Thoughts from owners of these three 50mm options please!

[Knipsknecht]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Personally, out of these three lenses I own just the 50mm Summilux. Given the price and the performance I think it's a no-brainer as long as one doesn't have very specific requirements. Yes, the Lux renders a picture in a modern way, but there still is so much "character" in the pics that they don't appear to be "sterile". The APO-Cron is - technically - a more or less perfect lens, but - personaly -  I think that you would pay a fortune for something that is barely visible in every day photography. The Lux is definitely not as "perfect", but I like it's rendering and the fact that from time to time it's nice to have a f1.4 lens.

The Noctilux is in my eyes a highly specialized lens with a very limited range of use-cases. Personally I don't like the Bokeh wide open (makes me feel getting seasick) and the price-usability ratio speaks not in favor of this lens (well, for me!). 

And if you look at the dimensions of all three lenses, they are more or less in the same league with the Noct beeing the heaviest, the Lux is the tallest and the Cron ist the most expensive😇.

Edited January 13, 2023 by Knipsknecht
forgot to insert a link

[250swb]

56 minutes ago, Kiwimac said:

Thanks; what makes you rule out the APO?

It's supposed to be insanely good, so you've got to be insanely careful to get the best out of it, which generally speaking people aren't prepared to do. Despite singing the APO's praises I doubt few people use a tripod which negates the inherent image quality boost and the price. If Leica M's had IBIS then it may be a different thing, but you've got to ask would your clients notice the difference between a Summilux and an APO at f2? I doubt it. 

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

8 minutes ago, 250swb said:

you've got to ask would your clients notice the difference between a Summilux and an APO at f2?

If they come on the LUF they could . 50/1.4 asph (above) vs 50/2 apo @ f/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!

[Kiwimac]

3 minutes ago, lct said:

If they come on the LUF they could . 50/1.4 asph (above) vs 50/2 apo @ f/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!

I’ve got to say that’s the one aspect of it I don’t like so much!

[evikne]

6 minutes ago, lct said:

If they come on the LUF they could . 50/1.4 asph (above) vs 50/2 apo @ f/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!

This comparison is not quite fair, because the one lens is stopped down, whereas the other is not. For a fair comparison of the aperture blades, both must be stopped down equally, e.g. Summilux at f/2 vs. Summicron at f/2.8 (both one stop).

[250swb]

38 minutes ago, lct said:

If they come on the LUF they could . 50/1.4 asph (above) vs 50/2 apo @ f/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!

I'm assuming the OP's clients aren't in a camera club and just look at the photos, as do most of us 🙂

Edited January 13, 2023 by 250swb

[Kiwimac]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 minutes ago, 250swb said:

I'm assuming the OP's clients aren't in a camera club and just look at the photos, as do most of us 🙂

True. They aren’t. 
 

But I am. 😱

[lct]

25 minutes ago, evikne said:

This comparison is not quite fair, because the one lens is stopped down, whereas the other is not. For a fair comparison of the aperture blades, both must be stopped down equally, e.g. Summilux at f/2 vs. Summicron at f/2.8 (both one stop).

Sorry but i don't share this point of view i must say. When i shoot at f/2 i don't want to see how my pic would look at f/2.8 . Anyway for those interested in the OoF rendering of both lenses at f/2.8 see below. BTW i prefer the 50/1.4 asph personally but my subjective reasons are of no interest for the OP i guess.

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!

 

[evikne]

13 minutes ago, lct said:

Sorry but i don't share this point of view i must say. When i shoot at f/2 i don't want to see how my pic would look at f/2.8 . Anyway for those interested in the OoF rendering of both lenses at f/2.8 see below. BTW i prefer the 50/1.4 asph personally but my subjective reasons are of no interest for the OP i guess.

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!

 

They are still not stopped down the same number of stops (Summilux 2 stops vs. Summicron 1 stop. The Summicron will always have one stop "advantage" if you compare the diaphragms at the same aperture.

Edited January 13, 2023 by evikne

[Kiwimac]

15 minutes ago, lct said:

Sorry but i don't share this point of view i must say. When i shoot at f/2 i don't want to see how my pic would look at f/2.8 . Anyway for those interested in the OoF rendering of both lenses at f/2.8 see below. BTW i prefer the 50/1.4 asph personally but my subjective reasons are of no interest for the OP i guess.

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!

 

Your subjective reasons are most welcome!

[lct]

7 minutes ago, evikne said:

They are still not stopped down the same number of stops (Summilux 2 stops vs. Summicron 1 stop. The Summicron will always have one stop "advantage" if you compare the diaphragms at the same aperture.

This could have some relevance if i were a teacher of maths perhaps (just kidding again ) but as someone taking photos for the pleasure of it i would never compare a 50/3.5 lens to a 50/1.0 lens at full aperture, i just smile at that idea but it's me.

[evikne]

25 minutes ago, lct said:

This could have some relevance if i were a teacher of maths perhaps (just kidding again ) but as someone taking photos for the pleasure of it i would never compare a 50/3.5 lens to a 50/1.0 lens at full aperture, i just smile at that idea but it's me.

It only has relevance if you want to compare the roundness of the diaphragms themselves. Regardless of aperture, but according to how much they are stopped down from fully open.

Edited January 13, 2023 by evikne

[spydrxx]

Not an owner of any of the 3 these days. After looking at some of your pictures, and understanding your changing "needs" , if you can tolerate the weight, I'd say go with the Noctilux as a means of creative experimentation. If you don't like it, you can always sell it and probably recoup your cost. Absent that, the Lux seems to be the best choice. Good luck in your decision.

[lct]

1 hour ago, Kiwimac said:

Your subjective reasons are most welcome!

Not sure my personal tastes may interest you unless you are a (just retired) French lawyer living in Normandy and using (too) many M lenses since the seventies . My subjective reasons of preferring the 50/1.4 asph are mainly that i favor character lenses and i dislike noise reduction softwares generally. As i shoot often indoor i may need f/1.4 when i shoot moving subjects. Also i use lenses like fine wines so to speak. One day i will open a bottle of Bourgogne (50/1.4 v3), another day of Bordeaux (50/1.4 asph) and sometimes of Californian wine (50/2 apo). No surprise with the 50/2 apo it does exactly what expected. But how to say this, its only character is transparency. Not to say that it is a boring lens per se but when my purpose is boring, which it is mostly admittedly, i cannot count on the lens to render it more interesting. Example of a pic i couldn't shoot with the 50/2 apo (Kolari mod. Sony A7s, 50/1.4 asph, f/1.4).

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!

 

Edited January 13, 2023 by lct

[fil-m]

The Noct 50/1.2 is an interesting lens. For creativity, its 1.2 aperture coupled to its very specific rendering makes it a relevant choice. For street shooting it is quite good, not that big or bulky (as a Noctilux!), and with 16 blades, nice bokeh as you stop down with increased sharpness. Competent for portraits too whether open or at f2. Kind of two characters lens in one. I've rented it from a friend and a one day experience and loved it. 

For street shooting and having experimented with many lenses, I still go back to the APOs, my favourites, whether the 50 or 35. I love the APO rendering, its compact dimensions  as a carry all day lens, plus forgiving nature if you want to crop or adjust. It captures reality with transparency and very nice OOF and transition zones which gives the image a very special look that I personally like.  

The Lux 50/1.4 asph is a great all rounder and despite all the good logic and solid reasons that make it the best 50 ever, and against all odds, I could not bond with it so bought it new, sold it for a used APO 50  But that's really me. 

My view: I'd start with an APO and then buy (later) a Nocti 1.2 for creativity. And if that's financially impossible, the Nocti as the only 50, to get something great for creativity, excellent for portraits and v good for the street while still remaining barely bigger than a Summilux. 

[Gobert]

I own two APO 50. I love those lenses, they are so damned good and two APO’s means double sharp.

However, some people consider those lenses as too clinical.

I own the LUX as well. It’s softer and different from the APO. Better for portraits, less clinical.

No Noct 1.2 in the collection, although I have the 0.95. I don’t consider the Noct as a general purpose lens.

If people who are looking for that, better choose the APO or LUX.

[Robert Blanko]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb lct:

If they come on the LUF they could . 50/1.4 asph (above) vs 50/2 apo @ f/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!

For my typical usage of the Lux (and maybe the typical usage of a Lux in general) this would be practically irrelevant. I use the Lux either at 1.4 to have nice bokeh as much as possible or at about 5.6-8 for landscape or similar applications.

[sinjun]

5 hours ago, lct said:

One day i will open a bottle of Bourgogne (50/1.4 v3), another day of Bordeaux (50/1.4 asph) and sometimes of Californian wine (50/2 apo)

I like this wines analogy. Sometimes it is nice to have a cheap, honest, unpretentious and unrefined pinard, like my Industar 50mm.

[Kiwimac]

6 hours ago, lct said:

Not sure my personal tastes may interest you unless you are a (just retired) French lawyer living in Normandy and using (too) many M lenses since the seventies . My subjective reasons of preferring the 50/1.4 asph are mainly that i favor character lenses and i dislike noise reduction softwares generally. As i shoot often indoor i may need f/1.4 when i shoot moving subjects. Also i use lenses like fine wines so to speak. One day i will open a bottle of Bourgogne (50/1.4 v3), another day of Bordeaux (50/1.4 asph) and sometimes of Californian wine (50/2 apo). No surprise with the 50/2 apo it does exactly what expected. But how to say this, its only character is transparency. Not to say that it is a boring lens per se but when my purpose is boring, which it is mostly admittedly, i cannot count on the lens to render it more interesting. Example of a pic i couldn't shoot with the 50/2 apo (Kolari mod. Sony A7s, 50/1.4 asph, f/1.4).

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!

 

Bien sur, votre raisons  est bon. Je m'excuse pour mon pauvre Français, mais je ne m'entraîne pas beaucoup ici en Nouvelle-Zélande!

Your wine analogy is a good one. To continue it, your cellar is better stocked than mine!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jared]

I currently own the Noctilux 1.2 reissue and the APO, and I used to own the current version of the Summilux.

Pro's for the Noctilux:

• Oodles and oodles of character wide open or at f/1.4
• By f/4, solid performance across the field, and from f/5.6 onward it is indistinguishable from the APO (OK, slight exaggeration, but close enough)
• Very small and light considering the fast maximum aperture; completely manageable viewfinder blockage (in contrast to the f/0.95 Noctilux)

Con's for the Noctilux:

• What sharpness there is at f/1.2 is only in the exact center of the frame; if you want an off center subject, you will either need to crop for the composition you are looking for or stop down to f/2 or so. Otherwise "character" becomes "poor image quality".
• The bokeh is not simply dreamy/creamy. It's vastly more complex than that since it consists of a combination of coma, astigmatism, and spherical aberration. It can make results unpredictable, though sometimes really, really cool.
• Focus throw is really long and close focus is only 1m
• It's a "retro" lens, so the lens hood is much less elegant and practical than either of the other two options
• Lots of distortion; you'll either need to correct in software (easy with the correct profile) or avoid objects with straight lines

The Noctilux is much more practical as a carry everywhere lens than I expected as the performance is quite solid at f/5.6, while providing plenty of "character" at f/1.2 or f/1.4. Surprisingly, I find myself choosing it over the APO most of the time. It's almost like having two lenses in one, depending on aperture selected.  Now lets move on to the APO...

Pro's for the Summicron APO:

• Excellent performance across the field at all apertures. If you want a lens that just "gets out of the way" and lets you control the photo from start to finish, this is the one I would choose. It's not the absolute highest performing M lens I have owned (that would be the 35 APO), but it's very, very close. 
• If you shoot mostly black and white, this one is a no brainer. The micro contrast is a great match for images that are dependent on texture and detail for their impact. 
• While the Noctilux was small and light for its maximum aperture, this one is just flat-out small and light. 300g. 
• Close focus of 0.7m is as good as it gets for range finder coupled lenses
• Distortion is almost nonexistent
• Minimal vignetting

Con's for the Summicron APO:

• Maximum aperture of f/2.0 has less subject isolation than the other two lenses you are considering (though a bit more than you might think since actual focal length of the lens is more like 52mm than 50mm)
• You pointed out the "sterile" feel to the images. I have never agreed with this characterization since I tend to favor optical quality over character, but I'll list it in the negatives anyway since you certainly aren't going to see wild bokeh and mustache shaped field curvature
• It's the most expensive of the lenses you are considering

The APO is a solid--even exceptional--performer at all apertures and all subject distances. If you don't the subject isolation that comes with an f/1.2 or f/1.4 lens (or the extra stop of ISO), this is the best of the three lenses, no question. 

That leaves the Summilux as the last option.

Pro's for the Summilux:

• Least expensive of the three options by a pretty wide margin
• Most balanced performance of the three in that you get nearly all the subject isolation capabilities of the Noctilux, with a much more predictable bokeh, good sharpness across the entire field even at f/1.4, and stopped down to f/5.6 it is close to being the equal of the APO. Close. You can tell the difference, but it's close. 
• Not quite as apochromatic as the APO (as you'd expect from the naming), but it's pretty good. I'd say it actually has less longitudinal CA than, for example, the 90mm APO, and that one got the APO designation.
• Fits right between the APO and the Noctilux in terms of bulk and weight

Con's for the Summilux:

• I actually had more problems with flaring with mine than I expected; the APO is the one that has a reputation for flaring (early production batches), but I saw more challenges with this lens, and a bit less predictable than I would have liked. With a mirrorless camera, this would be much less of an issue since you'd see everything in the viewfinder and adjust your composition or shade the lens accordingly, but with a viewfinder camera... Let's just say I lost more shots than I expected.
• Bokeh when not wide open was never really to my taste. This is a personal thing, so you may disagree completely, but I actually prefer the out-of-focus rendering of the APO at f/2 or f/2.8.

The easiest lens to recommend of the three is the Summilux just because of its balanced performance and its low cost, at least by Leica standards. It's a really, really solid choice. The second easiest to recommend is the APO simply because of its lack of optical flaws and its compact size. It does, however, give away some subject isolation and low light capabilities, and it's a very, very expensive lens. The Noctilux I would only recommend with caution. You have to know that you want and can live with its flaws. It's super fun, I much more practical than I expected as an every day lens (due to its size and its performance stopped down), but it is hard to predict and control below f/2.8, and if you aren't shooting below f/2.8, why would you buy this lens? Even so, it's cool and fun and I actually find myself reaching for it an awful lot. It's not a lens I would recommend you buy unless you can try it out and see how you like it. Definitely not for everyone.

- Jared