bags27 Posted February 21, 2020 Share #221 Posted February 21, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) Wonder how an L prime performs on the TL2. Anybody try that? 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! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/305622-leica-apo-summicron-sl2035mm-average-performer/?do=findComment&comment=3917119'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 21, 2020 Posted February 21, 2020 Hi bags27, Take a look here Leica Apo-Summicron-SL2.0/35mm - average performer?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted February 21, 2020 Share #222 Posted February 21, 2020 Very well, but cropped and ergonomically terrible ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted February 21, 2020 Share #223 Posted February 21, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, bags27 said: Wonder how an L prime performs on the TL2. Anybody try that? 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! Don’t be fooled by this graph. Bill explained why TL2 seems to perform better : Leica changed the black point and cooked the DNG with compulsory noise reduction. Details will be lost and you cannot get them back. Just look at the downwards triangle, meaning noise reduction b I think that the target to TL2 is beginner. No need to fiddle with JPG neither DNG. They will look quite good out of the box. CL, Q2, SL2 DNG and jpg have to be seasoned by the photographer. Something like reheating a frozen dish vs cooking from fresh ingredients. Edited February 21, 2020 by nicci78 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica5 Posted February 22, 2020 Share #224 Posted February 22, 2020 For those looking to Buy APO 35mm SL lens; it is available at leica on line store usa. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRKstudio Posted February 22, 2020 Share #225 Posted February 22, 2020 On 2/19/2020 at 12:09 PM, Ivar B said: I wonder a bit what difference the camera body makes. I noted that the well established German magazine Color Foto awarded the APO-Summicron-SL 2/50 100 points when tested on a 47 MP Panasonic. This fell well short of the 112 ponts awarded to the Panasonic 1.4/50, tested on the same body. The Panasonic lens is no doubt a good perforer (I just bought one) but performing quite a lot better than the APO SL 2/50 - I don’t think I buy that. Is it due to the camera body? Pcmag.com tested the Panasonic 50/1.4 and and the 75 SL. The 75 SL is sharper at all tested apertures. If the 35 SL (and the 50 SL) are sharper than the 75 SL, then all would be sharper than the Panasonic 50/1.4. The 35/50SL are both second gen SL lenses that incorporated newer tech And more ASPH surfaces; im wondering what this 3rd round of SL lenses will have to show. The 28/24/21mm SL may be even a step up from where the SL lenses are currently in terms of tech and glass. https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-s-pro-50mm-f14 https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/leica-apo-summicron-sl-75mm-f2-asph However the $600 Nikon 50/1.8 Z, crushes all of the above lenses even on its 45mp Z7 body. I was surprised to read that it’s smaller, lighter, sharper and about 8-9x cheaper. Kind of makes me think twice about saying Leica is The Premier specialist Optics company, when Nikon takes the leading spot with an entry level 50mm prime. https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/nikon-nikkor-z-50mm-f18-s Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted February 22, 2020 Share #226 Posted February 22, 2020 1 hour ago, NRKstudio said: However the $600 Nikon 50/1.8 Z, crushes all of the above lenses even on its 45mp Z7 body. That's an observation which is becoming more and more common: lenses and cameras have become so software-optimized that old-style resolution tests are essentially irrelevant. The software stack recognizes chart patterns and spits-out "perfect" results that have nothing to do with real-world performance. That was Erwin Puts' recent conclusion: lenses no longer perform as you would expect (using the latest generation of cameras), at least when pointed at charts. The same lenses show clear improvements from wide-open to optimal aperture on an optical bench. Does it really matter? We live in a world where software will make a singer hit notes that they can not hit in the analogue world. Cars pollute much more when you drive them then they do when tested in a lab. Ironically, and fittingly, trends have been going in the opposite direction when it comes to images. People want imperfections, whether on Instagram, or in the art world. Almost no one is impressed anymore by a large print that is perfectly sharp and "accurate." Cinematographers seek-out vintage lenses because their imperfections make stories more compelling, not less. None of this is new. Compare 19th-century Neoclassical painting to the Impressionists that followed. There seems to be a limit to how much "accuracy" humans want in artistic expression. I don't mean to imply that a specific lens/camera combination is bad, or somehow morally wrong, based on the way that it reproduces test charts. For all I know, the camera/lens combination mentioned above will produce outstanding images in the right hands. However, I doubt that the emotional depth of these images will come from the accurate representation of bar-code-like patterns taped to a wall. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRKstudio Posted February 22, 2020 Share #227 Posted February 22, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) 1 hour ago, BernardC said: That's an observation which is becoming more and more common: lenses and cameras have become so software-optimized that old-style resolution tests are essentially irrelevant. The software stack recognizes chart patterns and spits-out "perfect" results that have nothing to do with real-world performance. That was Erwin Puts' recent conclusion: lenses no longer perform as you would expect (using the latest generation of cameras), at least when pointed at charts. The same lenses show clear improvements from wide-open to optimal aperture on an optical bench. Does it really matter? We live in a world where software will make a singer hit notes that they can not hit in the analogue world. Cars pollute much more when you drive them then they do when tested in a lab. Ironically, and fittingly, trends have been going in the opposite direction when it comes to images. People want imperfections, whether on Instagram, or in the art world. Almost no one is impressed anymore by a large print that is perfectly sharp and "accurate." Cinematographers seek-out vintage lenses because their imperfections make stories more compelling, not less. None of this is new. Compare 19th-century Neoclassical painting to the Impressionists that followed. There seems to be a limit to how much "accuracy" humans want in artistic expression. I don't mean to imply that a specific lens/camera combination is bad, or somehow morally wrong, based on the way that it reproduces test charts. For all I know, the camera/lens combination mentioned above will produce outstanding images in the right hands. However, I doubt that the emotional depth of these images will come from the accurate representation of bar-code-like patterns taped to a wall. The questions itself of whether increased resolution and more megapixels improve or aid Artistic Expression was not so much my aim when comparing the lenses. It was whether Leicas claims of optical perfection and this justification of the very high prices of the Summicron is warranted (or is Leica crossing its fingers when saying the SL Summicrons are second to none). I had no idea that the Z7/50f1.8 combo artificially corrects the image so that it scores higher on imatest and other lens test. Really very surprising but believable none the less. When Ansel Adams (In his autobiography) sought perfection from his lenses, cameras and film, he justified it by saying that even the utmost, seemingly insignificant detail was all an important part of the whole. his goal was to make it as if a viewer were standing in front of his camera (even though he of course had his own bag of darkroom techniques), so that they would not miss a thing, even a blade of grass. Only with this perfect detail would the full extent of the grandeur of the captured moment be passed through the camera and into a print. To lose a detail would be to lose the whole scene. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BernardC Posted February 22, 2020 Share #228 Posted February 22, 2020 I have nothing against optical perfection, just wanted to point-out that resolution tests are effectively meaningless. They are tests of how well the camera's software recognizes resolution charts. Software also recognizes faces, animals, etc. The only tests that are somewhat valid are those that take the camera out of the loop (Lensrentals publishes lots of those). Even then they only test for one dimension of lens performance and ignore flare, colour, distortion, mechanical qualities, etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted February 22, 2020 Share #229 Posted February 22, 2020 (edited) S1R + 35 SL @ 2.0... Insanely good 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! Edited February 22, 2020 by Donzo98 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/305622-leica-apo-summicron-sl2035mm-average-performer/?do=findComment&comment=3917789'>More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 22, 2020 Share #230 Posted February 22, 2020 resolution alone is boring. for me its about the overall image-appearance. does the image look 3-d? does it look natural. How is sharpness roll-off. Bokeh? color? I think the Nikon Z 35 and 50 are very good lenses. But they dont fit the SL2. And the Summicrons dont fit the Z7... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted February 22, 2020 Share #231 Posted February 22, 2020 3 minutes ago, tom0511 said: resolution alone is boring. for me its about the overall image-appearance. does the image look 3-d? does it look natural. How is sharpness roll-off. Bokeh? color? I think the Nikon Z 35 and 50 are very good lenses. But they dont fit the SL2. And the Summicrons dont fit the Z7... You be the judge... complete pic is above the crop... 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted February 22, 2020 Share #232 Posted February 22, 2020 https://www.lenstip.com/577.11-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Summary.html I think that we are in the territory of the 100# bottle of wine v the 1000# one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozie Posted February 22, 2020 Share #233 Posted February 22, 2020 How ist that "dxomark score" calculated? I don't get it. For example: the Summicron has better sharpness, better transmission (2.0:2.0 vs 1.4:1.6), less distortion, same vignetting and same chr. abberation as the Sigma but a lower dxo score. Huh? 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! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/305622-leica-apo-summicron-sl2035mm-average-performer/?do=findComment&comment=3917984'>More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted February 22, 2020 Share #234 Posted February 22, 2020 Just one of life's mysteries. Try the 35 APO Summicron and see what YOU think. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 23, 2020 Share #235 Posted February 23, 2020 vor 9 Stunden schrieb jrp: https://www.lenstip.com/577.11-Lens_review-Nikon_Nikkor_Z_50_mm_f_1.8_S_Summary.html I think that we are in the territory of the 100# bottle of wine v the 1000# one. I agree. If I was a Nikon user I would be certainly happy with the Nikon Z lenses and as a Leica user I am certainly happy with the APO-Summicrons. While the Leica Summicrons are steep prices, the Nikon Z primes are not really cheapo lenses either by the way. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaemono Posted February 23, 2020 Share #236 Posted February 23, 2020 vor 10 Stunden schrieb ozie: How ist that "dxomark score" calculated? I don't get it. For example: the Summicron has better sharpness, better transmission (2.0:2.0 vs 1.4:1.6), less distortion, same vignetting and same chr. abberation as the Sigma but a lower dxo score. Huh? 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! People got to eat so marketing dollars spent by a manufacturer on DxOMark sites is probably part of the equation. 😂 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donzo98 Posted February 23, 2020 Share #237 Posted February 23, 2020 13 hours ago, tom0511 said: I agree. If I was a Nikon user I would be certainly happy with the Nikon Z lenses and as a Leica user I am certainly happy with the APO-Summicrons. While the Leica Summicrons are steep prices, the Nikon Z primes are not really cheapo lenses either by the way. Nikon Z lens prices are SUPER CHEAPO compared to Leica prices... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted February 23, 2020 Share #238 Posted February 23, 2020 Sure, but not all - the Nikkor 50/0.95 Noct is $8,000. Sure, only 2/3 of the price of the Leica version, but it does go to show that when Nikon aim at a similar lens in the Leica lineup, it doesn't come "super cheapo". That's not to say that a $900 Nikkor lens isn't any good, but when they try to match a Leica flagship lens, they can't match those "cheap" prices. I sold out of Nikon (reluctantly) years ago, so I can comment on the quality. I'm committed to Leica and Hasselblad ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterGA Posted February 23, 2020 Share #239 Posted February 23, 2020 Hugh Brownstone has made a video about the Nikon 50/1.8. I think he pretty much goes through the issues likely to be discussed regarding the merits of this versus that in his own inimical manner. Interestingly despite the compelling 'value' to be found in Nikon|Canon|Fuji|Sony land - he bought an SL2 and has the 35 APO Summicron on order - make of that what you will. I just see another person who has decided that what feels good in hand and makes one happy walking around /contemplating and looking for the next shot - is the most important part of the journey. So my walking and happy snap companion is now my SL2 and the 35 Summicron is my favourite L mount lens. I am certain that other manufacturers will bing out very impressive 'better' lenses like they always have at much lower prices, like they always have - but I like using Leica cameras and lenses. IF Nikon wish to impress me with value for money systems - they can try and match Fuji which is my utilitarian system - Fuji is the relevant benchmark for 'value' - Leica is about 'fun'. This is not a Nikon bash btw - great company great products - just like every other company making cameras and lenses today . 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NRKstudio Posted February 24, 2020 Share #240 Posted February 24, 2020 On 2/22/2020 at 7:17 AM, NRKstudio said: Pcmag.com tested the Panasonic 50/1.4 and and the 75 SL. The 75 SL is sharper at all tested apertures. If the 35 SL (and the 50 SL) are sharper than the 75 SL, then all would be sharper than the Panasonic 50/1.4. The 35/50SL are both second gen SL lenses that incorporated newer tech And more ASPH surfaces; im wondering what this 3rd round of SL lenses will have to show. The 28/24/21mm SL may be even a step up from where the SL lenses are currently in terms of tech and glass. https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-s-pro-50mm-f14 https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/leica-apo-summicron-sl-75mm-f2-asph However the $600 Nikon 50/1.8 Z, crushes all of the above lenses even on its 45mp Z7 body. I was surprised to read that it’s smaller, lighter, sharper and about 8-9x cheaper. Kind of makes me think twice about saying Leica is The Premier specialist Optics company, when Nikon takes the leading spot with an entry level 50mm prime. https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/nikon-nikkor-z-50mm-f18-s 5 hours ago, PeterGA said: Hugh Brownstone has made a video about the Nikon 50/1.8. I think he pretty much goes through the issues likely to be discussed regarding the merits of this versus that in his own inimical manner. Interestingly despite the compelling 'value' to be found in Nikon|Canon|Fuji|Sony land - he bought an SL2 and has the 35 APO Summicron on order - make of that what you will. I just see another person who has decided that what feels good in hand and makes one happy walking around /contemplating and looking for the next shot - is the most important part of the journey. So my walking and happy snap companion is now my SL2 and the 35 Summicron is my favourite L mount lens. I am certain that other manufacturers will bing out very impressive 'better' lenses like they always have at much lower prices, like they always have - but I like using Leica cameras and lenses. IF Nikon wish to impress me with value for money systems - they can try and match Fuji which is my utilitarian system - Fuji is the relevant benchmark for 'value' - Leica is about 'fun'. This is not a Nikon bash btw - great company great products - just like every other company making cameras and lenses today . I was really just posting about the Nikon 50/1.8 to make the point that the SL Summicron lineup may be, unfortunately for us SL shooters, not as ground breaking as initially sold/marketed. I really did believe the SL lenses were the end all, and better than any other mirrorless line-up. It was one of the reasons I switched to the SL from an A7r4/r3 (aside from being able to use my M lenses). here’s the Nikon Z 85/1.8, much stronger showing than the 50/1.8Z and of course the Leica Summicron 75/2 SL. I do thoroughly enjoy using my 50 SL APO, but it stings a little to know it’s not the revolutionary glass I thought it to be. Note: it still won’t slow me down the least bit making pictures with it. https://www.pcmag.com/reviews/nikon-nikkor-z-85mm-f18-s Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.