SL2 prime kit with Summilux M 21mm f/1.4

[Alf62]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The SL2 is in my bag for a couple of weeks now and have enjoyed it very much using mostly my APO SL 35 and the SEM M 21. I have added a 50mm Summicron RIGID f/2.0 (1956) recently and really like the classic Leica look of it.
 

I am reviewing how to build my lens kit for several reasons. First, and with 47MP, cropping to a APS-C size still gives you 20,2 MP which is still usable for printing decent quality on a decent format. Hence focal lengths that are to close to each other is not directly necessary imho. Secondly, “older” M lenses might not be build to deliver the contrast at 40 lines/mm MTF-wise as the newer SL or moderns M lenses like the APO M summicron. Than again, sharpness is not always where we are looking for (my Summicron RIGID). Thirdly, I have read a lot already on the net and here in this forum and there seems to be this idea that wide-angle M lenses might not perform that well on the SL2, mostly in the corners. 
 

I have at this point in time, and with the above in mind, a 21-35-75 prime kit in mind, also thanks to my discussion with Ross @rfunnell on the 75mm. Thanks Ross. With the 50mm RIGID added as a not to be underestimated “fun” lens and good for old Leica look portraits, the prime kit I have in mind gives me a lot of options. Sharpness when I need it, wide angle that I like to shoot from time to time and a choice in DOF/FL mix that gives me a lot of options.

The only thing on my mind that I wish to get more thoughts on is if a 21 M Summilux would be worth it instead of my SEM M 21. I really like the 1.4 option that I see in example images but they are mostly on a M camera.  I have seen the view reviews where a Summilux M 21 is used on an SL (not necessarily on a SL2) but there are only a few. Hence my ask in this topic is if you have thought on this. I use the SEM M 21 also for landscape and it is super sharp. I hope to find out if a Summilux M 21 will give me the Leica look on f/1.4 and sharpness corner to corner on f/5.6 to 8.

Appreciate your thoughts.

[Advertisement]

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

[Fedro]

I have used it extensively on the SL, not so much no the SL2, although from what I see it seems similar to me

It is a lovely lens, very pictorial in rendering, but with quite a few aberrations too. From what I read it is not supposed to match the rendering of the SEM until f8 or something like that ..

[Jared]

9 hours ago, Alf62 said:

The SL2 is in my bag for a couple of weeks now and have enjoyed it very much using mostly my APO SL 35 and the SEM M 21. I have added a 50mm Summicron RIGID f/2.0 (1956) recently and really like the classic Leica look of it.
 

I am reviewing how to build my lens kit for several reasons. First, and with 47MP, cropping to a APS-C size still gives you 20,2 MP which is still usable for printing decent quality on a decent format. Hence focal lengths that are to close to each other is not directly necessary imho. Secondly, “older” M lenses might not be build to deliver the contrast at 40 lines/mm MTF-wise as the newer SL or moderns M lenses like the APO M summicron. Than again, sharpness is not always where we are looking for (my Summicron RIGID). Thirdly, I have read a lot already on the net and here in this forum and there seems to be this idea that wide-angle M lenses might not perform that well on the SL2, mostly in the corners. 
 

I have at this point in time, and with the above in mind, a 21-35-75 prime kit in mind, also thanks to my discussion with Ross @rfunnell on the 75mm. Thanks Ross. With the 50mm RIGID added as a not to be underestimated “fun” lens and good for old Leica look portraits, the prime kit I have in mind gives me a lot of options. Sharpness when I need it, wide angle that I like to shoot from time to time and a choice in DOF/FL mix that gives me a lot of options.

The only thing on my mind that I wish to get more thoughts on is if a 21 M Summilux would be worth it instead of my SEM M 21. I really like the 1.4 option that I see in example images but they are mostly on a M camera.  I have seen the view reviews where a Summilux M 21 is used on an SL (not necessarily on a SL2) but there are only a few. Hence my ask in this topic is if you have thought on this. I use the SEM M 21 also for landscape and it is super sharp. I hope to find out if a Summilux M 21 will give me the Leica look on f/1.4 and sharpness corner to corner on f/5.6 to 8.

Appreciate your thoughts.

Tell me what you mean by, "the Leica look" at faster apertures.  

In my experience (based on the SL, not the SL2), the SEM produces consistently better results than the Summilux.  Unless there is a reason you really, really need f/2.8 or faster (unusual requirement in an ultrawide angle), I'd stick with what you've got.  I had the Summilux and used it for some astrophotography, but had to stop down to f/4 or so before the coma became manageable in the corners.  At that point, I was better off with the SEM.  It was kind of cool being able to get some limited control over depth of field wit the lens, but 21mm is wide enough that it really was limited.  It's not like you are going to isolate subjects effectively unless they are right at close focus.

If you have a specific need for a fast lens, the 21 Summilux is actually quite good even wide open (aside from astrophotography).  If you don't need the speed, and most of the uses for an ultrawide such as interiors and landscape work actually benefit from a bit more depth of field, then the SEM is better in my opinion.  

[hillavoider]

cosina voigtlander 21mm f1.4 just came out, I would save 7 grand and get that

[Alf62]

12 hours ago, Jared said:

Tell me what you mean by, "the Leica look" at faster apertures.  

In my experience (based on the SL, not the SL2), the SEM produces consistently better results than the Summilux.  Unless there is a reason you really, really need f/2.8 or faster (unusual requirement in an ultrawide angle), I'd stick with what you've got.  I had the Summilux and used it for some astrophotography, but had to stop down to f/4 or so before the coma became manageable in the corners.  At that point, I was better off with the SEM.  It was kind of cool being able to get some limited control over depth of field wit the lens, but 21mm is wide enough that it really was limited.  It's not like you are going to isolate subjects effectively unless they are right at close focus.

If you have a specific need for a fast lens, the 21 Summilux is actually quite good even wide open (aside from astrophotography).  If you don't need the speed, and most of the uses for an ultrawide such as interiors and landscape work actually benefit from a bit more depth of field, then the SEM is better in my opinion.  

Thanks for sharing your view. Good to have this perspective. 

To your Leica look question, which is indeed good to precise, and to me, there are two aspects to it: 1. what people like to call the Walter Mandler dreamy look, and 2. and not necessarily related to point 1, sharp in the center and a pretty fast fall off in sharpness to the edges and corners at faster aperture with a nice bokeh and a nice separation. 

I am looking to building the prime kit that cover it all, including lenses that offer sharpness corner to corners. Maybe I should keep indeed the SEM and save the money. With the 50mm Rigid and 35 and 75mm SL’s and the SEM, and when I think twice, this kit might bring all of this already ....  

Not that I can afford one, I hope to be able just to try the 75mm Noctilux once... I assume that I will see here the combi of all off this 🙈

[Alf62]

19 hours ago, Fedro said:

I have used it extensively on the SL, not so much no the SL2, although from what I see it seems similar to me

It is a lovely lens, very pictorial in rendering, but with quite a few aberrations too. From what I read it is not supposed to match the rendering of the SEM until f8 or something like that ..

Thanks. 

I saw your comment in other posts on amongst others Noctilux lenses. It is a bit the same dilemma. It is a question of where you are looking for in what situation. Hence, I am looking for the right versatile kit that cover the different needs without ending up with 8 lenses or so....

[Jon Warwick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, Alf62 said:

....  

Not that I can afford one, I hope to be able just to try the 75mm Noctilux once... I assume that I will see here the combi of all off this 🙈

It’s an interesting thought. My reaction has been that images from the 75 Noctilux (and also 90 f1.5) both seem to have a really, really nice combo of very high resolution AND a smoother (more dreamy?) look compared to certain other Karbe lenses that I’ve used a lot, such as the M 50 APO which (to my eyes) has almost too high acuity and hence arguably overly exacerbates the  “digital” look - for my taste at least.

In other words - I probably need to save my pennies for the 75 Noctilux, and wait with intrigue if other lenses with such rendering appear. 

Edited February 23, 2020 by Jon Warwick

[Slender]

You can see a few images of SL(2) + 21 1.4 on LFI gallery. Looks cool! I would assume its nice for reportage/people stuff for a compact solution waiting for Leica's take on the 21 SL.