50 lux vs 50 apo

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is always a combination of the two, not a weakest-link situation.

 

Absolutely, but we are talking about two very good lenses. Neither is a weak link.

[Advertisement]

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

[01af]

I cannot conceive that the 50 mm Apo-Summicron would change any images shot on the 50 mm Summilux in any significant way—even, that is, if sensors were able to utilise the extra information it offers. It is what it is - a superlative lens - but in real world photography its not going to make any difference that's relevant.

That's a common misconception, caused by the false notion that sharpness was a photographic lens' sole property.

 

 

... but there is absolutely no way that a web-based JPEG can illustrate how good a lens is ...

Unfortunately I must agree, this image is not capable of showing off any lens.

Strange how nobody here has eyes to see

 

Sure, it's a tiny image which doesn't show much ... but at least you'd get a glimpse of the particularly smooth bokeh (provided you cared about anything but resolution).

 

 

It is always a combination of the two, not a weakest-link situation.

That's right. An extra-ordinary lens like the Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph will shine on any film or sensor. The first time I tried it was on a Leica M9—and after ten minutes and just a handful of test shots I knew it's going to replace my Summilux-M 50 mm Asph. There's so much more in there than just better sharpness.

[Ivar B]

One sometimes hears that the Apo-Summicron 2.0/50 and the Zeiss Otus 1.4/55 are peforming pretty equally optically. The Zeiss lens is just huge and weighs about 1 kg - how Leica has been able to design such optical quality into such a tiny lens, is truly remarkable.

[jaapv]

That's a common misconception, caused by the false notion that sharpness was a photographic lens' sole property.

 

 

 

Strange how nobody here has eyes to see

 

Sure, it's a tiny image which doesn't show much ... but at least you'd get a glimpse of the particularly smooth bokeh (provided you cared about anything but resolution).

 

 

 

That's right. An extra-ordinary lens like the Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph will shine on any film or sensor. The first time I tried it was on a Leica M9—and after ten minutes and just a handful of test shots I knew it's going to replace my Summilux-M 50 mm Asph. There's so much more in there than just better sharpness.

I don't think it shows the transition of the focus, which is what i care about. Smooth  bokeh in the far backgroung is something that many lenses achieve in macro-type images - I particularly like the Tele-Elmar 135 for that reason.

[Peter Kilmister]

Some time ago a member of the forum asked me to take photos to compare the two lenses. After considering all the factors that might cause variance I mounted my camera on a tripod inside my kitchen with lights switched on. I then attached a cable shutter release, and an SF40 flash gun. Having set everything to be equal I then fitted the Summilux and took a series of shots from f/1.4 upwards to f/11. Next I swapped lenses and took shots from f/2 to f/11 with the APO Summicron.

 

All shots were then developed in Lightroom without altering anything. The developed images were uploaded to Google Photos and a link sent to the forum member. Their response was that the quality of the APO Summicron was clearly superior to the ASPH Summilux.

 

My view is that they are both excellent lenses. The APO Summicron is lighter, more compact, and more expensive. The ASPH Summilux is heavier, bigger, has f/1.4, and is cheaper. 

 

I still own both lenses, however, my first choice is always the APO Summicron. I may sell the Summilux soon as it never seems to be used.

 

P.S. Google told me I was using the maximum space on Photos and I deleted the images to make room for others. Sorry, I can't send anyone the link without spending ages reloading everything.

[pgk]

That's a common misconception, caused by the false notion that sharpness was a photographic lens' sole property.

 

Strange how nobody here has eyes to see

 

Sure, it's a tiny image which doesn't show much ... but at least you'd get a glimpse of the particularly smooth bokeh (provided you cared about anything but resolution).

 

That's right. An extra-ordinary lens like the Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph will shine on any film or sensor. The first time I tried it was on a Leica M9—and after ten minutes and just a handful of test shots I knew it's going to replace my Summilux-M 50 mm Asph. There's so much more in there than just better sharpness.

 

So I will await an image which is substantially better when made on the APO rather than the Summilux, by which I mean clearly and absolutely better - in other words the APO lens has supported the image in such a way as to make it viable when the same image from an Aspheric Summilux would not be. I suspect that I will wait a very long time indeed. 'Sharpness' is indeed only one part of the performance of a lens, often an important one but far from the only one. Small jpegs tell us very little though - everything looks ok on an iPhone screen for example whilst a large print will show up innumerable flaws if they are there.

 

FWIW I see a lot of images from a lot of photographers. I cannot remember seeing, in recent times (the last few years), any 'good' image which has been let down by the lens used. And I've never had an image rejected by a stock agency because of the lens it was shot on.

[anickpick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 50 Apo Cron is better by a large margin when used wide open, close focus range, with the focus point in the outer 2/3 of the frame.

[LocalHero1953]

Can we get away from the notion that somehow because one Leica lens is perceived as "only a little better" than another it shouldn't be a lot more expensive? That is the sort of comment you'll read on other forums about Leica cameras compared to Sony, Fuji, Canikon etc - we Leica owners, of course, know better . It's embarrassing to read it here.

 

What's being argued about here are matters of fact, perception, price, choice....... any one of them could be the key criterion for buying or not, and we find our own level. But being Leica owners already puts us in a space where arguing about IQ/£ is ridiculous IMO!

 

Edit: full disclosure. I have the Apo 50. It didn't replace another 50, except the ZM Sonnar that I bought while on the Apo waiting list. I picked the Apo because it was a focal length I wanted, it had exceptional IQ, and I preferred small size over the wider aperture of the Summilux - and I could afford it. Similar kinds of argument have applied ever since I replaced my otherwise excellent Pentax MX with a used M3 and collapsible Elmar 50.

Edited October 9, 2017 by LocalHero1953

[jaapv]

It is the same everywhere. The last few percent of improvement increase the costs exponentially. Nothing new.

[M11 for me]

Sorry, allow me a small lttle correction of your sentence:

 

It is the same everywhere. The last few percent of improvement increase the price exponentially. Nothing new

[jaapv]

That is not quite correct. With Leica, contrary the Internet lore, price IS related to cost. The manufacturing cost of the Apo-Summicron is probably substantially higher than the customer price of the Summilux. I seem to recall that Peter Karbe made a remark on the extraordinary cost of the glass, for instance.

[pedaes]

Jaapv is absolutely correct in the high cost small benefit ratio at the leading edge. If you take the Lenscore figures as a  objective measure (http://www.lenscore.org) they show scores of;

 

   APO Summicron - 1399

   Asph Summilux  -  1370

 

As a comparison, the regular Summicron scores 871, and the previously mentioned  huge Zeiss APO 1,4/55 Otus 1390.

 

We should agree that both the Summilux and APO Summicron are excellent lenses, and way in front of most other 50mm primes. For me, a key factor is whether the weight of the Summilux is worth the extra stop.

[pgk]

If you take the Lenscore figures as a  objective measure.....

 

Of what? I'm talking about actual images. The difference in actual images between lenses of this class is irrelevant. You are comparing excellent lenses. Both will deliver superb results. Is one simply more superb than the other. Does this genuinely matter in practice? I think not.

[pedaes]

...of the elements used to compile the 'score'.  I am not arguing with what you say, as I completely agree with you. What I was adding is the measured benefit (by Lenscore) is 2.1%

[pgk]

To draw an analogy. At this level of lens 'quality' any differences are like those of the interpretation of a piece of music. One conductor can make his orchestra produce an exceptional performance. So can another, and of the same piece of music. Both may be great performances and some listeners will prefer one to the other. But 'better'? I think not. Both may be very good with personal choices determining which is preferred. Trying to 'score' (no pun intended) a great orchestra for its musical performance of a piece is in many ways like trying to assign figures to score great lenses. Fundamentally pointless.

[pedaes]

"Fundamentally pointless."

 

In your humble opinion. The analogy is not a good one, as it is a scientific fact that some aspects of a lenses performance can be measured. 

[pgk]

"Fundamentally pointless."

 

In your humble opinion. The analogy is not a good one, as it is a scientific fact that some aspects of a lenses performance can be measured. 

 

But not in the photographs they take. Its like trying to analyse the technical characteristics of one orchestra in oder to determine whether it will perform better than another when both are very good. Technical characteristics at the level of these lenses will not determine the image quality in qualitative terms. Both are more than fit for purpose. Both will respond well to being used well. Neither is 'better' than the other. Both are excellent. 

[01af]

At this level of lens 'quality' any differences are like those of the interpretation of a piece of music.

Not true.

 

Sure—there are some ... uh, aspects where you can see a difference without being able to tell which is better, as it's just a matter of taste. But there are other aspects where one lens indeed is clearly, objectively better than the other.

 

One example: Take a picture of a detailed scene at or near infinity, such as a landscape or cityscape, at f/2.8. Look at the area half-way between the frame's center and edge. There, you will find a fuzziness in the picture taken with the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph that looks like camera shake. This fuzziness will be absent in the picture taken with the Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph.

 

But then, that's just one (minor) aspect. The real value of the 50 mm Apo-Summicron is the incredible clarity and transparency of the picture ... almost as if the image magically has thrown itself onto the sensor, with no physical lens involved.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest )-(]

I have the 50 APO and have had the 50/1.4 ASPH. 

I like the APO better. No 'buzzsaws' in the highlights when stopped down a bit.

 

I like 39mm filter better (but the two lenses are not that dissimilar in size/handling)

I'm only using them on film, no sensor required. I don't like the aperture ring on either lens much.

 

I agree that images from the APO do have a different feeling, the flatter field and rounder highlights, all makes for a gentler picture.

(I'll stay away from too many adjectives and I don't take test pictures or A/B pictures.)

 

But honestly I find myself preferring my 50 Summicron 'Rigid' as frequently as the APO.

It's 10 times better made as an object and the meaningful differences in pictures I actually took can be small (the colour can be a little lacking at times)

 

These things are worth whatever they're worth to you. I could certainly easily 'live with' the 50 Summicron Rigid and I hear they don't even bother to make this one anymore.

 

I prefer 50 APO enough to value the lens over the lost stop of aperture to the ASPH, which must say something with film.

 

I imagine there will be some new 50mm lens to come at some point and there will be new superlatives and things that are now suddenly important but weren't discussed before that everyone will wax lyrical about. I'd just get the one you can afford and forget about the other ones. 

[B-A-C]

Lux is an APO FLE as well.  Love both lenses.  The Lux ASPH on Portra 400 is magic.  Love the night shots.  Go with what you want neither will let you down.