M 50 mm summilux “upgrade” to APO

[David_miller70]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’ve had a 50 mm f1.4 Summilux since last year and at the time went back and forward as to whether to buy this or the 50 mm F2 APO. All the recent talk of the new 35 has brought this back!

Whilst undoubtedly the lux is a great lens, I’m wondering if I should exchange. For reference I’m shooting on a M10-R at the 40+ MP.

So is it worth taking the hit cash wise? What would I be gaining and indeed losing, or is it just another wonderful lens with slightly different rendering.

Has anybody done this and regretted it or been happy?

Am I just gassing for something else that others might perceive as better when any improvement is marginal and beyond my amateur eye?

Thanks in advance for your input.

Best, David 

p.s. I know one good  answer is to buy it and after a year sell one, I am considering that.

[a.noctilux]

Hello David,

you had just answered yourself in your P.S.

😉otherwise how would you know ?

Maybe the cost would be (or not too high ).

 

I think that people at Leica know that (GAS and all ! ).

We have choices, that is very nice.

Edited March 12, 2021 by a.noctilux

[Drmat]

I bought the 50APO when I first acquired the M9 monochrom.  I later sold it when my lens needs changed and acquired the 50 lux.  When I bought the M10 monochrom I felt that maybe I was not getting the most out of my camera and again acquired the APO.  I will not lie - the images are spectacular with respect to detail, and all the other technical stuff people seem to like on this forum.  It is especially good if you are the kind of person who crops images and then prints them large.  However, I do not think it is a necessary lens and I am not sure of its marginal value over the 50 lux.  In Canada, I can acquire a 50 lux for less than half of the APO.  That additional cost does not translate into better photos, which generally speaking are more about what you are looking at than how it is rendered, or at least that is my experience.

I find that when I take photos with my APO i spend a lot of time thinking about the quality of the lens and revelling in the detail it gets, but I am not sure that has any bearing whatsoever on the “goodness” of my images.  If you were in Canada, I would gladly trade you... or at least let you take a test run (as that will be the only way you will ever know).

[Hanno]

From another thread, a link to the Red Dot Forum Camera Talk (initially posted by Jeff) on all the Noctilux lenses but also on the 50mm Lux asph and 50mm Cron apo (at the very end of the presentation). You may find it useful in your decision making.

 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Hanno

[onasj]

My first Leica M 50 was the 50 APO, and it is a spectacular lens.  But I found myself increasingly drawn to the look of the 50 lux, and to the extra stop and narrower DOF the latter offers.  They are quite different in how they render a scene.  Both are terrific.  As you probably know, the 50 APO is sharper and has less field curvature.  But the differences are not as much as you might think—less than the difference between the 35 cron ASPH and the 35 APO.  

MTF curves corroborate these conclusions (top two=50 lux ASPH; bottom two=50 APO):

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!

[newtoleica]

I've done this. Nothing to do with sharpness etc, but solely on account of overall rendering at f2.8-4. Unless you're finding with ND filters its often impossible to shoot wide open. The bokeh on the summilux is 'busy' with tramlines and donuts at this stop. The APO is smooth throughout its aperture range. It makes a huge difference to me.

[onasj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, newtoleica said:

I've done this. Nothing to do with sharpness etc, but solely on account of overall rendering at f2.8-4. Unless you're finding with ND filters its often impossible to shoot wide open. The bokeh on the summilux is 'busy' with tramlines and donuts at this stop. The APO is smooth throughout its aperture range. It makes a huge difference to me.

Plus, the lux has ninja star bokeh unless wide open.  Though I find it very useful when shooting in natural light that isn't daylight.

[David_miller70]

thanks for the replies so far.

I'm new to MTF charts and just had look up how to read them. What I take from the above is that (although there is no comparison at the same F-stop), at the lowest two aperture numbers the light getting through and contrast fall off on going from the centre to edge of the lens in the lux looks much worse than in the APO. Am I reading them wrong?

Would such differences not be visible in pictures?

Thanks, David

 

 

[pgk]

2 minutes ago, David_miller70 said:

Would such differences not be visible in pictures?

If you take the appropriate subject matter, know what to look for and are hypercritical then you may be able to discern a subtle difference when pixel peeping or in very large prints. In real world photography the 50/1.4 Summilux Aspheric is an outstanding lens and has few rivals. There is no doubt that the Apo is better technically, but very, very subtly better and (IMO) is a statement lens which shows that Leica can produce extraordinary lenses. Whether you want it (I use the word 'want' rather than 'need'', because at this level 'need' is superfluous) is something that I would suggest only you can decide.

[tightsqueez]

I’ve owned both in the past at the same time, say maybe 5 years, but ultimately sold the Lux. 
 

The differences are subtle. Very subtle to the causal observer, and to be quite frank no one can tell the difference. We are only trying to fool ourselves. 

However if you understand this and look past the obvious, the subtle differences can be rewarding. It’s like a good shot of a top shelf scotch vs a run-of-the mill Jameson... once you tune into the subtleties it’s eye opening. 

 The biggest reasons I went with the 50 APO over the Lux was; wide open on the edges the APO crushed the Lux, not to mention flatness of field. Stitching hand held at f2 is a breeze! Another aspect was the out of focus areas of the Lux at f2.8. -5.6, which I’ve probably proclaimed a thousand times... are horrible. Specular highlights should not resemble stop signs like some dumb trick lens ( you know the kind with stars and hearts). 
 

As far as this APO thing... whatever. They are the same in regards to color. 
 

For me today, I shoot film 99% of the time. If I was to chose again... the Lux is more versatile because of the extra stop and those annoyances are less pronounced on film. But on digital, they rear their head, especially at 40 mp. 
 

Luckily I don’t have to chose the Lux... there’s the Noctilux 1.2 that pairs with the 50 APO even better. 

[Stuart Richardson]

31 minutes ago, David_miller70 said:

thanks for the replies so far.

I'm new to MTF charts and just had look up how to read them. What I take from the above is that (although there is no comparison at the same F-stop), at the lowest two aperture numbers the light getting through and contrast fall off on going from the centre to edge of the lens in the lux looks much worse than in the APO. Am I reading them wrong?

Would such differences not be visible in pictures?

Thanks, David

 

 

You are not reading it wrong, but it is not the whole story. It is the contrast at the point of focus. In a lens with field curvature, you might still have that contrast, but not in the exact plane with the lens is focused. This is common and even desireable in some wide angle lenses, where the focus towards the edges of the image draws a bit closer to the camera. A lens does not normally have a flat field...it is something that designers have to work in to the formula.

In any case, the MTF gives a good idea of performance, but particularly in cases where the edges drop off in performance, sometimes that is loss of sharpness, but sometimes it is just sign of a lens that does not have a flat field, and that it may be sharp, just a bit closer to the camera. I don't particularly like it, but it is just another optical trade-off, just like one of the many that need to be made to make a lens.

[Jean-Michel]

All those lenses are stupendous. Yes, there are subtle differences, the 35 mm lenses acuity test done by onasj elsewhere in this forum is quite revealing. But, and there is a ‘but’ those differences can be rather moot once you print your image to a normal size. By and large, a 24 by 30 inch print (My largest printer is a 24 inch one) is not a normal size, a 12 by 18 or smaller is more a ‘normal’ size. At those normal sizes I am not sure that I, or anyone,  could detect whether I made the image with my current 35 and 50 Summicrons or my 1968 50 ‘rigid’ or my goggled 35 from 1962. There are differences and I do use my newer lenses, but there is nothing wrong with the older ones,  but they remain quietly on a shelf. Still,  like any desirous photographer, I would not say no to any APO or summi or nocti luxes!

[jplomley]

3 minutes ago, Jean-Michel said:

All those lenses are stupendous. Yes, there are subtle differences, the 35 mm lenses acuity test done by onasj elsewhere in this forum is quite revealing. But, and there is a ‘but’ those differences can be rather moot once you print your image to a normal size. By and large, a 24 by 30 inch print (My largest printer is a 24 inch one) is not a normal size, a 12 by 18 or smaller is more a ‘normal’ size. At those normal sizes I am not sure that I, or anyone,  could detect whether I made the image with my current 35 and 50 Summicrons or my 1968 50 ‘rigid’ or my goggled 35 from 1962. There are differences and I do use my newer lenses, but there is nothing wrong with the older ones,  but they remain quietly on a shelf. Still,  like any desirous photographer, I would not say no to any APO or summi or nocti luxes!

Ah, printing, the great equalizer. Resolution is limited by droplet size, paper type etc. It’s very rare the differences you see on screen at 100% will translate to print. I’m amazed how often this is forgotten when people drop $10K on new glass.

[colonel]

3 hours ago, onasj said:

My first Leica M 50 was the 50 APO, and it is a spectacular lens. 

MTF curves corroborate these conclusions (top two=50 lux ASPH; bottom two=50 APO):

There is a significant difference IMHO. At f2 the APO is simply spectacular .....

 

[Jeff S]

I bought the 50 M APO (black chrome) to pair with the 50 Summilux ASPH, expecting to ultimately choose one or the other. I decided to sell the APO and stick with the Summilux, which more than adequately serves my shooting and printing needs (all my worthy pics are printed).  Plus the extra stop, and significantly lower cost, are bonuses.  Both are superb lenses, which can only be judged IMO by user experience.

Jeff

[Guest]

4 hours ago, colonel said:

There is a significant difference IMHO. At f2 the APO is simply spectacular .....

 

Whats it like at 1.4 ?

[lct]

If you need f/1.4 get the 50/1.4 asph, otherwise the 50/2 apo is the better lens. None will hide the skin imperfections of your models, if any, but f/1.4 is more forgiving than f/2 from this viewpoint. I would not recommend either lens for soft portraits anyway.

[LeicaR10]

David_Miller70,  You asked an interesting question concerning the 50 APO Cron vs 50 Lux and whether or not you should sell the 50 Lux for the 50 APO Cron.  IMO, the answer to your question...It depends on your genre of photography and intended purpose of the lens.  I once owned the 50 APO for my business.  It is an excellent technological and engineering marvel and performance that is cutting edge.  Ideally the lens excels at landscape photography for edge to edge performance.  Yet, despite all its marvel my clients did not like the rendering when it came to other subjects such as people  The lens renders as I was told, "too perfect" and did not have "feeling".  I thought hard about their comments and realized they were correct.  So I sold it and went back to the 50 APO Lux.  What you say?...50 APO Lux?...Yes, the 50 Lux as designed by Peter Karbe at Leica is indeed a APO lens.  It just doesn't say so.  It turns out during various interviews, Peter thought it was silly to write on the lens APO.  I am not kidding and you can find the Peter Karbe interview on different sites.  I am providing one such link from:  https://www.pebbleplace.com/reviews/rangefinder/leica_50mm_summilux_asph/index.html   All said, you might want to ask yourself;  What will the 50 APO Cron do for your genre of photography that your current 50 APO Lux doesn't provide for you?  (Price is a different matter and only your wallet can dictate that reality)  Only you can answer this question, not the well meaning forum members expressing their opinions.  As I have written in other threads in the forum and after 40+ years in photography; for me, HOW a camera sensor and certainly a lens renders what I envision while I am creating the photograph is what is most important to me.   All my experience selling fine art prints to corporate clients and private collectors always gets down to the actual photograph itself.  The key to success that separates a mere photo from a superb masterpiece photograph is both my creativity to use the tools (camera and lens at hand) and express my vision in my photograph that makes the viewer:  Stop, Look, Think and Feel something about that moment time.  I am sure you will the answers to your own questions and then decide what is best for you, thereby enabling you to get out and create most masterful and excellent photographs.  Just my two cents.  r/ Mark

[Erato]

12 minutes ago, LeicaR10 said:

David_Miller70,  You asked an interesting question concerning the 50 APO Cron vs 50 Lux and whether or not you should sell the 50 Lux for the 50 APO Cron.  IMO, the answer to your question...It depends on your genre of photography and intended purpose of the lens.  I once owned the 50 APO for my business.  It is an excellent technological and engineering marvel and performance that is cutting edge.  Ideally the lens excels at landscape photography for edge to edge performance.  Yet, despite all its marvel my clients did not like the rendering when it came to other subjects such as people  The lens renders as I was told, "too perfect" and did not have "feeling".  I thought hard about their comments and realized they were correct.  So I sold it and went back to the 50 APO Lux.  What you say?...50 APO Lux?...Yes, the 50 Lux as designed by Peter Karbe at Leica is indeed a APO lens.  It just doesn't say so.  It turns out during various interviews, Peter thought it was silly to write on the lens APO.  I am not kidding and you can find the Peter Karbe interview on different sites.  I am providing one such link from:  https://www.pebbleplace.com/reviews/rangefinder/leica_50mm_summilux_asph/index.html   All said, you might want to ask yourself;  What will the 50 APO Cron do for your genre of photography that your current 50 APO Lux doesn't provide for you?  (Price is a different matter and only your wallet can dictate that reality)  Only you can answer this question, not the well meaning forum members expressing their opinions.  As I have written in other threads in the forum and after 40+ years in photography; for me, HOW a camera sensor and certainly a lens renders what I envision while I am creating the photograph is what is most important to me.   All my experience selling fine art prints to corporate clients and private collectors always gets down to the actual photograph itself.  The key to success that separates a mere photo from a superb masterpiece photograph is both my creativity to use the tools (camera and lens at hand) and express my vision in my photograph that makes the viewer:  Stop, Look, Think and Feel something about that moment time.  I am sure you will the answers to your own questions and then decide what is best for you, thereby enabling you to get out and create most masterful and excellent photographs.  Just my two cents.  r/ Mark

Bravo. Well stated, and I couldn't agree more.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[cboy]

Keep the lux and test the APO to decide yourself or buy the VM APO and work out if you really need the Leica APO.

As others said it depends on your prefered aperture range/ subject

All the best