Jump to content

Leica APO-Summicron-SL 75mm f/2 ASPH


scroy

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have you ever tried photographing moving children?

How about jockeys on moving horses? They don't pose. They look briefly into the camera and move on. You only get one shot.

 

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 by Chaemono
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of interest how does AF help with that?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I could explain in detail - talk about moving faces, moving bodies etc.

But I'm sure you understand the issues and I doubt that's what you want anyway.

The best way of thinking about it is to accept that different photographers use their cameras in different ways. Some even use AF for portraits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could explain in detail - talk about moving faces, moving bodies etc.

But I'm sure you understand the issues and I doubt that's what you want anyway.

The best way of thinking about it is to accept that different photographers use their cameras in different ways. Some even use AF for portraits.

I was more interested in your process; in how you shoot portraits. There's still so much I don't know I was hoping to learn from it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever tried photographing moving children?

Of course - I have two, seven and four that I shoot with a manual focus lens all the time.

 

35253572384_961ccf8cf5_k.jpgIt's Time for Bed - Blood & Water by Greg Turner, on Flickr

 

35276784084_3807d59621_k.jpg7.05pm by Greg Turner, on Flickr

 

 

How about jockeys on moving horses? They don't pose. They look briefly into the camera and move on. You only get one shot.

 

OK but then that's not really a 'portrait', it's a candid/snapshot and while there's nothing remotely wrong with that, I'd suggest the 24-70 or 90-280 were the right tools for that job.

 

For actual portraiture, distinct from candid photography or snapshots, where you specifically engage with a subject to take their picture, you just don't need AF let alone fast AF.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course - I have two, seven and four that I shoot with a manual focus lens all the time.

 

35253572384_961ccf8cf5_k.jpgIt's Time for Bed - Blood & Water by Greg Turner, on Flickr

 

35276784084_3807d59621_k.jpg7.05pm by Greg Turner, on Flickr

 

 

OK but then that's not really a 'portrait', it's a candid/snapshot and while there's nothing remotely wrong with that, I'd suggest the 24-70 or 90-280 were the right tools for that job.

 

For actual portraiture, distinct from candid photography or snapshots, where you specifically engage with a subject to take their picture, you just don't need AF let alone fast AF.

both images show kids but not moving kids

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

both images show kids but not moving kids

 

Well the trick is to click the shutter when they stop moving whether you have AF or not. Neither of my two stay still for a moment, the youngest particularly so and  this shot of him was part of a set where he was moving a lot so I just stopped the lens down.

 

AF in a lens that you specifically want for portraiture is a luxury rather than a neccessity but by all means incorporate it in the design if you think it will sell more copies. I doubt that Leica will sweat making it incredibly fast and I suspect this is the reason that the 50 SL Summilux is also fairly pedestrian compared to the 24-90 (as is widely reported on here).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pedestrian in AF speed ... I'm not sure it is reliably that much slower (if at all) than manual focus.

 

I don't have the lens, but what I read about its image quality sounds pretty compelling.  I don't need that marginal improvement.  For myself, having excellent M mount primes for 21-28-50-75, I don't see myself needing or justifying the AF-SL primes.  I already have the 24-90mm zoom, so I'm not sure what I'd be adding.

 

I'm not a huge fan of AF, but I've become used to it (I no longer fight it).  In my experience, the size of a lens has no impact on image quality, so I don't really worry too much about it.  If I was in the market for an SL prime for portraiture, neither size nor AF would be deciding factors (for me).  I think image quality would be the thing.  I love the way the 75 Summilux is a little soft wide open, and tack sharp stopped down.  The only problem is being aware that the depth of field is wafer thin wide open (more so than the Noctilux, another candidate for a good portrait lens).

 

My solution to AF is to set the camera to manual focus, press the joystick and then fine focus manually (thanks Godfrey for that tip).  I guess my point is, if people don't like the size, expense or speed of the AF primes, the M primes are fabulous (probably a little more expensive bought new).  I really don't understand the size of these top quality lenses - the APO-Summicron-M 50 is diminuitive and the Summilux-M 50 not much bigger, yet the manual focus Otus lenses are huge (none of them AF).  I guess Leica has concentrated on small as possible for the M line, and it isn't seen as important for the rest.

 

Cheers

John

Edited by IkarusJohn
Link to post
Share on other sites

AF in a lens that you specifically want for portraiture is a luxury rather than a neccessity but by all means incorporate it in the design if you think it will sell more copies. 

There are already the 75 and 90 M Summicrons that work terrifically with the SL. Manual focus only. So you can be one happy camper. With the 75 and 90 Summicron-SL Leica is broadening the product range for those who actually want AF. It's called giving people more choice. It's broadening the addressable market. So from Leica's perspective it's good business practice. From a user's perspective, you can try to impose your views on others here as much as you want. No one gives a monkey's.

Edited by Chaemono
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was more interested in your process; in how you shoot portraits. There's still so much I don't know I was hoping to learn from it.

Just one example.

 

I sometimes get my subjects to move around to get them relaxed - turn around, bend over, walk about - and ask them to finish by turning to look at the camera. When someone bends over with their eyes shut, then lifts their head to look straight at the camera, there is a fleeting moment when their eyes are wide open and taking in a new scene - it just lasts for a second. Sure, you can do it with manual focus, but I prefer to think about the expression and the moment, not focusing.

 

So when you say "no one cares about AF speed (actually no one cares about AF)" - I disagree.

And for someone who can write "There's still so much I don't know", you are rather didactic in your statements about what portrait photographers care about.

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one example.

 

I sometimes get my subjects to move around to get them relaxed - turn around, bend over, walk about - and ask them to finish by turning to look at the camera. When someone bends over with their eyes shut, then lifts their head to look straight at the camera, there is a fleeting moment when their eyes are wide open and taking in a new scene - it just lasts for a second. Sure, you can do it with manual focus, but I prefer to think about the expression and the moment, not focusing.

 

So when you say "no one cares about AF speed (actually no one cares about AF)" - I disagree.

And for someone who can write "There's still so much I don't know", you are rather didactic in your statements about what portrait photographers care about.

 

Thank you for sharing, genuinely interesting to read and think about.

 

Yes I am didactic but I am also highly reflective and able to change my mind and views based on new perspectives. I think that in the instances you've articulated here I can see some value in AF though it's still very straight forward to do it manually if you're in a studio setting with strobes; very hard to do that elsewhere because you'd be wanting to shoot at a wide aperture to isolate the subject. In a studio you'd just stop the lens down and use pre-focus and strobes to illuminate the subject.

 

Perhaps the more relevant question in response to these lenses is, 'why these lenses?' as opposed to say a 35mm & 50mm SL Summicron and then wider primes. Since the M versions offer just as much utility (if not convenience) as the forthcoming 75 and 90 SL versions, I'm curious why Leica would prioritise these over the shorter focal lengths where AF has much more to offer.

 

 

you can try to impose your views on others here as much as you want. No one gives a monkey's.

 

 

I'm not trying to impose anything but I am most definitely being quite challenging (here and as you know elsewhere on the SL forum). I think we both know that if no one gave a monkey's no one would take the time to respond to my challenges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read with some amusement argument for AF lens on LUF, by all means have AF lens if you think you need or want one.

 

In many situations MF rules supreme, if wildlife specialists like Doug Herr can capture small birds in flight with MF long telephoto than surely there is argument to have shorter focal lengths as manual. One of reasons I moved from Nikon to Leica, especially SL601 (I am an amateur) was ability to focus manual lens successfully. If I really wanted AF system likes of Canon or Nikon provide full frame digital bodies with 24 to 50MP sensors and AF primes/ zooms from 12 to 800mm FL for less money than Leica equivalent.

 

Other reason to favour MF over AF, compact size apart, is lack of electronics. Focusing motors can go wrong, just ask S users, and Leica is not famous for its electronic prowess, pretty much every digital M model had some electronic issue of one kind or other, also many S lenses had focusing motor issues, hopefully SL range is built to higher standard (Panasonic contribution).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read with some amusement argument for AF lens on LUF, by all means have AF lens if you think you need or want one.

 

In many situations MF rules supreme, if wildlife specialists like Doug Herr can capture small birds in flight with MF long telephoto than surely there is argument to have shorter focal lengths as manual. One of reasons I moved from Nikon to Leica, especially SL601 (I am an amateur) was ability to focus manual lens successfully. If I really wanted AF system likes of Canon or Nikon provide full frame digital bodies with 24 to 50MP sensors and AF primes/ zooms from 12 to 800mm FL for less money than Leica equivalent.

 

Other reason to favour MF over AF, compact size apart, is lack of electronics. Focusing motors can go wrong, just ask S users, and Leica is not famous for its electronic prowess, pretty much every digital M model had some electronic issue of one kind or other, also many S lenses had focusing motor issues, hopefully SL range is built to higher standard (Panasonic contribution).

Replace AF with MF and the (highlighted) statement would still be true for Zeiss lenses and Canon/Nikon/Sony bodies. But that wouldn't satisfy you or me.

Fortunately Leica recognises that some photographers like MF and some like AF - and sometimes it's the same photographer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course - I have two, seven and four that I shoot with a manual focus lens all the time.

 

35253572384_961ccf8cf5_k.jpgIt's Time for Bed - Blood & Water by Greg Turner, on Flickr

 

35276784084_3807d59621_k.jpg7.05pm by Greg Turner, on Flickr

 

 

OK but then that's not really a 'portrait', it's a candid/snapshot and while there's nothing remotely wrong with that, I'd suggest the 24-70 or 90-280 were the right tools for that job.

 

For actual portraiture, distinct from candid photography or snapshots, where you specifically engage with a subject to take their picture, you just don't need AF let alone fast AF.

 

 

Regardless of what you used to make the photos, they are wonderful, sensitive, and poignant portraits. I know that at some day in the future, you will treasure them more than any of the equipment you will ever own. That's what it's all about. Bravo!

 

"Equipment is transitory. Photographs endure."

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of what you used to make the photos, they are wonderful, sensitive, and poignant portraits. I know that at some day in the future, you will treasure them more than any of the equipment you will ever own. That's what it's all about. Bravo!

 

"Equipment is transitory. Photographs endure."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course - I have two, seven and four that I shoot with a manual focus lens all the time.

 

35253572384_961ccf8cf5_k.jpgIt's Time for Bed - Blood & Water by Greg Turner, on Flickr

 

35276784084_3807d59621_k.jpg7.05pm by Greg Turner, on Flickr

 

 

OK but then that's not really a 'portrait', it's a candid/snapshot and while there's nothing remotely wrong with that, I'd suggest the 24-70 or 90-280 were the right tools for that job.

 

For actual portraiture, distinct from candid photography or snapshots, where you specifically engage with a subject to take their picture, you just don't need AF let alone fast AF.

 

Beautiful shots.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Replace AF with MF and the (highlighted) statement would still be true for Zeiss lenses and Canon/Nikon/Sony bodies. But that wouldn't satisfy you or me.

Fortunately Leica recognises that some photographers like MF and some like AF - and sometimes it's the same photographer.

 

True. And expressions as you mentioned is your focus. If you are engaged with your subject, predicting the expression becomes the passion.

 

Also this, while it's nice to have the tactile feel of the mechanical lens but after a long day's work, AF is a boon to me.

When my eyes are just tired. It's nice to have automatics. It's okay to blame the photographer for poor manual focus but if setting

the scene and mood is key, it's nice to be able to farm out the job of autofocusing to a nice reasonably reliable assistant.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...