Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
IkarusJohn

35 Summilux-TL on the TL2?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The AF isn't superb, but it's fine. It locks focus slower than my Nikkor 50/1.4 but it's accurate when it does. You don't fight for perfect focus, you usually simply get one. The image quality is great, also at 1.4 of course which I use at 70% of my shots with this lens

Bokeh is very nice. This lens is pretty big and I prefer it without the lens hood. Great portrait and day-to-day lens. I'll try to post something here soon so you can see the bokeh (that's what I'm after when thinking about the lenses)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still, these images are tack sharp! With the slow auto-focus on the Summicron-TL, I’ve been wondering if I’d be happier with the M summilux instead. But then again, the shorter focusing distance with the TL lens gives me more bokeh. What’s you preference??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS

Still, these images are tack sharp! With the slow auto-focus on the Summicron-TL, I’ve been wondering if I’d be happier with the M summilux instead. But then again, the shorter focusing distance with the TL lens gives me more bokeh. What’s you preference??

what pictures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting these, Rob.  The out of focus areas look more to me like the 35 Summilux-M FLE than the 50 Summilux-M ASPH - not that pleasing ... It may be a factor in the focusing distance and the nature of the background - it's not as smooth as I'd like.  It may also be a factor that focusing on an object so close, the depth of field is very narrow - so narrow that the entire subject is not in the plane of best focus ...

 

Has anyone got images taken with the TL2 and this lens? (not that it makes a lot of difference, I guess).  I'd also be interested in the AF performance with the TL2.

 

Cheers

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The out of focus areas look more to me like the 35 Summilux-M FLE than the 50 Summilux-M ASPH - 

 

 

 

John,

Not sure that I understand . . . . The last several were taken with the 35 Summilux M FLE, not the 50 Summilux. Sorry if my posts were not clear.

Are you looking for shots with the 35 1.4 TL?

Rob

Edited by ropo54

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rob,

 

Sorry for the confusion.  I was commenting on the quality of the out of focus areas of what I thought were the 35 Summilux-TL images that you posted - I didn't realise that you were posting 35 Summilux-M FLE images.  

 

I like the out of focus treatment of the 50 Summulix-M (and the Noctilux 0.95 and the 50 Summilux-SL, actually) - something to aspire to.  I never liked the out of focus treatment of the 35 Summilux-M and your images seem to have the same "busy" out of focus treatment.  I'm not sure.

 

The 50 Summilux M and SL versions have, to my eye, the preferred bokeh, the 35 Summilux-M not so much; the 28 Summilux-M can be good.  The quality of the out of focus areas is subjective, and depends on may things, but to my mind the following is helpful:

 

(1)  depth of field - if you want the subject to stand out, you have to ensure that the entire subject is in focus, which may mean selecting a smaller aperture for closer subjects.

 

(2)  checking the background - a busy and distracting background will spoil any photo regardless of the strength of the subject or the quality of the bokeh.  Similarly, if the light is soft, then the out of focus spots can be more pleasing, whereas bright harsh light can result in less pleasing out of focus areas.

 

(3)  understanding the qualities of the lens - many criticise the modern, Karbe designed lenses for being too clinical and having unpleasing bokeh.  The blurring of out of focus objects is largely when the circle of confusion is bigger than the subject definition, so you get blurred details.  These can be round, oval or polygonal with points of light, depending on the shape of the aperture blades on your lens.  My LTM Summitar 50/2 from 1948 has lovely round aperture blades, which gives pleasing out of focus spots, but its spherical design can give weird swirly bokeh that will make you seasick if you're not careful about the background.

 

The transition from in focus to out of focus is also important (to my eye) for a pleasing image - some lenses (50 Summilux-SL) handle this well, others not so much.  Again, it is, perhaps, in the eye of the beholder.

 

(4)  focusing distance - this can also impact on all of the above.

 

So, what I was looking for is how the lens handles the transition from in focus to out of focus, and what the out of focus areas look like.  I guess I would also be interested to see how sharp it is, in practical terms, across the image, as the advantage of the TL2 and SL is to be able to focus accurately off-centre.

 

Cheers

John

Edited by IkarusJohn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Rob,

 

As you can see from your Noctilux photo, the selection of focal point and depth of field is important.  The leaf in the centre of your picture is crisp, but nothing else is as crisp.  The fall-off from in focus to out of focus is nice, and the out of focus areas smooth.  I also have this lens, and it is particularly nice on the SL.

 

What I really want to see is images taken using the 35 Summilux-TL 1.4 on the new TL2 camera.  I have the TL2, so I can take pictures using the Noctilux and 21-28-50 & 75 Summiluxes myself.

 

Cheers

John

Edited by IkarusJohn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS

Hi Rob,

 

Sorry for the confusion.  I was commenting on the quality of the out of focus areas of what I thought were the 35 Summilux-TL images that you posted - I didn't realise that you were posting 35 Summilux-M FLE images.  

 

I like the out of focus treatment of the 50 Summulix-M (and the Noctilux 0.95 and the 50 Summilux-SL, actually) - something to aspire to.  I never liked the out of focus treatment of the 35 Summilux-M and your images seem to have the same "busy" out of focus treatment.  I'm not sure.

 

The 50 Summilux M and SL versions have, to my eye, the preferred bokeh, the 35 Summilux-M not so much; the 28 Summilux-M can be good.  The quality of the out of focus areas is subjective, and depends on may things, but to my mind the following is helpful:

 

(1)  depth of field - if you want the subject to stand out, you have to ensure that the entire subject is in focus, which may mean selecting a smaller aperture for closer subjects.

 

(2)  checking the background - a busy and distracting background will spoil any photo regardless of the strength of the subject or the quality of the bokeh.  Similarly, if the light is soft, then the out of focus spots can be more pleasing, whereas bright harsh light can result in less pleasing out of focus areas.

 

(3)  understanding the qualities of the lens - many criticise the modern, Karbe designed lenses for being too clinical and having unpleasing bokeh.  The blurring of out of focus objects is largely when the circle of confusion is bigger than the subject definition, so you get blurred details.  These can be round, oval or polygonal with points of light, depending on the shape of the aperture blades on your lens.  My LTM Summitar 50/2 from 1948 has lovely round aperture blades, which gives pleasing out of focus spots, but its spherical design can give weird swirly bokeh that will make you seasick if you're not careful about the background.

 

The transition from in focus to out of focus is also important (to my eye) for a pleasing image - some lenses (50 Summilux-SL) handle this well, others not so much.  Again, it is, perhaps, in the eye of the beholder.

 

(4)  focusing distance - this can also impact on all of the above.

 

So, what I was looking for is how the lens handles the transition from in focus to out of focus, and what the out of focus areas look like.  I guess I would also be interested to see how sharp it is, in practical terms, across the image, as the advantage of the TL2 and SL is to be able to focus accurately off-centre.

 

Cheers

John

John

I just went through what Leica TL 35mm f1.4 fliker there are on line and there are some nice shots and many shite shots.............I'm guessing its down to human error but I did not see anything WOW like what you would expect to see on say the Summerlux 50 1.4 or the Noctilux or even the 90mm APO..................I also guess its early days for that lens, but I hope to have it in a few weeks time and I will try and get the beast out of it

 

Neil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thorsten has some images on his site, and they are nice (unfortunately, relatively small jpegs).  Unfortunately, the images which stand out are taken with the Noct and 50 Summilux-SL.  Not what I want to hear, as I'd ruled that lens out (I already have three very good 50mm M mount lenses).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the TL-35mm and think it works pretty well on that 'old' original T

 

 

 

Breakfast Room in the Town Hall Hotel 

 

Tower Bridge & Docklands 

 

Champagne all round 

 

Tower Bridge at night 

 

Tower Bridge all lit up 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John,

Perhaps these will be more helpful  . . . T+35 1.4 TL

Rob

Edited by ropo54

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS

I love the TL-35mm and think it works pretty well on that 'old' original T

 

 

 

Breakfast Room in the Town Hall Hotel

 

Tower Bridge & Docklands

 

Champagne all round

 

Tower Bridge at night

 

Tower Bridge all lit up

Darren

Did you shoot those night shoots hand held and at what iSO??

 

Neil

Share this post


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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...