Leica Summilux-SL 50mm f1.4 ASPH

[Jenningsmca]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know when this lens came out a while ago it was slow to focus on the SL and hence I decide to not purchase it.

Can anyone who owns this lens and the newer SL2 tell me if the SL2 in any way makes this lens focus better or should I just invest in the APO-SUMMICRON-SL 50mm f2 ASPH.

 

Thx

 

MJ

[thatkatmat]

It received a firmware update that made it faster. It's a very usable speed unless you're shooting sports or something extremely demanding. But, I didn't have it when I got my SL2 so I can't say if it's faster on the 2. My point is, if you can deal with the size, it's the best 50 I've ever shot...It renders BEAUTIFULLY. I wouldn't worry about the AF...50mm at 1.4 is SHARP, contrasty and the colors are beautiful....I got rid of it because of the weight, I bought an M to replace it....but, I think I made a mistake.

I say get the SL Lux if you want the best IQ, unless you're worried about weight.

[hofo100]

vor 59 Minuten schrieb Jenningsmca:

... or should I just invest in the APO-SUMMICRON-SL 50mm f2 ASPH.

No experience with the Summilux SL but very happy with the Summicron - here is a link to a series entirely shot on SL2 with that lense - I definitely do not miss the 1.4f extra stop.

[Ivar B]

I don`t think there is any doubt that the Apo-Summicron-SL 50mm is a better lens optically. It boils down to if you need 1.4 or not and if you can live with the extra weight of the Summiliux.

I believe that some of the aberrations of the SX are corrected by camera software, but Leica does not publish software optimized PDF. The Summicron 50mm is perfect and in no need of software support.

Edited August 23, 2020 by Ivar B

[thatkatmat]

Wow....i have the 35SL, guess I should try the 50 APO f2 SL too.

Leica says the f2's are optimized to render more like an f1.4 lens. I agree that sometimes my 35SL can render like a 1.4 lens, but, other times it doesn't, depending on the scenario. I suppose with the longer FL the 50 APO might do an even better job at compression.

Still, I think if you need a f1.4, you need an f/1.4 and maybe I'm in the minority, but I think the SL Lux is a great lens.Either way you're shooting with an amazing kit....enjoy!

Cheers

Edited August 23, 2020 by thatkatmat

[T25UFO]

With the SL sensor you very seldom need f1.4 for exposure.  Aperture is for composition and subject separation.  The SL 50mm Summilux is a wonderful lens - just a little on the large size 🙂

[Jenningsmca]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Last time at a Leica store I found all the new SL lenses to be large compared to the m lenses I have now.

MJ

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I have both...

The Summicron (f2) focuses faster than the Summilux (1.4). The 1.4 is not really going to suit any moving target. It's also huge and heavy, if that matters to you. However, it draws absolutely beautifully. The f2 may be a *better* lens but I prefer how the 1.4 draws, even stopped down to match the Summicron. The Summicron is smaller lighter, sharper and nearly aberration free. Although the 1.4 draws slightly better I tend to carry the f2 more because of its size and weight. It just feels perfectly balanced on the SL2 body.

If I were to keep only one it would be the Summilux but for most people I would recommend the Summicron as I think it's a lens that will get more use and unless you have the Summilux you won't miss it.

Gordon

[Jenningsmca]

The Noctilux has always been on my list though through the years I have not been able to purchase it as its such a luxury item. Love the bokeh from it so I am looking to get close to it a little cheaper and with AF would be even better. Hence the question on the Summilux SL on there SL2 and new autofocus might have an edge on the SL.

 

MJ

[Gavin Cato]

I have SL2 with the SL 50/1.4 but not the 50/2.

I do however have the 90/2 which i assume is roughly equal in speed to the 50/2 AF wise.

The 90 is definitely faster than the 50, the 50 can hunt a bit if it doesn't grab a contrasty bit initially. But I wouldn't describe it as slow - just adequate.

I shot a couple the other day 90% on the 50 and I was never thinking about the AF speed.

Optically, it's absolutely drop dead stunning. It would be right up there with my fave lenses of all time across any system. I absolutely love it.

 

Edited August 23, 2020 by Gavin Cato

[ardbeg]

I recently acquired a Summilux-SL 50. It is a great lens but I would agree it is big, like lugging a Hasselblad 501CM with lens into the field big. Doesn’t bother me though. Autofocus is adequate to good but not “snappy” on the SL2 but I don’t shoot sports so no practical usability issues for me. Rendering is somewhere midway between a Zeiss Sonnar C 1.5 in 3D character and an Summilux-M 50 ASPH in color and other attributes. I find the out of focus areas / bokeh at 1.4 to be a bit more neutral than the M ASPH (likely due to the relatively high element count compared to the M) and certainly less swirly, “characterful” than a Lux M pre-ASPH or a F1 Noctilux. From the sample images I’ve seen of the APO Summicron M and the APO SL 50s, the Lux has a bit more character in the out of focus areas and more 3D pop / separation but at the cost of weight. And it is very sharp. Perhaps not as sharp as the APO 50s (SL or M) but noticeably sharper than the Lux M ASPH. 

Edited August 24, 2020 by ardbeg

[Dr. G]

I have both the 50mm Summilux-SL and the APO Summicron-SL.  I agree with everything written above and do find it has more character than the APO Cron.  Even though it's  large lens it balances well on the SL/SL2.  I can't keep two 50mm lenses, though and I've been doing more landscape type shooting lately, so I'm selling the 50 Lux.  

[caissa]

Usually (in the past) I did not like the f 1.4 lenses, they had too many weaknesses. The Summilux SL 50 has no weakness at all (maybe one - it is big). So if I ever would like to use a 1.4, then the SL 50. So for me the Summilux SL 50 is "better" than the Summicron SL 50 which cost about the same (depends on the offers).

For f2 there are many lenses that are more or less equivalent to the Summicron SL 50 in daily use - maybe not as sharp and clean, but drawing nicely, like the Sigma 45 which is also a lot smaller (very handy with fast AF). Panasonic will also bring a 1.8/50 soon. (Their 1.4/50 is optically excellent, but big, so the 1.8/50 could also be optically excellent).

Generally I have the impression that f 1.4 lenses are slower focusing than f2 or f 1.8 lenses. If this difference is important for you, then ...  

If I want a small lens --> Sigma 45. If I want the "best" lens --> Summilux SL 50. (So no place left for the Summicron SL 50, which is a misconstruction from Leica, too expensive (for a nifty fifty) and not optimal for daily use. I still hope for a lens similar to the Summicron R 50 - small and good enough for almost all use cases).

Edited August 24, 2020 by caissa

[Jeff S]

17 hours ago, Jenningsmca said:

The Noctilux has always been on my list though through the years I have not been able to purchase it as its such a luxury item. Love the bokeh from it so I am looking to get close to it a little cheaper and with AF would be even better. Hence the question on the Summilux SL on there SL2 and new autofocus might have an edge on the SL.

 

MJ

Aside from any focus differences, SL2 offers a potential IQ advantage over the SL if the user can benefit from IBIS, either from shake or from extended exposure times.  
 

Jeff

[Dr. G]

One other consideration of the Lux vs Cron SL lenses.  If minimum focusing distance is important to you (it is for me), the APO Cron can get much closer to your subject.

[Chaemono]

I have both. The APO 50 Summicron-SL is like the wife, elegant and slim. The 50 Summilux-SL is like the mistress, voluptuous and bodacious. 😂

[Arrow]

I am a happy shooter of the Lux SL. Do consider that you might get hold of a pristine used copy of the Lux SL for around 3K EURO. Some people seem to wish to get rid of the Lux in favour of the Cron because of alleged bulk, software correction (M lenses are also software corrected), speed (f1.4 is always faster than f2  ), bla, bla issues.

 

Edited August 24, 2020 by Arrow

[FlashGordonPhotography]

On 8/24/2020 at 9:16 AM, Jenningsmca said:

The Noctilux has always been on my list though through the years I have not been able to purchase it as its such a luxury item. Love the bokeh from it so I am looking to get close to it a little cheaper and with AF would be even better. Hence the question on the Summilux SL on there SL2 and new autofocus might have an edge on the SL.

 

MJ

The SL Summilux doesn't draw anything like the M Noctilux. The look they have is chalk and cheese. The closest alternative to the Noct is the CV 50mm 1.1. Manual focus and packed with aberations (as is the Noctilux) but it has that *look*. The Noctilux has it more but the CV is a great way to see if the Noct is a lens you could actually live with.

The Sl Summilux is like most modern 50mm 1.4 lenses. Super sharp in the middle and softer outside wide open with a lovely creamy blur. Very very sharp stopped down. You can also get some nice flare off it. But it isn't a Noctilux which is really not that sharp and relies on it's background rendering to give it's look..

Gordon

[thatkatmat]

I just purchased one again, tried the 50 Cron, it's not for me, it's light it's perfect, but I didn't see the same crisp glow the Summilux gives me at 1.4, anyways, the way the Lux draws won me over. I think YMMV between the two, depending on how you're using it.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount