Help me choose a fast lens

[Csacwp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm having a very indecisive moment and could use some help.  I have an SL and an M246, and I currently own the WATE, 50 Apo, and 80 lux-R.  I'm looking for a fast lens for walkaround photography, so likely another 50mm (the Apo tends to live on my Monochrome).  I can get a 0.95 Noctilux used in very good condition for $6390, but I hear rumors that an updated, improved Noctilux may be just around the corner.  For ~$4000 I could get the black chrome edition of the Summilux-M.  I've owned the Summilux in the past and it is usually fast enough for me, although I do a lot of low light shooting and I would use 0.95 often enough.  I've only tried the Noctilux once and didn't find the size to be an issue for me.  

 

One last catch is that I do a lot of landscape and use filters.  The Noctilux's 60mm filter thread works well with my current kit, but for the Summilux-M I'd have to buy a set of screw-on filters for it.  But, with the money I save I could buy another used lens, maybe a 24mm elmar.  It's a touch decision.

[YellowBelly]

Buy the 24&50mm summilux a great combination for you I think. I do have the noct ais nikkor as well which is wonderful and also the noctilux.95 a dream but if your thinking about filling a wide range the 24 summilux is wonderful and paired with the 50Lux a dream! or try the nikkor noct 58 f1.2 ais on the SL it works better than any Nikon body I've used it on

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[amoebahydra]

The native SL 50 f1.4 give you AF capability at the sacrifice of bulkier and heavier ..........

[darylgo]

I'd buy the noctilux, you will always think about the opportunity to shoot it.  For landscape once you stop it down to f2.8 it matches up to the summilux very well if not slightly slightly higher resolution at a few apertures.  The ability to shoot close ups of flowers at f0.95 is quite fun if not always easy.   The  noctilux and apo is a great combination.  For a  24 wide shoot the 50's and stitch, you will get twice the resolution.   The 60mm filter compatibility is a plus.  

[Csacwp]

The native SL 50 f1.4 give you AF capability at the sacrifice of bulkier and heavier ..........

I'm not interested in the SL lenses for a few reasons.  They are too large, I have no use for autofocus, and the fact that some of the excellent image quality they produce is due to in-camera software makes me wonder about the longevity of them. I'd rather spend my money on M and R glass which are plenty good for my purposes.

[Csacwp]

I'd buy the noctilux, you will always think about the opportunity to shoot it.  For landscape once you stop it down to f2.8 it matches up to the summilux very well if not slightly slightly higher resolution at a few apertures.  The ability to shoot close ups of flowers at f0.95 is quite fun if not always easy.   The  noctilux and apo is a great combination.  For a  24 wide shoot the 50's and stitch, you will get twice the resolution.   The 60mm filter compatibility is a plus.  

Yeah, since I started shooting the M I've always wanted to shoot the Noctilux.  I like the size and weight plus the low light performance.  I'm just concerned that they might release a new one in a year or two (according to rumors from a fairly reputable source) and that now is a poor time to buy a 0.95. 

 

I'd also considered the f/1 Noctilux but I think its rendering may be too close to my 80mm Summilux R to make it worthwhile.  I think the 80 R has wild-enough bokeh as is and I hear the f/1 Noctilux is even more uncontrolled.  Don't get me wrong though, I do love my 80 lux.  

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a Noctilux and a black chrome Summilux. My Noctilux never out resolves the Summilux. At any aperture and especially toward the corners. I like both lenses but for certain I would choose the black chrome over the Noctilux if I could keep only one.

 

I had the "normal" summilux before the black chrome. The BC is heavier but I just adore the focusing. It's so wonderfully damped and seems to have a perfect throw. The Noctilux throw is necessarily longer and so slower to use.

 

Gordon

[Csacwp]

I have a Noctilux and a black chrome Summilux. My Noctilux never out resolves the Summilux. At any aperture and especially toward the corners. I like both lenses but for certain I would choose the black chrome over the Noctilux if I could keep only one.

 

I had the "normal" summilux before the black chrome. The BC is heavier but I just adore the focusing. It's so wonderfully damped and seems to have a perfect throw. The Noctilux throw is necessarily longer and so slower to use.

 

Gordon

 

I used to own the 50 lux asph and always liked it.  I did miss not having f1 or 0.95 though.  I mainly shoot my SL now and I think the smaller M lenses look downright goofy on it... I'm trying not to let aesthetics factor into my decision though.   

[Jeff S]

I had the "normal" summilux before the black chrome. The BC is heavier but I just adore the focusing. It's so wonderfully damped and seems to have a perfect throw. The Noctilux throw is necessarily longer and so slower to use.

 

Gordon

Do you find that the aperture ring is a bit loose? There seems to be reports on this, along with some other recent M lens releases (as I experienced with a 50 APO that I recently demo-ed).

 

Jeff

[Csacwp]

Do you find that the aperture ring is a bit loose? There seems to be reports on this, along with some other recent M lens releases (as I experienced with a 50 APO that I recently demo-ed).

 

Jeff

Not to change the subject, but both the 50 APO's that I've owned had very loose aperture rings.  Not a big deal though... you just have to be careful.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Do you find that the aperture ring is a bit loose? There seems to be reports on this, along with some other recent M lens releases (as I experienced with a 50 APO that I recently demo-ed).

 

Jeff

 

No. Mine is perfect. The focus loosened up a bit but is still wonderful. My Noctilux aperture ring is looser than the BC Summilux. But I've had it much longer.

 

Gordon

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I used to own the 50 lux asph and always liked it.  I did miss not having f1 or 0.95 though.  I mainly shoot my SL now and I think the smaller M lenses look downright goofy on it... I'm trying not to let aesthetics factor into my decision though.   

 

I agree the Noct looks better and balances better on the SL. And with ISO50 and the silent speeds no ND filter is needed. The Noctilux also performs better on the SL than the M (less fringing and a easier to correct blue). I am fortunate to be able to keep both. And I have the superb SL Summilux which is better than either of the M lenses, to my eye.

 

I should note that I think the black chrome is easier to use than the tabbed normal version on the SL. The focus ring is easier to use and more substantial to grasp. But I am not a fan of tabs so I am biased.

 

All we can do is present our personal opinions and hope that it helps someone make their own choice, whether it be the same as ours or not.

 

Gordon

[Csacwp]

I agree the Noct looks better and balances better on the SL. And with ISO50 and the silent speeds no ND filter is needed. The Noctilux also performs better on the SL than the M (less fringing and a easier to correct blue). I am fortunate to be able to keep both. And I have the superb SL Summilux which is better than either of the M lenses, to my eye.

 

I should note that I think the black chrome is easier to use than the tabbed normal version on the SL. The focus ring is easier to use and more substantial to grasp. But I am not a fan of tabs so I am biased.

 

All we can do is present our personal opinions and hope that it helps someone make their own choice, whether it be the same as ours or not.

 

Gordon

The coating on the BC front element is a different color than the regular 50 lux.  Have you noticed any optical differences in images taken with it?

[Jeff S]

Optics aside, I prefer the handling/ergonomics of my standard 50 Summilux ASPH compared to the 50 APO that I demo-ed.  The APO is smaller, but as such it sacrifices the separate knurled focus ring of the Summilux, having only a partially knurled ring adjacent to the tab.  I like a fully knurled ring for fine-tuning focus.  And, as mentioned, the aperture ring was too loose compared to my Summilux.....and DAG adjusted the focus action to make my Summilux focus action very smooth.

 

Jeff

[Csacwp]

Optics aside, I prefer the handling/ergonomics of my standard 50 Summilux ASPH compared to the 50 APO that I demo-ed.  The APO is smaller, but as such it sacrifices the separate knurled focus ring of the Summilux, having only a partially knurled ring adjacent to the tab.  I like a fully knurled ring for fine-tuning focus.  And, as mentioned, the aperture ring was too loose compared to my Summilux.....and DAG adjusted the focus action to make my Summilux focus action very smooth.

 

Jeff

The APO is quite small on the SL but I've been very impressed with the images it produces.  Having also used it extensively on the M240 and M246, there is a certain 3D pop that I see on the SL that was lacking from the other two cameras.  I also find the color to be more vibrant on the SL.  Talk about a silly looking camera and lens combo though... together they look like a joke.

[caissa]

For me it looks as if you have all you need in M lenses, and that you are just thinking about getting more of the same stuff (with slight variations).

What you are missing, is that the SL can also use completely different lenses, that could give you and your work a wider scope. You could for example add R lenses - a R 2.8/60 macro lens and a R 28mm Super-Angulon PC shift lens for macro or landscape and/or architecture. Or anything else, the choice is almost limitless. It depends only upon your interests.

More of the same is probably reassuring, but in the end maybe boring.

 

And I generally care more about the look of the pics than of the look of the camera combo. But tastes are different.

 

P.S.: A different suggestion maybe more in your line: Go for the Summilux-M 35mm Aspherical (or AA) (from the nineties). It's a very nice lens, with a special look and quality. It is a nice companion to the Apo 50 but slightly different and slightly faster. It is well adapted for "walking around" and more interesting than a 50.

Or the Summilux-R 35mm - a nice companion to your R 80. (Big but looking ok on the SL).

Or even go for the Summilux-M 28. Big but special. And looking well on the SL. (Blackdoc has produced nice pics with it on this forum, and Jono Slack on his website).

[Csacwp]

For me it looks as if you have all you need in M lenses, and that you are just thinking about getting more of the same stuff (with slight variations).

What you are missing, is that the SL can also use completely different lenses, that could give you and your work a wider scope. You could for example add R lenses - a R 2.8/60 macro lens and a R 28mm Super-Angulon PC shift lens for macro or landscape and/or architecture. Or anything else, the choice is almost limitless. It depends only upon your interests.

More of the same is probably reassuring, but in the end maybe boring.

 

And I generally care more about the look of the pics than of the look of the camera combo. But tastes are different.

 

P.S.: A different suggestion maybe more in your line: Go for the Summilux-M 35mm Aspherical (or AA) (from the nineties). It's a very nice lens, with a special look and quality. It is a nice companion to the Apo 50 but slightly different and slightly faster. It is well adapted for "walking around" and more interesting than a 50.

Or the Summilux-R 35mm - a nice companion to your R 80. (Big but looking ok on the SL).

Or even go for the Summilux-M 28. Big but special. And looking well on the SL. (Blackdoc has produced nice pics with it on this forum, and Jono Slack on his website).

If I got an R macro I'd get the 100mm Apo.  For landscape I prefer 24mm or wider, or I just use the 50mm Apo.  I considered the 35mm lux R for a long time but decided against it.  The extremely shallow depth of field that the 80 lux has is such a large part of its charm, and I don't think I would enjoy the lens if it didn't have this characteristic.  Therefore the 35 lux probably isn't for me.  I'm really a 50mm kind of guy when it comes to a general, walk-around lens, hence my search for a second one to compliment the Apo.  I've considered the Noctilux f1 but I think the bokeh might be a little too uncontrolled for my tastes... the 80 lux is about as wild as I like and it is more serene compared to the Noctilux f1.  If there was never going to be an updated Noctilux 0.95 I would likely just get it, but I've heard rumors that an update may be around the corner for it and I would rather not buy it now only to trade it in towards a more corrected version.  If the Summilux Black Chrome had a 46mm filter thread or larger, it would be a good enough choice. I guess I could just get another regular Summilux.  I was never moved by that lens's rendering... I prefer that of the 0.95.  

[FlashGordonPhotography]

The coating on the BC front element is a different color than the regular 50 lux.  Have you noticed any optical differences in images taken with it?

 

Sometimes I think so and then I don't. I do think I like the files better but I write that off to justification of buying the same lens to have a different focusing collar.

 

I can say I am completely satisfied with it. Of the half dozen or so 50's I've tried this is the one I like the most and that I have solved my M 50mm GAS.

 

Gordon

[Csacwp]

Well I decided to hold off on the noctilux for now. Just picked up a 1962 Summicron Rigid for my Monochrome. With my left over cash I'm either going to get the 21 super elmar and the 24 elmar, one of those two and the summilux black chrome, or a noctilux f1.

 

The big question now is can I justify having both the 50 Apo and the 50 lux asph while also using a 50 rigid on the monochrome (both the apo and lux would be used almost exclusively on my SL).

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Ruz]

50 lux for SL is a great lens, its just a bit heavy.