Disappointed with my 10R/50 Sumilux

[irenedp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Mikep996 said:

"t is a simple as this: a Summilux 50 at 1.4 will never have the same depth of field as a Summilux 28 at 1.7. It will be much narrower. 
And hence it will be much easier to miss focus even by a fraction:  "

Yes, I understand that.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, I used a Noctilux for a couple of years so I'm quite familiar with narrow focus depth (!!!) 😱

I don't believe I missed focus since RF and Live view focus produced an identical pic. The (auto) shutter speed was 1/750 so there was no camera shake involved (and I was braced on a concrete railing) as well. But it does look as if it's slightly out of focus!

 

 

Mike, my apologies because I wasn’t intending to be rude. I just did the test -with a Summicron 50 at f2 on the 10r, and a Q2 at the same aperture. At 2 m, a shelf 25 cm deep gets slightly blurry on the back with the 10r, and is in focus with the Q. At 1.4 I reckon that the area on focus would be razor thin. 

[Mikep996]

Did tripod test this morning.  The Sumicron and the Sumilux images are essential identical at F2.  Even cropped 200%+ there is no noticeable difference.  OTOH, With the Lux at 1.4 it is soft in comparison. As has been mentioned, I guess it's just the function of the wider lens opening though, again, Leica brags on their "wide open" capability and I'd say this particular Lux does not exhibit that.  But I have no other Leica 50 1.4's to compare.  The only other 50 1.4 I own nowadays is a Nikon on my FM2 and, being a film camera, there is no easy way to compare.

TBF, the Lux's 1.4 softness I'm talking about is not really noticeable unless the pic is enlarged (cropped).  The Q3 28 crop to 50mm, the Cron 50 and the Lux 50 pics all look pretty much same when looking at the pics on the screen.  

[Mikep996]

These are Jpegs NOT from the cameras but as converted raws - all pics were raws.  There is a color difference because I had the M10R camera set for Daylight WB (first three pics).  The last pic was from my Q3 28 , taken from the same spot and cropped to the same size.  

1st pic is 10R with 50 Cron at F2.  2nd pic is 10R with 50 Lux at F2.  3rd pic is  10r with 50 lux at F 1.4.  4th pic is Q3 28.  Again, all original pics were DNGs and were converted in "post"  Last pic shows the actual field of view of the 50mm shot.  The Q3 was shot at F1.7 from the same position so the original pic, of course, has a much wider field of view and cropped far more to get pic #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 April 22 by Mikep996

[TomB_tx]

On your 3rd shot (Summilux @ f1.4) the central area is less sharp, but the hinge at the far left is sharper than in either of the first two shots. This suggest a focus issue such as shift between f1.4 & f2.0. Was the camera tripod mounted for these?

[Adam Bonn]

NOT saying this is your issue Mike... but FWIW I got my 50 Lux used and frankly I failed to see what the fuss re WO performance was all about, hard to focus (even with a tripod and live view) and I didn't consider it a great performer until F2.8

Long story short the effing thing was de-centred 🙄

IIRC -it was a while back- Just shy of 4 weeks and just north of €300 later and OMG now I see what the fuss is all about

(to be fair as a tale of woe this might sound for the used market, it was a good price and even factoring in paying for the repair it was still cheaper than going rate at the time)

[Mikep996]

One thing I figured out (one of those "DOH!" moments) is that IF the issue with the softness of the Sumilux is my inability to accurately focus - either with the RF or the live view, then I can't take advantage of the 1.4 lens opening and the lens has no benefit for me over the f2 Sumicron.  As the old saying goes - "Know your limitations."   As I mentioned, I used a Noctilux for a couple of years and never felt I had a problem focusing but that was then (film) and this is now.

I've since taken several more shots handheld because that's the only way I use the Leicas.  In every case, the Lux 1.4 shots are soft compared to the f2 Cron.  When the Lux IS opened to f2 they look essentially the same from that Fstop on.  So I have no reason to carry a larger/heavier lens that I can't use!

Oh well, it SEEMED like a good idea when I bought the Lux new last year!  I'd trade it in at the Leica store where I bought it but there's no Leica (or other) camera gear I want to acquire.  Maybe I'll think of something! 🧐

[Alberti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Mike, I am 'on your side'. I have encountered exactly the same things.

I bought a new Summicron 28, just to see this effect. Even on 'infinity'. I brought it back. I also bought a Summilux 50mm Black Chrome that had this, gave it back. It drove me mad. (My 50mm Summilux type too does not have it, nor does my 50 Sumicron-V, as far as I remember.) 

Now I have a 35mm FLE/1 as a very 'modern' lens, and again, I vaguely remember seeing this but I decided to disregard it. [Otherwise I would get so mad that . . . well the rest would be history]  The new 24/3.8 I have is great too. I now have an AA lens that I - I'm glad - does not show it.

It is not DOF but it is wobble. So - a slight sensor effect?

• At one moment I hypothesised that it was sensor wobble. For instance due to heating of the sensor. A slight local 2 micron bulge - because it seemed to be a visible artifact in the same mid-field location all the time.  At least, there was a spot on the right of the centre where it would be more visible. 
• But then, it is not stable across lenses
• it seems some lenses have more problems with it. Canadian lenses fare better??

So Mike, I'm sure you now understand my position. I have been thinking that maybe an M11 would not show this. But I am very very weary to check it out. Specifically also because it is impossible for me to explain.

[Chris W]

The last two pictures (4 & 5) look lovely to me. The Q series 28mm lens is something special IMO.

[Mikep996]

I have to admit that the most surprising thing to me was the Q3 28mm pic that was taken from the same physical distance as the 10R with the two 50mm lenses and pics cropped to the same "enlargement" size.

[wizard]

Am 21.4.2025 um 14:02 schrieb darylgo:

That the summicron is sharper indicates the 50 summilux is a poor sample.   

That would be my guess, too. My own Summilux 50 asph is definitely as least as sharp as my Summicron 50 v5, even wide open.