glamorous".

Despite its extraordinary quality I am not totally in love with the SL 50. The size simply hurts too much (I use no tripods). And I am quite sure as soon as Leica offers a macro-capable SL 2/50 or SL 2.8/60 (of much smaller size) I will switch and use this most of the time. The longer the distance to walk and the longer the photo session the more certain.

Zeiss set the trend with their Otus lenses - we all love the resulting high quality and resolution. But the trend is not ideal for me. Maybe younger users see that different (fitter body and muscles). Ready to pay daily for getting the best quality.  (You pay the money only once and forget it afterwards, but you pay for the weight every single day.)

 

I like Farkas' reviews regarding the optical qualities he shows us inherent in these lenses. But he tells us not the whole truth (how could he or anybody else), namely that the SL 50 is a PITA, especially for the classical Leica 50mm "lovers" (or fanboys, if you want).

It is like the LENR problem. Well known by anybody using Leica and interested in longer exposures, but never mentioned in official tests - and so never fixed since several years (decades ?).

Edited March 31, 2017 by caissa

[Chaemono]

Just one more thing. Because of what the author of this article http://www.artphotoacademy.com/the-leica-look/ describes as [the SL50s] “exceptionally high micro-contrast, i.e., an ability to register a nearly full variety of tonal variations between slightly darker and slightly brighter areas of very similar colors” this lens is particularly well suited for B&W photography. Will try to do some comparisons with the M246 over the weekend.

[tom0511]

Comparing the 4 new high-res 50mm lenses (Zeiss Otus, Sigma, Sony, Leica SL 50), for me the Sony lens is not interesting, only the other three that can be attached to the SL.

The Otus and the Sigma have no AF on the SL, so the SL 50 is the only one remaining to get more than what we already have with the M lenses.

I find it (after 2 days use) an incredible lens. Outstanding just as much as the 90-280, but not half as useful/flexible. (After all it is only a 50, though I would never call it a nifty-fifty.)

The problem is the "wideness" (88mm) of all these lenses. Leica has probably long ago decided that a 82mm filter size is professional and tried to make the best and produce all professional lenses at this size (one filter size for all). At the same time they decided to stretch this 88mm diameter over the whole length of the lens so that a common adapter (ASTAT-SL) could be used to attach them to a tripod. But this results in lenses that are difficult to hold for a long time. (My hands are big, but people with smaller hands could have a problem.) It is no problem for the 90-280, but worse for the shorter lenses. (The 16-35 will probably also be of that size).

In my eyes it was a good idea, but in the end unfortunately a bad solution.

Looking forward to the 67mm (filter thread) lenses, the Summicron primes. I am expecting a lot, mainly that they are much more "userfriendly" (the extraordinary optical quality I take as granted from Leica). Unfortunately there are none with OIS.

 

So regarding optical quality, the SL 50 is unbeaten (especially at f 1.4). For a professional the only choice. But for a fun photographer there is only one reason (the smaller price), to choose instead of the Apo 50 the "cheaper" SL 50. In many situations the Apo 50 is simply more fun. The Summilux-M is no match (sorry), the normal Summicron 50 is simply a reasonable all-rounder, but maybe not special enough for a professional. The Noctilux is a different story and cannot be compared with "ordinary" lenses. But the SL 50 is definitely closer to an "ideal 50" than the Noctilux, but also not so "glamorous".

Despite its extraordinary quality I am not totally in love with the SL 50. The size simply hurts too much (I use no tripods). And I am quite sure as soon as Leica offers a macro-capable SL 2/50 or SL 2.8/60 (of much smaller size) I will switch and use this most of the time. The longer the distance to walk and the longer the photo session the more certain.

Zeiss set the trend with their Otus lenses - we all love the resulting high quality and resolution. But the trend is not ideal for me. Maybe younger users see that different (fitter body and muscles). Ready to pay daily for getting the best quality.  (You pay the money only once and forget it afterwards, but you pay for the weight every single day.)

 

I like Farkas' reviews regarding the optical qualities he shows us inherent in these lenses. But he tells us not the whole truth (how could he or anybody else), namely that the SL 50 is a PITA, especially for the classical Leica 50mm "lovers" (or fanboys, if you want).

It is like the LENR problem. Well known by anybody using Leica and interested in longer exposures, but never mentioned in official tests - and so never fixed since several years (decades ?).

 

If you mind the size of the 50 SL than the 50 APO might be the choice. I own both and I prefer the 50SL on the SL since it offers AF. I personally dont have a problem with lens size of the 50 or the 24-50. But what is too heavy for some might be fine for others and the other way around.

Between the "lower" price the 50 SL offers AF, weather sealing, wide open focusing compared to the 50 APO.

 

If you prefer smaller size maybe a Leica T with the 35/1.4 would be a better choice than the Leica SL.

[LD_50]

So regarding optical quality, the SL 50 is unbeaten (especially at f 1.4). For a professional the only choice. But for a fun photographer there is only one reason (the smaller price), to choose instead of the Apo 50 the "cheaper" SL 50. In many situations the Apo 50 is simply more fun. The Summilux-M is no match (sorry), the normal Summicron 50 is simply a reasonable all-rounder, but maybe not special enough for a professional.

 

 

I don't agree with the "for a professional" stuff here. Professionals use all kinds of gear, and the absolute highest quality, abberation free lens typically isn't the only lens on the list.

 

All of my paid work was with a Nikon D4/D4s and the following lenses: Nikkor 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 200 f2, and 58 f1.4. Absent the 200 f2, none of these are the best lenses available optically.

 

Most of the professionals I see are shooting with zoom lenses (Canon and Nikon). Getting the shot and ensuring the lighting and overall aesthetic are to the photographer's standard usually is more important than MTF.

Edited March 31, 2017 by LD_50

[caissa]

The TL is no solution, as the SL body is not the problem.

If the SL 50 is too big for me I use the Sigma 2.0/24-35 Art. It is not much smaller - actually slightly longer with the adapter - but easier to hold. And it is a zoom (equal three primes) for the same weight. And the optical quality is very close (but not the bokeh). And AF is also equal. Or a manual lens (R 50 or R 60, or R 35).

 

Of course most of the time top quality is not needed - nobody notices the difference (as LD_50 describes in his note). For myself I see and enjoy the difference, but typically nobody else sees/notices it.

That is also why I find the X1D useless. The selection of lenses and effortless usage is more important for me than the bigger sensor. And in a few years all sensors will be past that level anyway.

Edited March 31, 2017 by caissa

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use the Sigma 2.0/24-35 Art. It is not much smaller but easier to hold. And the optical quality is very close (but not the bokeh). 

 

Good to know.

[Donzo98]

So impressed with the sharpness/accuracy of the SL/50 combo... This is inside with a combo of incandescent and halogen lighting. 1.4/ ISO 400/ 1/100th

 

This is about 30% of pic cropped out... single point AF on the K in sparkling. My standard processing in LR and exported as a jpg with 1200 pixels on the long edge.

 

Edited April 1, 2017 by Donzo98

[phovsho]

Finally got opportunity to buy SL50/1.4 yesterday. Got the call there was one in stock. Anyways, I just couldn't pull the trigger. Images look great no doubt. AF performance not a problem. But the size - reminded myself that the best lense is the one you have with you. I just can't imagine making this lense a regular fixture on my camera. I would more likely put on a M lense if just walking around.

 

The SL50 does have weathersealing. But I have the 24-90. About the same size and only lose speed but gain versatility with the zoom. Speed isn't primary consideration for me in situations where weather sealing matters.

 

Maybe I'll change my mind. But at this point I can't get myself over the line.

[Chaemono]

Three from this morning's walk.

 

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!

 

 

 

 

Edited April 2, 2017 by Chaemono

[caissa]

Is the Summilux-SL 50  apo corrected ?

As it is "equal" to the Apo 50 and even one stop wider, I assumed so.

But "scientifically" is it or not ?    And why did Leica not use that label ? OK. the name is already long enough. But apo would have been nicer than asph. .

I know Zeiss is also not using it for the Otus lenses.

[jrp]

But Zeiss is using "Apo" for their new 135mm Batis lens.  Suffice to say that the 50mm Leica lens produces v clean images with little or no purple, red or green fringing.

Edited April 7, 2017 by jrp

[thighslapper]

Leica appear to be particularly stringent in their labelling of 'apo' ..... they set the bar very high.

 

The SL 50/1.4 is APO from a resultant image point of view ...... but a % of that correction is through firmware rather than by exotic optics, so it really doesn't count

[ZHNL]

Leica appear to be particularly stringent in their labelling of 'apo' ..... they set the bar very high.

 

The SL 50/1.4 is APO from a resultant image point of view ...... but a % of that correction is through firmware rather than by exotic optics, so it really doesn't count

It is the opposite. Canon Nikon never use APO for their lens even some of their lenses have great Color correction perofrmance.

 

ZEISS APO usually is real but can't say the same to Leica. 75/90cron M should not label with APO IMO. And OTUS 55 has twice as much APO correction vs 50APO M per IMX.nl review.

 

No idea how this SL perform with digital CA remove build in, image looks good so far and correction is not a bad thing here.

[caissa]

But as far as I can see Puts compares the Otus 55 to the older Summilux-M 50 Asph which is a "hidden/unnamed apo" lens.

As this lens is weaker than the SL 50, the SL 50 seems to deserve the apo designation even more.

I thought that only vignetting and distortion are corrected in sw, and that the apo part is done inside the lens.

 

I remember the terrible pics from jupitersnake (he used other software to show the "uncorrected" SL 50 lens), but the CA seemed ok even in these bad examples.

 

I think Scott Kirkpatrick knows how to see the "corrections" in the EXIF data. It would be interesting if he could explain to us what is done in the case of the SL 50 (only distortion and vignetting or also CA correction).

[Big John]

From what I can tell, this is a pretty amazing lens - from both IQ and functionality (autofocus) perspectives.

 

However, for me it is not sufficiently smaller and lighter than the 24-90 for me to entertain it. The zoom is heavy and big but I have to hand a 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm so it truly is a 'one lens' job.

 

For a 50mm prime, I would elect for the summilux.

 

And another thing - the M lens will still be usable in decades to come.

[Chaemono]

I remember the terrible pics from jupitersnake (he used other software to show the "uncorrected" SL 50 lens), but the CA seemed ok even in these bad examples.

It showed terrible CA in terrible pics. He must have used another lens by mistake.

[johnbuckley]

For a decade, I've been taking Ms out with a Noctilux attached to take pictures of the Tulip Frenzy.  Last year I began using the SL for this work, and last weekend I was able to take my SL out with the SL 50 Summilux.  I think the look of the images, linked below, is pleasing to the eye.  Shot wide open, in sunshine, with an ND filter, these images, to me at least, have a fantastic Leica Summilux look.  I am very happy to have this lens to use.

 

https://tulipfrenzy.com/2017/04/11/the-tulip-frenzy-2017-edition/

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[wizard]

And therein lies the explanation to Leica's current success with the SL. Bulky bling for people who believe that Japanese cameras are beneath them.

 

Well, to each his own. Leica certainly does not force anyone to buy their stuff.

[Cliff S]

 

That is also why I find the X1D useless. The selection of lenses and effortless usage is more important for me than the bigger sensor. And in a few years all sensors will be past that level anyway.

 

 

The X1D lenses presently, in 35mm equivalents, are 24mm, 35mm and 70mm. Forthcoming lenses are 18mm, 52mm, 95mm and a 28-60mm. Pretty much in the range on M and SL lenses except for the 135mm for the M and the long zoom for the SL. The nice thing about the X1D is its effortless usage. Almost like an M10 with autofocus. It is really ease to carry around and handhold with no strain on the wrist. Like an M10. Like I said before, I believe it's what the SL should've been. Very simple, intuitive and grab 'n go.

 

But the captures from an X1D OOC are stunning. I keep comparing SL and X1D shots of equivalent subjects, same aperture and ISO and the X1D files are very real and natural looking and don't look like photographs. A picture of hand looked like my hand was inside the camera. the SL looked like a nice pic of hand. 

 

I look forward to getting the relatively small 60mm (51mm) which will; ne in great use. I couldn't get the SL 50 because of the size, weight, balance and inconvenience. After all, I am an M shooter and can never go back to the canikon experience. the X1D gives me the M feeling with AF and and amazing sensor. Not to mention the price of the HCD 65mm will be 2/3 the SL50. Doesn't hurt.

 

Sorry for enraging Leica lovers, of which I AM one. But..