M10 and Super Fast Lenses

[Dennis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, M10 for me said:

I would whish to see more sharp Noctilux images though

Without to consider all the possible negatives aspects, what to expect about sharpening of this new 50 0.95 lens?

https://leicarumors.com/2020/04/10/ttartisan-50mm-f-0-95-lens-for-leica-m-mount-to-be-released-in-a-few-weeks-first-official-pictures-of-the-lens-included.aspx/

🤔

[adan]

On 6/3/2020 at 9:02 AM, rcerick said:

After replacing my M9 with an M10 and seeing how much better it is at high ISO shooting, I wonder whether the need for Summilux lenses in low light (no flash) situations still exists.

I guess it just depends on how - adventurous - one is in pursuing pictures of human activity.

Picture below was M10 at 12500, 75 f/2.4 at 1/60. And with exposure raised a bit in post-processing, so an effective ISO 20000.

Reflections from the flashlight were the sole light source on the racer. More motion blur (camera and subject) than I like, more noise than I'd prefer - banding starts to show up above 10000. I wish I'd had a 75 Summilux along.

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[Mikep996]

That's a great shot - IMO, you didn't need a faster lens/shutter speed with a lower ISO.  To me this pic captures a moment/feeling much better than a super-sharp image would have.  I know some (many/most?) folks would disagree with me but I think that sometimes maximum sharpness/detail and lack of grain/noise is the opposite of what a particular photo needs for best effect.

Edited June 9, 2020 by Mikep996

[adan]

I don't really disagree - but I would always prefer that it be my choice, not something forced on me.

[Erato]

On 6/3/2020 at 11:02 PM, rcerick said:

After replacing my M9 with an M10 and seeing how much better it is at high ISO shooting, I wonder whether the need for Summilux lenses in low light (no flash) situations still exists.
I found that 800 ISO was the upper limit for good IQ with the M9, but the M10 produces excellent IQ at ten times that setting. Since the Summilux lenses (35 and 50, specifically) are noticeably heavier and bigger than the Summicrons, what is the benefit of them now other than bokeh when wide open, which the 50 Lux (but not the 35 as much) excels at?
 

From my understanding, FYR, the 50 Lux is the first lens that you don't compromise image quality while the aperture is wide open. Furthermore, in the dim light scenery, the image colors are bright, clean also saturated but the low light scenery might be an exception. In most of the cases, flare suppression is outstandingly surpassing and sometimes even better than the Noctilux or the Summicron.

And of cause, if you're looking for a perfect design lens and expecting sharp images with superb corner-to-corner detail rendition which fulfills large format printing process toward all photographic situations, then the Apo-Summicron-M 1:2/50 mm ASPH with minimizes chromatic aberration can be the best fit for you. 
Remark: this lens generates superb bokeh as well.

Do you need a fast lens mounted on your M10? 
According to my experience, fast lenses are not a must-have if you're familiar with high dynamic range tool. All you have to do is change the shadow and black zone for expecting results, as a reminder, do not overdo it.

[farnz]

1 hour ago, Erato said:

In most of the cases, flare suppression is outstandingly surpassing and sometimes even better than the Noctilux or the Summicron.

From personal experience of the three 50 Summiluxes I've been fortunate to own, particularly from shooting extensively at night into unavoidable powerful spectral highlights, they are good at resisting flare but my 50/1 Noctilux v4 is clearly more flare resistant (and the most flare-resistant lens I've ever owned).

Pete.