Do I need a f1.4 lens?

[mwooten]

Maybe, but I'm not sure.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Akiva: Let me keep it simple: yes, you need it. No requirement that you use it wide open, but when you need that extra stop it is there. I think you need to think of these things as options, colors on a painter's palette, if you will. I live as far north in the US as you do south if you are in Florida. The amount of available light is less, the days are shorter. You need more speed.

Of course you could just carry a giant tripod with you everywhere you go. But that Lux will keep calling to you and you will wonder whether your pictures would have had a little extra "something" if you could juuuuuust open that one extra stop.

So yes. You need it. In fact it is remarkable that a man of your sober judgment and life experience doesn't already have one.

Ben

 

[Pablito]

Maybe, but I'm not sure.

I disagree with that, on principle.

 

[kshapero]

Akiva: Let me keep it simple: yes, you need it. No requirement that you use it wide open, but when you need that extra stop it is there. I think you need to think of these things as options, colors on a painter's palette, if you will. I live as far north in the US as you do south if you are in Florida. The amount of available light is less, the days are shorter. You need more speed.

Of course you could just carry a giant tripod with you everywhere you go. But that Lux will keep calling to you and you will wonder whether your pictures would have had a little extra "something" if you could juuuuuust open that one extra stop.

So yes. You need it. In fact it is remarkable that a man of your sober judgment and life experience doesn't already have one.

Ben

Sober, who me? The Lux is on the way.

 

[raid]

Congratulations, AKiva.

 

[mdarnton]

I bought a 50/1.4 for my Nikon FG. After I saw how much more out of focus the background was on my informal portraits, I immediately bought the 50/1.1 Nokton for my Leica. For me it's not about speed, it's about the look.

 

[BillBingham2]

Mosal tov!

B2 (;->

 

[jamin-b]

Having bought a Nikon Df I have a different take on this then using a rangefinder with film or my M8. The high ISOs are so good that i am now happy to have a smaller lens with f/3.5 or 4 maximum aperture -- and actually shoot it at f5.6 or 8, even in dismal light conditions.

 

[uhoh7]

Looking at a sweet Leica Summilux 50/1.4 Version 2

For one third the money the M version of the CV 50/1.5 is superior in every way to the pre-asph lux. 🙂

nice thread on the CV:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1439320/0

To the point of the OP, do I need one?

I shoot the 50 cron v4 most of the time. I have lusted for an 50 Lux ASPH, but other priorities have held sway. With the M9 50/2 is not going to make it if you shoot low light. With a A7S it's more than fast enough for anything. Plain A7, too slow for low light.

So I have a number of fast 50s I use only for low light, CV 50/1.1, Canon 1.4 and 1.2, and the Sonnetar. The 50 Lux ASPH would be better, probably, in all situations. It is sharp form edge to edge WO. But the CV is a lot of fun at 1.1, it's fully usable, and actually right with the .95 Leica sharpness wise, but of course the nocti is in a class by itself for superspeed render.

If you shoot daylight only, or have no problem now with noise in your images, you do not need a F/1.4 lens.

Some of us, however, like to play with things we do not "need". 🙂

I think the most practical super speed is the CV 35/1.2, because the DOF is easier to use than a 1.2 or faster 50.


L1008172-2 by unoh7, 35/1.2
The Planar 50/2 is a great lens. Cron v4 is better. But a single 50 may get a little boring, and it's nice to get another look sometimes:


Here and Now by unoh7, Sonnetar

If I owned a 50 Lux, I would probably never need another 50 for the M9 in any situation, unless I felt it was sometimes too big. That would be nice. If I sold all those other 50s I have, I could probably afford one LOL

The v4 cron actually beats the 50 ASPH Lux close up at F2, though nowhere else. But it is incredible, and tiny. Overall the best 50 of the 20th century. 🙂


Duncan by unoh7, 50 cron v4 WO

 

[michaelwj]

Depends how you define superior...
😀

 

[AlexBG]

I think that if you have the zeiss 50mm f2 then a faster 50mm really needs to be a lens that will give you soft images at f1.4 or over the top bokeh.

A summarit 50 f1.5 may be a great option. Would compliment the zeiss well.

 

[oftheherd]

It's a moot point now since kShapero has already bought what he wants. I don't have a fast lens for my RF cameras. But I do have some 50mm f/1.4 lenses. The one I have used since 1975 is a Fujinon 50mm f/1.4. For me that was better than the 50mm f/1.7 Yashinon. The extra 2/3 stop got me photos I would have difficulty having gotten otherwise. But part of that is that I always enjoyed available darkness photography, whether is was for professional reasons, or just my own fun.

Not everyone needs that. And with My Kiev and its f/1.8 or my Mamiya Super Press 100mm f/3.5, I just learned to make adjustments, or not take a photo.

It is really a personal thing imho. kShapero, please let us know how you and the lux get along.

 

[johnnyrod]

I guess it depends if it suits. The fastest lens I have is a Pentax 50mm f1.2 for SLR. My style is mainly grabbed shots rather than careful compositions or landscapes, and with the f1.2 wide open I took the only two pictures I've ended up enlarging. Both were at 1/30th (no flash - it wasn't working at the time) with one opportunity, and with anything slower I just wouldn't have got a sharp picture. Not often I'd say those words! Lowlights in other pictures (stopped down) look good and bright too but I presume that's more down to the characteristics of the lens than its ability to go so wide.

You'll find out soon if you need it!

 

[uhoh7]

Depends how you define superior...
😀

Look, the Planar is awesome. But I can't think of a thing the 50 cron v4 does not do better.

from:
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/06/comparing-rangefinder-and-slr-50mm-lenses-version-0-7/

Just in terms of sharpness, WO the cron murders the Planar, though folklore has told us otherwise 😉

Look at that: 1200/1200/1200 🙂

The only Zeiss in that league, you need a pickup to carry it 😉 I wish Roger would have included the CV 50/1.5 M.

 

[michaelwj]

Ah, so by superior you meant "superior sharpness when shooting resolution targets at one distance measured at three points in the image circle, as defined by one lab". Sweet.

I haven't used any of these lenses, I'm not a 50mm type person, but the ZM planar is vastly inferior because it has annoying 1/3 aperture click stops. 😀