50 'lux question......

[BigSteveG]

to all you more experienced than I.

I've been hankering for a 50 'lux for some time now. It will get use in Jazz clubs and other low light adventures. I really want the sharpness associated with the asph model, but may have an opportunity to purchase a NOS pre asph model complete w/ Warranty for about 14-1500.
Question: Are differences between the 2 lenses subtle or very obvious?
Is the asph's sharpness wide noticeably better? would this make much difference when shooting at 800 or 1600 ASA?
All answers are greatly appreciated!!!

 

[waileong]

Hey, the new 50/1.4 is supposed to be the best standard lens in the world! But frankly speaking, at night in a jazz club, you won't get too much sharpness shooting at anything less than 1/250. People groove and move, you know. And if you shoot at 1600 or higher to get 1/250, the grain will be overpowering.

 

[rover]

I think waileong has nailed it, though you can control the grain in development. If you like the way the Summilux draws it is the way to go as an all purpose lens not only for a specific application. If you are only looking to use it in a jazz club the CV Nokton, Canon 1.4 or Nikkor 1.4 may satisfy you too for less $$$. Again, this is not a comparison of the lenses, but the result of the condition in which they will be used.

NOS pre asph model complete w/ Warranty for about 14-1500

That is about the going rate for a NOS lens, but you could save some $$$ if you shopped a little for a used one or for an older version. My Summilux is the same optical formula as the most recent pre asph, but only focuses to 1m and is from 1966. It was about half this price in KEH bargain (perfect glass) condition.

 

[Harry Lime]

As has been already metioned, the new Lux ASPH is considered the best performing 50 ever.

I shot a test roll with one and it's pretty darn impressive. There really isn't much to say. It's blazing sharp at any stop, impervious to flare and costs $3000 dollars. Think of it as a 2/50 Summicon opened up a stop, with better close up performance, due to the floating element. It has a different signature than the pre-ASPH model. Very modern, high contrast and incredible sharpness, even wide open.

I own three modern 1.4/50's

The new Zeiss Planar 1.4/50 in Nikon mount
Canon EF 1.4/50
Lux 1.4/50

Overall I think the Lux-M is the best of the lot.

The Canon is very soft at 1.4 and flares. Sample variation is an issue. I had to replace my fist copy, because it was soft at any stop. It's mainly plastic and the internal gear has been known to die after a few years of heavy use. Stopped down it is very, very sharp. Bokeh is nice, but can sometimes be a little erratic like a Noct. Overall it it has a pleasant, smooth signature. I like this lens.

The Zeiss is an interesting lens. In terms of sharpness it is equal to the Lux and Canon but there is something rather strange about the way it renders tonality. The middle grays feel 'thin' or stretched out. The lower zones are real contrasty. Somehow it renders like a badly adjusted black and white TV. Everything is either black or white and the grays in between feel compressed. I can't quite put my finger on it, but I have a friend who shoots Contax SLR and he has noticed this also. But it is very resistant to flare and becomes very, very sharp once it's stopped down a little. Wide open I think it's better than the Canon and about the same as the Lux, but contrast seems lower.

Overall the Lux-M has an almost perfect balance of tonality and resolution. It is as sharp as a Summicron when stopped down a little, but has that lush Leica look in terms of tonality. This lens really excels in b/w. Flare resistance is quite good. Like all lenses without a floating element, the Lux is at it's weakest at f1.4 and focused to .7 meters, but it works wonders for portraits. This is one of my all time favorite lenses.

Here is Erwin's test of the Lux-ASPH

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/SummiluxASPH/s14-50.html

 

[Nachkebia]

WOW, Zeiss planar 50 f/1.4 equals to 50 lux asph at f/1.4, very hard to believe I owned both lenses and I don`t think that was my case 🙂

 

[awilder]

The pre-asph. has an interesting signature in no small part due to curvature of field mostly from mid-frame to the edge. This is beneficial in street and people shooting to increase apparent sharpness if there are any subjects off center and CLOSER to the camera than the central subject focused with the rf patch. The E43 versions that focus down to 1 meter and are in black finish are optically identical in every respect (even the coating) to the closer focusing version and typically go for $800-900 in decent shape. Mechanically the E43 versions are better made according to repair people I trust.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Steve: here's a biased answer. I have a lot of 50's (and really like the DR 50), but once I got my 50/1.4 asph, use of the others has really tapered off. And this is someone who said hyperbolically that they'd have to pry the tabbed 80's 'cron from his cold, dead fingers. The lens sparkles, be warned, in my experience, it is fairly high-contrast. Now having said that, you've gotten some very good advice about the factors that can limit performance. If you just need a fast 50 to shoot with in a club from time to time, I'd have a look at the C/V 50/1.5 Nockton, which won't break the bank. Sean Reid has some very interesting information on his website ReidReviews.com (subscription) comparing these fast 50's that can give you a start comparing the looks of various lenses.

Good luck and let us know what you choose.

Ben Marks

 

[BigSteveG]

Thanks guys.......

Thanks guys.......

Great opinions and you've really got me thinking about what I want in a fast 50. The bokeh issue is important because I do plan to shoot the lens wide open most of the time. Does anyone use 'lux (asph or not) wide open w/ an ND filter for exterior daytime shots?

 

[Honus]

Does anyone use 'lux (asph or not) wide open w/ an ND filter for exterior daytime shots?

Here are 3 recent examples from the 50 asph. Delta 100, f1.4, 3-stop ND filter. Developed in Xtol 1:1 + Rodinal 1+100. Not the best pics, but it gives you an idea about the sharpness, fingerprint and oof rendering.

 

[rodneyAB]

yes Robert, those photographs say what it is about the Summilux 50mm ASPH.

 

[BigSteveG]

Thank You Honus. Those do really help. I've seen more color example than anything else so far. I'm really starting to shy away from the Asph at this point. The Pre does offer a more "classic " look and that's something I really like. I'm wondering if I get the NOS on a Leica Student Discount. This would nice....
BTW....is last pre-asph the 46 or 43 ? Anyone know offhand?

 

[Ben Z]

Tom Abrahamsson let me use his Aspheric to take some shots along with my pre-aspheric (43mm filter) in the hotel jazz bar in New Orleans (pre-Katrina days). I was shooting 400-speed b&w film, at f/1.4 in the range of 1/15 second with my elbows on the table for support. From the results I concluded that those conditions negated any advantage the Aspheric has. I'm sure that close-up &/or wide open on a tripod shooting subjects with fine details into the far corners on fine-grained film (or an M8 at low ISO) I would've been "blown away" by the Aspheric. But I can say that stopped down to f/8 the above scenario is well served by the pre-aspheric too. The jazz b&w shots in my gallery were done with this lens, but the scans were done off prints using a flatbed so not the best of samples.

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

I have been working with the ASPH 50/1.4 and previously had used the E43 version of the 50/1.4 pre ASPH. For me and the kind of work i do i think the 50/1.4 ASPH has an edge over the earlier version. Mine is the LHSA version so has the scalloped focus barrel, 43 mm filter and clip on hood. The lack of flare and performance at 1.4 and 2.0 is very good for the way i see things.

 

[Simon Larbalestier]

Two more all 5 images shot with MP + 50/1.4 ASPH TX 400 @1.4 and 2.0 MP at 1/30th and 1/50 in very poor light.
Scanned on Nikon 5000.

 

[kalokeri]

Great examples, Robert and Simon.

I´m always impressed when I realize the visible difference between the ´lux asph. and the ´cron (last version) I own. Before I did some shots with a borrowed ´lux asph. side by side with the ´cron I didn´t believe that the difference would be visible to me.

So now I think I should save and save for a ´lux asph. (no gas).

Thomas

 

[madsolitaire]

I just got a Summilux 50mm f/1.4 Aspherical and took it for a test-drive. Here are some pics from my a/c at flickr:

www.flickr.com/photos/madsolitaire


cheers,

 

[BigSteveG]

Thanks Mad,
That lens is crazy sharp isn't it....

 

[madsolitaire]

Hi Steve,
The lens also burnt a big hole in my pocket!

 

[Harry Lime]

WOW, Zeiss planar 50 f/1.4 equals to 50 lux asph at f/1.4, very hard to believe I owned both lenses and I don`t think that was my case 🙂

Maybe I wasn't being quite clear or you misread my post. I was talking about the
Pre-ASPH Lux and Zeiss 1.4/50 Planar. I think they perform similar wide open.

I agree that the Lux-ASPH is in a whole different category. Especially shooting wide open and close up.
The floating element makes a noticeable difference.

 

[colinh]

Maybe I wasn't being quite clear or you misread my post. I was talking about the
Pre-ASPH Lux and Zeiss 1.4/50 Planar. I think they perform similar wide open.

I agree that the Lux-ASPH is in a whole different category. Especially shooting wide open and close up.
The floating element makes a noticeable difference.

Oh no! Now I want a summilux 50 ASPH.

Arrrrrrrrgh!

I will see what the Dalai Lama has to say on the subject....

colin