Lumix S Pro 50/1.4 vs. 50 Summilux-SL - image thread

[jrp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One thing that sorts the men from the boys is night performance.  The S1R's IBS really helps, but a merely excellent lens such as the M Summilux 50mm would struggle to produce such a clear image as this SL Summilux version, albeit at the most of 6x the volume and goodness knows how much extra weight...

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!

Old Vic Theatre, London, England, UK

[rscheffler]

On 4/20/2019 at 5:27 PM, Chaemono said:

Anyone who crops, and that’s what the S1R guys seem to love about the high MPx count of their camera, should prefer the Summilux for background blur because the double lines and the nervous bokeh of the Lumix lens will become visible in those crops.

I see double line nervous bokeh in the Lux, just not centrally. From these few samples, it seems the rendering of out of focus foreground elements is smoother from the Lumix.

I suspect the Lumix was designed for across-frame consistency in the plane of focus, but gives up a bit of absolute sharpness/resolution/contrast in the centre of the image.

[Advertisement]

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

[jrp]

https://www.lesnumeriques.com/objectif/panasonic-lumix-s-pro-50mm-f1-4-p52031/test.html

A formal test.  They are less than impressed by wide-open sharpness, which just goes to show ...

[Chaemono]

I think it's sharp enough wide open. It looks like a thorough test and they did discover probably its main weakness, the vibrating finger contour (le contour des doigts semble "vibrer.")

[jrp]

Yeah. They don’t seem to like some of the bokeh. 

[Chaemono]

Thorough reviewers, I’d say. 

[Bonnitaet]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for your effort and sharing.

[Chaemono]

In theory, the Lumix S 50/1.4 should be a 'better' performer because it has 13 elements whereas the 50 Summilux-SL 'only' has 11. But, of course, designing a fast reference 50 is not that simple. 😁 

[verwackelt]

Somewhere in the www i saw a comparison between the 28 Otus and an older 28 Nikon lens with much less lenses.
I try to find it again. Did not bookmarked it…
The Otus was sharper but lacks of contrast compared to the Nikon. There was a slight grey veil over the otus picture.
The modulation (is it called microcontrast?) in middeltones was better at the older nikon too.
So i am not shure if many elements are the best way to heaven. If you want pictures with max resolution ok. But if you want more contrast and clarity and can forego for the last 10% resolution sometimes a lens design with less elements may be better for your needs…

Edited May 1, 2019 by verwackelt

[BernardC]

7 hours ago, Chaemono said:

In theory, the Lumix S 50/1.4 should be a 'better' performer because it has 13 elements whereas the 50 Summilux-SL 'only' has 11.

Not really. Often complex/expensive elements are split to save costs. One famous example is the Rolleiflex Planar in their TLR, which added an extra element in the early 1960s (or late 1950s, experts will know more). The change was made to reduce cost, but the performance is indistinguishable.

If anything, the more expensive one should be better because it was made with fewer cost/benefit compromises.

[saxo]

Thank you very much for comparison! Great pictures, realy helpful!

If possible, I would love to see how the lenses compare in the edges, not mainly the sweet central spot. Have you got some examples?

[Chaemono]

vor 10 Minuten schrieb saxo:

Thank you very much for comparison! Great pictures, realy helpful!

If possible, I would love to see how the lenses compare in the edges, not mainly the sweet central spot. Have you got some examples?

None that I can show. I'll try to do the edges this weekend and try to remember to take a tripod along.

[Chaemono]

Am 1.5.2019 um 19:04 schrieb saxo:

Thank you very much for comparison! Great pictures, realy helpful!

If possible, I would love to see how the lenses compare in the edges, not mainly the sweet central spot. Have you got some examples?

Yes, the Lumix S 50/1.4 is sharper in the corners than the 50 Summilux-SL. This applies to every corner but I'll only post the lower right one here the way I like to compare them. But I'm not sure this is the right question to ask. The difference is not material IMO unless one crops a lot. But if one crops a lot, the difference in the way the two lenses render the OOF area becomes apparent and here the Summilux is smoother. So in a way, the Lumix still 'looses.' 😀

This is with a tripod and IBIS off.

Less comperessed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-fJjs52/

S1 + Lumix S 50/1.4 RAW file here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g341192349-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=S08cDh7AMPJUfXkLR09ADPi27ildc7u8QmD4_nkIz1k=

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!

 

S1 + 50 Summiluix-SL RAW file here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g397360439-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=xMsdRJ5ZA6epFh-XeHPUm2LEeUJv0OkZOpx7jotroAc=

[Chaemono]

And now the crops.

Less comperessed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-fJjs52/

S1 + Lumix S 50/1.4

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!

 

S1 + 50 Summilux-SL

[Chaemono]

And two more. Yes, the Lumix S 50/1.4 resolves the brand of the headlights, Marchal, more clearly (no tripod used, IBIS on) but the Summilux appears smoother behind the focus point.

Less compressed JPEGs here: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-fJjs52/

 

S1 + Lumix S 50/1.4 RAW file here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g98099140-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=jRf5F00Zk_gZaQDOOGw2RtWBZYWib2gMMmG5kb0xUok=

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!

 

S1 + 50 Summilux-SL RAW file here: https://cc2032.zenfolio.com/img/g452300232-o750076470.dat?dl=2&tk=4Hipd_d5XnZ9IXGxYUPjeddvefT7-vUOvXQtrXcO0bo=

[hiepphotog]

On 4/28/2019 at 11:32 AM, Chaemono said:

I think it's sharp enough wide open. It looks like a thorough test and they did discover probably its main weakness, the vibrating finger contour (le contour des doigts semble "vibrer.")

what is a vibrating finger contour? First time I heard of it.

[helged]

6 minutes ago, hiepphotog said:

what is a vibrating finger contour? First time I heard of it.

Tendency for out-of-focus structures to look like double lines.

[jrp]

When looking at these on an iPad on the go, it’s hard to see a difference.  Whether there is a difference at printed resolutions is an open question. In view of the relative picture quality, the 2x price and poorer focusing make the Summilux hard to justify. But I already have one, and have a few years’ of pictures with it, so water under the bridge. 

[tom0511]

For my taste the Summilux images look slightly more 3d.

I wish Panasonic had made a f1.8 50mm lens in the size of the Nikon Z 50/1.8. For my taste both 50/1.4 are too large.

Allready owning the 50/1.4SL I will continue to use it, for someone buying a new lens its a different question what to choose.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[mls1483]

Am 1.5.2019 um 16:53 schrieb BernardC:

Not really. Often complex/expensive elements are split to save costs. One famous example is the Rolleiflex Planar in their TLR, which added an extra element in the early 1960s (or late 1950s, experts will know more). The change was made to reduce cost, but the performance is indistinguishable.

If anything, the more expensive one should be better because it was made with fewer cost/benefit compromises.

 

Each additional element adds two air/glass interfaces (except kit lenses. BTW, kit lenses were introduced to lower cost) signifianctly.

The Summilux has the smoother mid-range bokeh imho (see pilot's picture, window). It has also more contras (bike lamp). However, sharpness fall-off is quite similar.

With modern lens designs striving to perfection and eliminating all aberrations (minimizing them), lenses tend do become mopre and more alik. The glass makes still some difference. 

Cosina (Voigtländer), who's boss is a huge Leica fan and who has a collectino of almost all Leica lenses, comes quite close in color rendition. So does Panasonic, it seams.