Low light work -- Noctilux on M or SL / SL Summilux combo

[ardbeg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I will be making a lens and/or system purchases this year. While I have several M lenses which I use on a M 262, I leave the 50mm Summilux pre-ASPH on the body about 90% of the time to do portraiture, street, and night photography. The low light stuff in particular pushes the limits of the M’s high ISO performance and my eyesight isn’t as good as it was 10 years ago despite having a viewfinder magnifier. All that said, give that concentration on low light shooting, I was debating whether I should either get 1) a Noctilux 0.95 (given I have the pre-ASPH Summilux, I thought having a more modern lens design in the mix might be good) or 2) spend a comparable amount of money to get a SL and SL 50mm Summilux given the high ISO performance, AF, and other features of that camera / lens combo present different advantages for low light work.

 

I'm not in a particular rush, so if the SL is potentially the better choice, is it wise to buy now or wait for more clarity on timing on SL2?

 

Thoughts?

[mmradman]

Interesting dilemma, night light shooting and aging eyesight would benefit from AF camera and I guess Summilux SL 50mm may focus faster than MF lens on either M or SL camera. One other thing to consider is the size of the combination, M with Noctilux would be much smaller than SL with SL Summilux.

[Advertisement]

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

[LD_50]

M10 would offer similar high ISO performance to the SL and has optional EVF to help with the eyesight issue.

 

The Noctilux will give you an ISO advantage but won’t help with your eyesight and will be more difficult to focus wide open than your Summilux.

 

In low light the SL EVF can get to be pretty grainy, making it difficult to use sometimes. I recommend you try it before switching systems.

[Irakly Shanidze]

M10 sensor actually offers at least one-stop advantage over the SL. A 1.4x magnifier will solve the eyesight problem. If you need a diopter adjustment, that is available too. My eyesight getting worse, and yet I still find a coincidental rangefinder more reliable focusing tool than AF.

 

After using the SL for almost two years now, I am convinced that as good as M lenses are on the SL bodies, it is still better to use native lenses.

 

Another thing about SL: this is NOT a camera for low light work. Its high ISO performance shines in moderate lighting conditions when you need to stop down (a group portrait, or available light food photography: typical situations where large DOF is mandatory). IR-assisted AF works fine in low light, but third-party lenses require very careful focusing, as focus peaking can be fulled easily by high-contrast elements.

[thighslapper]

Despite the name I have never found the noctilux that useful for night images ...... there is a lot of fringing with highlights and aberrations wide open ...... not much of an issue with b&w but obvious with colour. It's more useful for dramatic wide open effects and portraits. I've done a lot of landscape work pre-dawn and post dusk and the SL is usable in situations where the naked eye can see nothing. Low light AF is good on the 24-90 zoom but not so good on the 50/1.4 ...... but the EVF makes manual focussing easy. Also remember the OIS on the 24-90 gives you back up to 4/5 stops of aperture which makes it as good as the prime equivalents. I've taken plenty of very low light hand held shots over the last 2 years with the SL+24-90 and never had to go above 800iso. Personally that would be my first option. I'm afraid I'd have to disagee with Irakly ..... other cameras may have better high ISO performance ..... but the SL is eminently usable as a low light camera from a practical point of view and produces good images.

Edited February 25, 2018 by thighslapper

[Jeff S]

Be sure your eyes are properly corrected for the RF patch (2m virtual distance) before final assessments. A magnifier will magnify any problems, and can further reduce contrast.

 

I use glasses to correct for astigmatism and for distance, and aging eyes now benefit from the addition of a +.5 diopter, which is fairly common. Most opticians have free trial diopters to test if you’re not near a retailer that carries Leica diopters.

 

I also greatly appreciate the improved viewing experience of the M10 vs the M240 (M262), including higher magnification, a bigger opening and better eye relief.

 

Jeff

[Irakly Shanidze]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Despite the name I have never found the noctilux that useful for night images ...... there is a lot of fringing with highlights and aberrations wide open ...... not much of an issue with b&w but obvious with colour. It's more useful for dramatic wide open effects and portraits. I've done a lot of landscape work pre-dawn and post dusk and the SL is usable in situations where the naked eye can see nothing. Low light AF is good on the 24-90 zoom but not so good on the 50/1.4 ...... but the EVF makes manual focussing easy. Also remember the OIS on the 24-90 gives you back up to 4/5 stops of aperture which makes it as good as the prime equivalents. I've taken plenty of very low light hand held shots over the last 2 years with the SL+24-90 and never had to go above 800iso. Personally that would be my first option. I'm afraid I'd have to disagee with Irakly ..... other cameras may have better high ISO performance ..... but the SL is eminently usable as a low light camera from a practical point of view and produces good images.

 

There is nothing to disagree about. Compared to hundreds of other cameras, SL is way ahead for low-light work. M10, however, is not one of them

So, on a practical note, if I were to decide what to get for low-light work, I would go with M10. If the main criterion were versatility, SL wins hands down.

[lx1713]

M10 sensor actually offers at least one-stop advantage over the SL. A 1.4x magnifier will solve the eyesight problem. If you need a diopter adjustment, that is available too. My eyesight getting worse, and yet I still find a coincidental rangefinder more reliable focusing tool than AF.

 

After using the SL for almost two years now, I am convinced that as good as M lenses are on the SL bodies, it is still better to use native lenses.

I agree on both points but thankfully the magnify 10x for AF is available on the SL. Makes up for the rangefinder focusing reliability but it doesn't make for a smooth shooting nor compare with the speed of rangefinder focussing.

[frame-it]

i use the M 50 summilux on my SL, at night, on the street, in available light, at f1.4 with no issues...im curious...you actually think the SL50mm will lock focus in low/available light at night on the streets at f1.4 ?

 

 

 night light shooting and aging eyesight would benefit from AF camera and I guess Summilux SL 50mm may focus faster than MF lens on either M or SL camera.

Edited February 26, 2018 by frame-it

[lx1713]

I've lock focus at ISO 50,000 at f4, 1/15 second but it is with a contrasty subject. It's better than what my eye can do. More importantly better than a DSLR without IR aid.

[frame-it]

nice but is it a nice usable image that can be printed framed and sold? i rarely go above ISO 1600.

 

 

but i get your point...from reading these forums i thought the SL50 doesn't lock focus so well at night in low light.

 

 

 

I've lock focus at ISO 50,000 at f4, 1/15 second but it is with a contrasty subject. It's better than what my eye can do. More importantly better than a DSLR without IR aid.

[mmradman]

i use the M 50 summilux on my SL, at night, on the street, in available light, at f1.4 with no issues...im curious...you actually think the SL50mm will lock focus in low/available light at night on the streets at f1.4 ?

Never handled the Summilux SL, assumed it will focus on night scene, it is AF lens after all.  You still need some light to photograph and acquire AF, AF cameras were able to do that for years now so can't see why not the SL601 with the Summilux SL.

 

For manual focus in my experience SL EVF is far easier to use at night than M RF patch.

[lx1713]

nice but is it a nice usable image that can be printed framed and sold? i rarely go above ISO 1600.

 

 

but i get your point...from reading these forums i thought the SL50 doesn't lock focus so well at night in low light.

 

Have not actually shot anything I wanted to keep at above 12,800 but I thought I might be pleasantly surprised. I was not. At least it's sharp.

 

I forgot to add. I needed to magnify image to help the SL.

[ramarren]

...

Another thing about SL: this is NOT a camera for low light work. Its high ISO performance shines in moderate lighting conditions when you need to stop down (a group portrait, or available light food photography: typical situations where large DOF is mandatory). IR-assisted AF works fine in low light, but third-party lenses require very careful focusing, as focus peaking can be fulled easily by high-contrast elements.

Huh? Why do you have to use AF or focus peaking to achieve good focus? I'm nearing 64 years old, use a Summilux-R 50mm on my SL quite a lot, and have no difficulties whatever shooting in extremely dim circumstances. ISO 3200 and 6400 are just fine, even for color work, as long as the diminished dynamic range at such stratospheric ISO settings isn't a problem for your work (I usually don't go higher than ISO1600).

 

I see this nonsense all the time lately: "Oh, I'm getting old and my eyesight isn't as good as it once was. I must buy an AF camera to help me out. Boo hoo!" BS. My eyesight was NEVER very good ... I've been wearing a pretty strong prescription since I was in fourth grade ... yet I can consistently nail perfect critical focus with my Leica M, my Leicaflex SL, and my Leica SL all the time using manual focus. I only rarely use the focus magnification or peaking features on the SL with any lens over 35mm focal length either. I do better than any of the AF systems I've had at it too. Why? Because I practice, practice, practice focusing my cameras and lenses, constantly. There are techniques to focusing a lens, it's not a natural act that just descends from the heavens when you're born.

 

Humbug.

Edited February 26, 2018 by ramarren

[ardbeg]

Thank you all for your responses. I should add that while my eyes are going (albeit slowly), I'm pretty good at nailing focus on the M. The bigger issue is I don't like the high ISO performance of the M 262 (it is great at 2000 or lower but above that not so much in my opinion) thus a speedier lens (Noctilux) or better ISO performance of another body could address. I'd say your comments have talked me out of the Noctilux. I do like the uniqueness of the rendering as I've tried one on my 262 but the RF blockage is a problem (not so much the weight). I had not considered getting an M10 as I haven't had the 262 that long as I relatively recently upgraded to it when my M8 screen broke (non-replaceable part). The other thing I didn't mention previously was that I have young children and despite my manual focusing skills (in regular or low light), manual focus tracking them is a challenge regardless of lighting and thus adding an AF camera to the mix to complement the M seemed like another reason to expand the options beyond just the M portfolio.

Edited February 26, 2018 by ardbeg

[johnbuckley]

I'm fortunate enough to have an SL and an M10, and an SL 50 Summilux and an 0/95 Noctilux.  I think Thighslapper is correct that the Noctilux is less optimal for low-light use, on either camera, than for its ability to isolate the in-focus subject from the OOF area.  The M-50 Summilux is, in some ways, a better low-light lens, if low-light is the optimal value, not subject isolation and bokeh.

 

I love my SL, and I love the SL 50 Summilux.  But I think of the optical viewfinder of the M10, coupled with the 50 Summilux, as thing I'd want in, say, a dark bar trying to focus on a subject. And if you also have the EVF, you can go back and forth to see what works.

 

To me, the SL with its great EVF is a great camera, but not ideal for low light, even with the SL 50 Summilux and the new firmware.  I'd rather use the M10, perhaps because I'm more practiced with it.  

 

If you want one camera and one lens for this sort of work, no doubt the SL and SL 50 would be really good.  But if low-light shooting is the priority, I'd try your 50 Summilux on an M10, with and without the EVF, before making that switch.

[tom0511]

I find a precise AF specially usefull on fast lenses with shallow DOF.

I also find the Noctilux DOF at 0.95 allmost too shallow for many subjects.

So if I had to choose I would go for the SL and 50/1.4, but only if you are fine with the size of the lens.

[IkarusJohn]

Hi Ardberg,

 

I'm in my late 50s and find myself wearing my progressive glasses more and more.  For photography, I can still get away with not using glasses.

 

I have the Monochrom, and Noctilux 0.95 and Summilux-M 50 ASPH; and SL with the two zooms and the 50 Summilux-SL.

 

Given the choice, this is how I see it.  The Monochrom is really better with the 50 Summilux-M.  It's fine with the Noctilux, but if you're using it on your M262, colour fringing can be a nightmare, and good focus at times hit and miss (even if your lens and camera are properly calibrated).  With practice, focus isn't as bad as the 75 Summicron-M ASPH, as the lens has a long focus throw.

 

On the SL, however, the Noctilux is a different creature.  Little or no fringing, and a far better focus hit rate (In my experience).  I love the Noctilux on the SL, and provided you manage the depth of field sensibly, it has lots of character.

 

However, with FW 3.1, the SL and 50 Summilux-SL knocks its socks off (in my view).  The 50 SL is sharp corner to corner, has little difference in sharpness at any aperture, and the AF works well (enough), in my view, in low light.  The transition from sharp to out of focus is smooth and the out of focus areas buttery.  It's big, but I like it.

 

I'm not a great adherent of AF, but the AF with the 50 SL works for me.  The EVF has a diopter adjustment built in, and you can program the rear joystick so that you have the camera in manual focus, and you then press the joystick for AF.  If you need to confirm focus, you can then press the lower left button (briefly) for magnification and a second time for greater magnification.  For me, this is a highly effective system.

 

Good luck with your decision.

 

Cheers

John

Edited February 27, 2018 by IkarusJohn

[RoySmith]

Hi Ardbeg

 

Every photographer is different. Some prefer the EVF some the rangefinder. See what works for you. I prefer the SL with the 50mm SL Summilux. The AF with it is much better with firmware 3.1

 

I’m curious - is Ardbeg your name or your favorite drink - or both?

 

Roy

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ardbeg]

Favorite drink...although certain Springbanks and Port Ellen are competing favorites.