Leica APO summicron 50 SL vs Summilux 50 SL?

[Donzo98]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

53 minutes ago, RoySmith said:

Keep them both, use one on the SL and the other on the SL2 ! 😊

Sold my SL... S1R on board now  

[Advertisement]

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

[Chaemono]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb IkarusJohn:

and the X1D II ... well, I'm not sure yet.  I regret selling my Hasselblad 500cx gear, and have always had a hankering to return to medium format. For landscape, however, and some short tele work, the increase in size of the 50c sensor has benefits (apparently) over and above just pixel count - dynamic range, colour and other things I'm yet to explore.

I might have waited to see what the SL2 is all about before getting the X1D II. 

[Chaemono]

vor 3 Stunden schrieb giampo:

If your sbjects are mainly people, prefer f1.4 and are a bokeh addictid, you would prefer the lux I guess.

Exactly right. Of the non-Pros here, what I’ve seen from Rob, Arvin, and Don they should definitely prefer f/1.4. For anything else, the difference will be small. 

vor 6 Stunden schrieb Donzo98:

What are you doing 50 wise?? What do you have now, and what are you keeping?

I’m keeping both. 

[tom0511]

The size of the summicrons fits great to the SL body imo. The zooms and the 50/1.4 is ok but really at the limit in regards of size and weight.

I habe a certain fabel for the 50 Lux  rendering though. Therefore i will keep both for some time and Decide then. 

[IkarusJohn]

5 hours ago, Chaemono said:

I might have waited to see what the SL2 is all about before getting the X1D II. 

I doubt, even in your wildest dreams, that the SL2 will have a medium format sensor...

[tom0511]

IMO with new sensors and lenses like the Leica APO Summicrons the difference between FF and MF gets smaller and smaller, for me I am not sure any more if MF is worth it for me any more.

 

 

 

[Chaemono]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 3 Stunden schrieb IkarusJohn:

I doubt, even in your wildest dreams, that the SL2 will have a medium format sensor...

See #46

[Fedro]

IMO I would rather have a MF 50 MP camera than 50 MP on a FF

Besides .. I did consider what you guys suggest last year, and after much thinking I ended up getting the X1D (Mk1) last September and dont regret it one single bit. We were wondering back then what the SL2 would look like, we still do 12 months later and I got 12 months of great pics from the X1D.

I may buy the SL2, and likely will, but we need to see it announced first ..

8 hours ago, Chaemono said:

See #46

 

8 hours ago, tom0511 said:

IMO with new sensors and lenses like the Leica APO Summicrons the difference between FF and MF gets smaller and smaller, for me I am not sure any more if MF is worth it for me any more.

 

 

 

 

[tom0511]

The question for me is 1% better IQ for 30% less speed and flexibilty. For example face detection allows much more chance of nailing a spontaneous situation.

[Chaemono]

vor 18 Minuten schrieb tom0511:

The question for me is 1% better IQ for 30% less speed and flexibilty. For example face detection allows much more chance of nailing a spontaneous situation.

Don’t forget IBIS. 

[tom0511]

Ibis and f1.4 or 2.0 instead of 2.8...

[IkarusJohn]

2 hours ago, Fedro said:

IMO I would rather have a MF 50 MP camera than 50 MP on a FF

Besides .. I did consider what you guys suggest last year, and after much thinking I ended up getting the X1D (Mk1) last September and dont regret it one single bit. We were wondering back then what the SL2 would look like, we still do 12 months later and I got 12 months of great pics from the X1D.

I may buy the SL2, and likely will, but we need to see it announced first ...

Hey Fedro,

While 35mm has way more lens options and is far more mature than digital MF (let's face it, current MF offerings aren't 6x6 Hasselblad by any stretch), I'm not convinced about cramming smaller pixels into the same real estate.  If you look at pixel pitch (the horizontal distance from one pixel to the next):

• 24MP APS-C - 3.91µm
• 24MP full frame - 6µm
• 50MP full frame - 4.3µm
• 37.5MP  S(007) - 6µm
• 50MP X1D 50c - 5.3µm
• 64MP S3 - 4.5µm

there is a clear advantage in the increased real estate offered by a 44x33 sensor in an X1D 50c over the 24MP APS-C cameras and the 50MP 35mm cameras, and to a degree over the S3 with its similar 45x30 sensor (though I have considerable faith in Leica).  In short, I have limited interest in a full frame camera with smaller pixels, when I can get the resolution, dynamic range and colour from a larger sensor in a camera not much bigger than an SL.

Now, I got a bit in the shit when I canceled my X1D order by saying that the SL was a better camera than the X1D and by the time Hasselblad sorted out the X1D, Leica would have updated the SL and would still be ahead.  Some here were a little offended at my dismissal of the X1D, and I guess that was understandable.  But, I was disappointed with the X1D as it was clearly unfinished, and the SL was and remains an excellent camera - I won't be selling mine.

However, I won't be buying an SL2, whatever it has to offer.  My SL does what I want perfectly (I don't suffer from Gordon's LENR nightmares).  I don't need better AF (I press the joystick and then focus manually), or anything else.  It's perfect the way it is.  Why an X1D II 50c?  It has the same old sensor from Sony, and it's the same camera with a better processor, better LCD and probably the camera that Hasselblad should have released in the first place (much like the M10 over the M(240) in my view).

Well, there's no getting over the advantages of real estate over density.  The Sony 50c sensor remains fantastic, and adding the X1D II to my cameras gives me another alternative, particularly for landscape.  It may turn out to be a waste of time (it's all very well having the technology available, but if you don't have the skills to make the most of it, you're wasting your time).

We'll see.

[tom0511]

One of the impressing things about the x1d(i/ii) is the size and form factor. I think it is a great camera and the lenses are also a good compromise between speed and size.

In regards of pixel count...we discuss this every time new generations of sensors come up. I remember when DSLRs had 12 MP and medium format backs 16 mp and people doubted 24MP for a FF sensor would make any sense.

One thing I would like to mention - for people who use a SL and want also a camera with bigger sensor for special occasions/subjects: If one uses a Leica S you can use the S lenses also on the SL, and you can use the SL as a backup for the S, and you have close menue systems.

(I am neutral in regards of x1d vs S and like both systems)

 

[Chaemono]

Whoever gets the X1D at this stage and does not wait to see what the SL2 will be about is making a mistake IMO. 

[Mr.Q]

4 minutes ago, Chaemono said:

Whoever gets the X1D at this stage and does not wait to see what the SL2 will be about is making a mistake IMO. 

The SL2 release does nothing to change the SL and XCD lens lineup.  For a lot of folks, lenses (and their size) are more than half the equation, so unless Leica starts pumping out a selection of APO-Elmarit-SL's there will be no mistake made.

[Chaemono]

The XCD lenses are a bit soft wide open. The M Summicrons stopped down a bit beat the crap out of them: https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-9FSKSS/

[Mr.Q]

So stop down the XCD lenses too LOL

[Chaemono]

They are already “stopped” because they are not fast lenses to begin with. The reason for stopping down the f/2 Summicrons in the comparisons above was to match the MF equivalent aperture of the slow XCD lenses wide  open. See here why:

https://youtu.be/f5zN6NVx-hY

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[nicci78]

You should wait for X2D. 

X1D were not ready for prime time. 

X1D II is barely ok, but it is just a bug fixed camera. Nothing special. Still not prime time camera. They are so much you can do with X1D primitive processor. Even sensor is a little long tooth now with Fujifilm using latest 100MP sensor from Sony. 

[Mr.Q]

1 hour ago, Chaemono said:

They are already “stopped” because they are not fast lenses to begin with. The reason for stopping down the f/2 Summicrons in the comparisons above was to match the MF equivalent aperture of the slow XCD lenses wide  open. See here why:

https://youtu.be/f5zN6NVx-hY

Come on now, the least you could do is put up a warning. I threw up a little bit watching 2 seconds of a Northrup video 

Seriously though, the link you provided in post #56 is a poor attempt at a comparison imo. There is a lot of camera shake and mis-focus. Look at the bottom 2 photos. The M10 is focused on the chest of the bird while the X1D is focused well below the bird's feet.

From my own experience, most of the XCD lenses are superior to M lenses in sharpness. And the IMX161 sensor responds to sharpening with such ease that moving the slider is almost like cheating. The same level of manipulation can not be replicated with any full frame sensor.  So if sharpness is your argument you are in for an uphill battle. The clarity and transparency of the X1D files are on another level.