An SL 50mm Dilemma

[Sohail]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all,

I find myself in the unfortunate dilemma of having to decide between buying the 50mm Summilux-SL or the 50mm Summicron-SL. I know this topic has been done to death. Further, I've read most of the discussions around it, and had made up my mind that the Summicron was the way to go until I was offered a very good copy of a used 50mm Summilux-SL at half the price of Summicron-SL! I'm really torn about what to do and would appreciate some informed commentary on this.

Let me add that I'm not big on bokeh, but I do like to shoot a lot in low-light situations. I don't mind the extra weight and the sluggish AF if the eventual image quality is worth it. What's more, I really like my newly acquired 75 mm Summilux-SL though at times I feel its rendering can be just a tiny bit too clinical for my liking. Maybe I need to shoot more with it until I'm totally decided. So here's my question: of the two 50s, which has the more organic rendering? I know this is subjective. Your responses (with images) would be really helpful in making the decision.

Cheers,
Sohail

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

As a lens set, I am wondering why you are looking at a 50 mm instead of a 35 mm lens. From 50 to 75 is just a minimal crop and will not impair image quality significantly. In other words, 50-75 is an illogical combo., 35-75 is far more versatile.

As to your basic question: if you stop the Summilux down to 2.0 you will be very hard put to find any difference between the images.

[Sohail]

Hi Jaap,

I already have a 28mm, which is my preferred and go to focal length. So 35 is redundant for me. I don't like the compressed look of a 90mm. 75mm is about right. A 50mm is what I use for shots where the distortion of a 28mm gets in the way but can give me a more natural (less compressed) look.

That aside, what are your thoughts on the two 50s?

Edited January 6, 2020 by Sohail

[Alistairm]

Sohail

The 50 Lux is an amazing lens in terms of IQ, and the firmware update has corrected the slow focussing. It is very big, but otherwise there really isn’t anything not to like about it. Especially at the price point you are talking about. 

I also own the 75 Cron and, as much as I love the focal length and the imaging, I find the rendering on the 50 Lux a bit more pleasant. That said, I love the rendering of the 75 Cron as well, so if you’re finding the 75 Cron too clinical I’m not sure the 50 Lux will be what you’re chasing in terms of “natural” presentation. I find both lenses to create very lifelike and appealing images, but they are also very sharp of course. Are you considering other lenses too, or just the native SL glass?

[Macberg]

vor 20 Minuten schrieb jaapv:

As to your basic question: if you stop the Summilux down to 2.0 you will be very hard put to find any difference between the images.

That and Alistairm's remarks would be very relevant hints for me. With the Summilux, you would have the possibility to shoot with a more open aperture (as an owner of the M-Summilux 50mm, I can tell you it won't take long until you really want to do exactly that!) and you would save some money you could invest into your next lens.
So if you don't care about the slower AF (is it really that much slower?)...😉

I personally would probably decide on the SL Summilux 50mm, if I didn't have the M-Summilux already and if I hadn't just bought the SL 35 Summicron (although I have a Q2 with 28 mm - irrational as I am).

Edited January 6, 2020 by Macberg

[Jeff S]

27 minutes ago, Sohail said:

What's more, I really like my newly acquired 75 mm Summilux-SL though at times I feel its rendering can be just a tiny bit too clinical for my liking. 

I assume you meant SL Summicron (and not 75 M Summilux). I would use that more before deciding on another similar lens. And I wouldn’t decide between the Summicron and Summilux without trying the latter first... demo or rental... and see how it fits my needs, style and print results. 

Jeff

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, Jeff, but he can get it cheap, and stopping down (even if anathema in some Leica circles)  equalizes the playing field.

[Sohail]

Thanks Alistair for replying.

This is helpful. Yes, the price is very tempting even if it means more lactic acid build up in my arms!

Re the 75 cron, I'm yet to make my mind up about it but so far I like what I see. The fact the 50 lux renders differently is another reason to get it, especially if you want to broaden your artistic choices. Re other native SL glass, I might wait for the 21mm to come out but I guess the 28/50/75 combo does it for me.

Cheers,
Sohail

[albireo_double]

The Summilux is heavier and focuses more slowly but, in my view at least, has a very slightly more pleasant rendering than my 75 SL. If you can buy it at a significant discount and don't mind the extra size / weight, then it is a no brainer. I bought my copy when I saw Joey L's video from Ethiopia where he was shooting an advertising campaign for the Zaaf collection leather goods brand - he was using the SL with the Summilux SL interchangeably with his Phase One XF and had fantastic results with it. If the Summilux is good enough for Joey, then it is more than good enough for me and, I dare to say, for most people frequenting this forum. On the other hand, if you really want to go compact, then any of the 50mm M lenses will also work fine, minus AF.

Edited January 6, 2020 by albireo_double

[Jeff S]

21 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Yes, Jeff, but he can get it cheap, and stopping down (even if anathema in some Leica circles)  equalizes the playing field.

Not as cheaply as deciding against both. Sometimes less is more... and there are always bargains to be found once needs are clarified.  I’d personally prefer the compactness of the 50 Summicron, but I don’t need f1.4 on the SL2 with its IBIS.  Different strokes...

Jeff

Edited January 6, 2020 by Jeff S

[Sohail]

23 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

I assume you meant SL Summicron (and not 75 M Summilux). I would use that more before deciding on another similar lens. And I wouldn’t decide between the Summicron and Summilux without trying the latter first... demo or rental... and see how it fits my needs, style and print results. 

Jeff

Yes, that's right. I meant 75 Summicron-Sl. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll correct that. 

Interesting advice. For me the 75mm is at the long-end for me. I'm not it would be quite as versatile in a crowd or a tight space.

[Jeff S]

3 minutes ago, Sohail said:

Interesting advice. For me the 75mm is at the long-end for me. I'm not it would be quite as versatile in a crowd or a tight space.

It’s not advice; it’s just my approach.  I use my M’s with 28/35/50 for most of my work. For longer, wider needs (and for zooms, AF, weather sealing, etc), I bought the SL2, starting with the SL 75 and two longer zooms.  I’ll see how that works over time before adding, or deleting, anything.  We each have different needs and preferences. 

Jeff

[Sohail]

14 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Not as cheaply as deciding against both. Sometimes less is more... and there are always bargains to be found once needs are clarified.  I’d personally prefer the compactness of the 50 Summicron, but I don’t need f1.4 on the SL2 with its IBIS.  Different strokes...

Jeff

This is sound advice. The compactness argument is a strong one especially if the heavier 50 Summilux-SL (and cheaper in this case) is not used as much. But again if you know it will give a lush rendering for a particular shot, that may just be all the motivation you need.

[Arrow]

I was also in the SL cron or Lux dilemma. I went for the Lux because of a bargain offer and I do not regret it because of it´s IQ

[Sohail]

2 minutes ago, Arrow said:

I was also in the SL cron or Lux dilemma. I went for the Lux because of a bargain offer and I do not regret it because of it´s IQ

Thanks Arrow. Can you please elaborate why. Presumably you've not had the Summicron-SL to compare it to as your liking for the Summilux-SL has developed. Or have you?

Cheers,
Sohail

[Jeff S]

10 minutes ago, Sohail said:

But again if you know it will give a lush rendering for a particular shot, that may just be all the motivation you need.

None of my favorite pics and prints have been due primarily to a lens that made it lush.  

Jeff

[NRKstudio]

The 50/2 SL Cron is a great lens in terms of sharpness, size and AF speed.  I like it more than the 75 Cron SL as the 50 has less swirly bokeh (less mechanical vignetting), the bokeh balls at the outside of frame are less misshapen than the 75.  I’m not a fan of swirly bokeh.  
 

I use the 35/1.2 Art for thin DOF photography and blowing out the background.  Much more to my liking than the 50 Lux, and it may be sharper than the Lux.  Also, no swirly bokeh, no regular (?) vignetting, backgrounds are far away and blown out, and it’s about the same size, also about 1/4 the price.  
 

TL;DR: get the 35/1.2 Art instead of the 50 Lux, and get the 50 Cron instead of the 75 Cron.  Until more lenses are released, this is how I set up my kit.  

[NRKstudio]

Also, remember, the 85/1.4 Art and the 135 Art are available on L mount and are great portrait lenses to blow out backgrounds and get smooth bokeh.  Also, I’d think about the 50/1.4 Art instead of the 50 Lux.  It’s not as awesome but pretty damn good.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Sohail]

6 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

None of my favorite pics and prints have been due primarily to a lens that made it lush.  

Jeff

Horses for courses.

[Mick H]

3 minutes ago, NRKstudio said:

Also, remember, the 85/1.4 Art and the 135 Art are available on L mount and are great portrait lenses to blow out backgrounds and get smooth bokeh.  Also, I’d think about the 50/1.4 Art instead of the 50 Lux.  It’s not as awesome but pretty damn good.  

Similarly, I use the 35 1.2 Art and 105 1.4 Art high speed primes to compliment my SL24-90 zoom.