On the fence about buying the 50 SL Summilux…..

[Sohail]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

23 minutes ago, jplomley said:

Save your money...I have the 21-35-75 APO combination and was in the market for either the 50 Lux or 50 APO. Note I also have the 50 Lux Asph for my M10-R and M10M, so fully aware of Lux rendering in this FL. I had heard a lot of amazing things about the SIGMA 50/1.2 from other SL users, so gave it a whirl in my local camera store on my SL2, more out of curiosity and with tempered expectations. As soon as I opened the images at home I called the shop and had them set aside the lens for pick-up the next day. My expectations were exceeded in spades. The cost differential from a Lux or APO I shall use towards a new Eizo monitor! 

Could you perhaps share some of those images and tell us why you think your expectations were exceeded in spades. I appreciate it's all very subjective. I, at least, would find that more instructive than side-by-side comparisons of still life.

[Dr. G]

22 minutes ago, Sohail said:

Could you perhaps share some of those images and tell us why you think your expectations were exceeded in spades. I appreciate it's all very subjective. I, at least, would find that more instructive than side-by-side comparisons of still life.

I'm not jplomley, but if you want to look at some images comparing them, I started a thread in the L mount Lens forum where I took the same scene on a tripod with the Lux and the Sigma at 1.2 and 1.4 different apertures and compared them.  I then compared f/2 images with the Sigma, Lux and APO 50.  There's also a thread with Sigma 50 1.2 images in that forum.  

I can see a case for owning all three 50s (which I do, FWIW, plus the LLL Speed Panchro ii)

Edited July 10, 2024 by Dr. G

[Sohail]

Thanks.

2 hours ago, Dr. G said:

I'm not jplomley, but if you want to look at some images comparing them, I started a thread in the L mount Lens forum where I took the same scene on a tripod with the Lux and the Sigma at 1.2 and 1.4 different apertures and compared them.  I then compared f/2 images with the Sigma, Lux and APO 50.  There's also a thread with Sigma 50 1.2 images in that forum.  

I can see a case for owning all three 50s (which I do, FWIW, plus the LLL Speed Panchro ii)

Actually, what I think is more interesting is to pick an image that you think best encapsulates the rendering of a lens. Side-by-side comparisons tend to elicit comments like "X is just as sharp as Y". The "bokeh of X is almost identical to that of Y". What I like about my image in post #181 (aside from its artistic merits, if any) is how the foreground and background melt away very smoothly and the relative sharpness of the subject. The contrast and colours are very rich. There's more of course. But it's what I find "delicious" about this lens. I'm sure the Sigma 1.2 is not far off (perhaps better, I don't know), but let's see a few images and take it from there, i.e. talk us through the magic. 

[Dr. G]

45 minutes ago, Sohail said:

Thanks.

Actually, what I think is more interesting is to pick an image that you think best encapsulates the rendering of a lens. Side-by-side comparisons tend to elicit comments like "X is just as sharp as Y". The "bokeh of X is almost identical to that of Y". What I like about my image in post #181 (aside from its artistic merits, if any) is how the foreground and background melt away very smoothly and the relative sharpness of the subject. The contrast and colours are very rich. There's more of course. But it's what I find "delicious" about this lens. I'm sure the Sigma 1.2 is not far off (perhaps better, I don't know), but let's see a few images and take it from there, i.e. talk us through the magic. 

Ok, I’ll sort of do it both ways.   Mind you, both of the following images were taken on different days and they’re edited, but the renderings for this particular subject are different due to lighting and framing - but you can still evaluate things.  With the Sigma I like how critically in focus the eye is at f/1.2 and how the background is blurred out.  This was taken with the sigma at f/1.2

 

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!

[Dr. G]

This one was taken last year with the Summilux-SL.  Note that this one was taken on the SL2-S and the previous image was taken with the SL3.  
 

Each image has its merits, but I prefer the entire image rendering with the Summilux-SL in this particular framing.

 

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!

[Dr. G]

For the sake of completeness, this is an unrelated subject taken with the Summilux-SL on the SL3.  I’m not sure the Sigma would have produced the same rendering.  Again, this is an edited image.

 

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!

[Sohail]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do you know I instantly went for the Summilux-SL images? The second two are gorgeously rendered. Nicely shot too. What I don't like about the first image, and I'm nitpicking here, I know, is how sharp the bird's breast is. This example of the Sigma 1.2, at least, doesn't do it for me. I also don't like the contrast and colours. 

[Dr. G]

 

29 minutes ago, Sohail said:

Do you know I instantly went for the Summilux-SL images? The second two are gorgeously rendered. Nicely shot too. What I don't like about the first image, and I'm nitpicking here, I know, is how sharp the bird's breast is. This example of the Sigma 1.2, at least, doesn't do it for me. I also don't like the contrast and colours. 

I’m not arguing with you… but I’ve been shooting the Summilux-SL since it was released years ago so part of that may be my comfort level with it and understanding how to best use it.  
 

The more I think about it, maybe the best way to characterize the lenses is by what they allow me to do (this is in my hands, others may use these tools differently)

Summilux-SL: If I want an all around beautiful image I’m probably using this lens.  It has the ability to isolate a subject and the transition is slightly less abrupt than with the Sigma, although it still creates good separation.  The in focus areas is sharp, but not bitingly sharp and the in focus area doesn’t have quite as much contrast/microcontrast as the Sigma does.  It produces an overall pleasing image and the image, under the right circumstances, has a very distinct look that others do notice.  
 

APO Summicron-SL: This is my go to lens for high contrast, sharp black and white photography.  Because of the high levels of sharpness, contrast and microcontrast it can create very impactful images that can border on almost being hyper-real.  It doesn’t have the smoothest out of focus rendering wide open, though.  

Sigma 50 1.2.  Still exploring this one because it’s so new to me.  This lens is sharper in the in focal plane than the Summilux.  It also has more contrast/microcontrast in the focal plane at 1.2/1.4.  I haven’t played with black and white yet, but I imagine it may be able to create images that can be striking in terms of isolating what’s in the focal plane while maintaining good background blur as opposed to the Lux which, again, I feel renders a more all around beautiful image.  So if you’re looking for more impact in the isolation of the subject, or with specific elements, this may be the better choice.  
 

In a recent trip I took my APO 21, 35, 50 and 75 and my Summilux-SL.  I used both the Lux and the APO depending on what I was shooting.  So, for me, it’s not really a one or the other situation.  The Sigma may be able to walk the line as a lens to replace both for travel - but I still need to really explore the capabilities of the lens.  

Edited July 10, 2024 by Dr. G

[Simone_DF]

21 hours ago, Dr. G said:

 

I can see a case for owning all three 50s (which I do, FWIW, plus the LLL Speed Panchro ii)

A bit off topic, but how do you find the SPII? I’m curious and was thinking about getting one, but I’m not entirely convinced by the high amount of glow

[Sohail]

A lens that has some of that Summilux-SL, if not more, is the 75mm Noctilux. An example taken today wide open at 1.25:

 

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!

[Sohail]

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!

A close-up to get a sense of the transition from smooth to sharp.

Edited July 12, 2024 by Sohail

[IkarusJohn]

It’s all about transition, rather than contrast and sharpness.  The first bird image above, taken with the Sigma has that cut and paste look which can be so distracting, yet part of that is composition. The breast of the bird and the head are against a distant background, rather than melting into the scene, which doesn’t help.  You then look at to the left, and shoulder and back fade into blur, but then the front of the wing is sharp.

Perhaps if the composition was different, or with a different subject, the lens might stack up better, but apart from its technical achievement, I find this image uncomfortable.  Conversely, @Sohail’s Noctilux image demonstrates the transition fabulously.  Probably an unfair comparison, but it is the transition that makes the difference for me.

[Sohail]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

Conversely, @Sohail’s Noctilux image demonstrates the transition fabulously.  Probably an unfair comparison, but it is the transition that makes the difference for me.

Here's an image of the Summilux-SL with very smooth transitioning too:

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!