Magical photos from 50mm summilux asph?

W

woodleica

Established
Local time
4:17 AM
Joined
Nov 26, 2009
Messages
99
Does anyone have photos to share they think are magical? I am contemplating a purchase, but great images shot with this lens on a digital body are hard to come by.
 
That's because most are used for bokeh tests using cats as the subject ;)

Its a great lens if you can afford it. If you need the speed, I don't think there is much to be proven by this lens...

A straight google search will give you plenty to chew on.
 
Of course one could argue that any "magic" is probably supplied by the photographer rather than the lens.:)
It is one of the few current production Leica lenses that I haven't owned or used. But as Turtle says, if you really need that speed jump from f/2 to f/1.4, it's hard to go wrong with the 50 lux asph.
 
'Magical' is a difficult term to define in photography, so not sure if this will fit your request, but I got some 'ok' images here: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92921&highlight=comic-con

If you're after 'magical' in terms of character like the Noctilux f/1 for example, you're looking at the wrong lens. The 50/1.4 ASPH is as technically perfect and boring at the same time.
 
Turtle said:
That's because most are used for bokeh tests using cats as the subject ;)

Its a great lens if you can afford it. If you need the speed, I don't think there is much to be proven by this lens...

A straight google search will give you plenty to chew on.
Click to expand...

It is not the speed that sets this lens apart, it is the way it draws. Magic is the right description.
 
jaapv said:
It is not the speed that sets this lens apart, it is the way it draws. Magic is the right description.
Click to expand...

Just a reminder for posters who ask questions like the one that started this thread. Every photographer sees these things differently. I can't think of an aspherical Leica lens that I would consider magical. They may be amazing in their corner-to-corner sharpness, resolving power, etc. But I see that as technical perfection rather than "magic."
For me, it's the Mandler-era lenses - the pre-asph luxes, etc.- that are magical in their rendering.

Then again, I came to the conclusion this weekend that I'm really not a fan of high-def TV. It's just too perfect for my own tastes.
 
Let's put it this way then - I am a fan of Mandler lenses - but still I consider the Summilux 50 asph arguably the most desirable lens in the Leica range. And I dislike HD TV as well - far too clinical.
 
tbarker13 said:
Just a reminder for posters who ask questions like the one that started this thread. Every photographer sees these things differently. I can't think of an aspherical Leica lens that I would consider magical. They may be amazing in their corner-to-corner sharpness, resolving power, etc. But I see that as technical perfection rather than "magic."
For me, it's the Mandler-era lenses - the pre-asph luxes, etc.- that are magical in their rendering.

Then again, I came to the conclusion this weekend that I'm really not a fan of high-def TV. It's just too perfect for my own tastes.
Click to expand...

Great point to make, which is why I'd call the ZM Sonnar 'magical' over the Summilux and even Noctilux ASPH lenses, as well as the 35/1.2 Nokton 'magical' over the Summilux ASPH

Technical perfection in lenses is a wonderful trait of Leica lenses, but after getting what I wished for, I longed for more personality and now I have it in somewhat more modern lenses like the Sonnar and Nokton. Yet, still technical perfection is to be admired in modern Leica lenses, and I'd chose those for my work over my magical lenses, but chose the magical lenses for personal use.
 
I feel the same way.
When I want modern/perfection, I tend to reach for my planar, or the 24-70 and 70-200 zooms with my D700. But otherwise, I prefer the J-3, 50/2 nikkor, CV 75/1.8, 35 summicron v.III, etc.
 
I'm not that fond of the new aspherical Leicas, much prefer the older ones. But I' must say that this particular lens, the 50mm summilux asph, is the only one that i've used that combines technical perfection AND personality. It's magic in that sense.
 
Last edited:
thomasw_ said:
I am a hardcore Mandler-man; the f1 noctilux, the lux 75, the pre-asph lux 35 and 50 all give a look that I value highly. But the asph lux has the ability to be a chameleon, depending on how it is used, and take on a variety of rendered looks. That said, it is less used than my v2 50/1,4 lux.
Click to expand...

I find it very difficult to see any rendering characteristics with this lens other than pure lens perfection, seriously. It is the most corrected 50mm or under lens I've ever used. It is soooooo smooth and perfect which I guess is a characteristic, but it renders everything too be 100% accurate both in focus and out of focus, which is perfect for documentary purposes. Dammit, I think I'm talking myself into one now....ah nope, the Planar gives me almost the same look....oops, no, but my Noct/0.95 does.....nope, it only focuses to 1M compared to 0.7M, dammit. :bang:;)
 
One of my most used lenses on the M9 (and MP, M5, M7...) These are both 50/1.4 ASPH on the M9:

L10022842.jpg


screenL1002092v1.jpg
 
Last edited:
I shoot about 100 rolls a year of c41 mostly thru a 50 Summilux asph. I volunteer in a big church nursery and take lot's of infant/toddler photos with it. Mostly at f2.0 or f1.4 in the range of .7 meters to 2 meters. I've got over 200 enlargements posted in the church hall, I will not post them elsewhere, and the 50 Lux asph is perfect for this. Sharp as can be, wide open and up close. I also recently posted about 15 enlargements taken at halloween with the 50mm Noctilux. A very different display. I agree with others here, the asph lenses are technically excellent but the Mandler lenses have much more magic. With the little kids I use the 50 Lux asph but on vacation I might reach for a very nice J8 I own. Joe
 
thomasw_ said:
I will try to illustrate that it can take on different looks depending on how it is used:>

First, a shot that is very much like a pre-asph lux 50:>


dreaming of a memory by thomasw_, on Flickr


Secondly, a shot that looks like a 'standard' asph lux shot, technically very strong:


Après ballet by thomasw_, on Flickr

So, the ASPH can be a bit of a chameleon depending on how it is employed -- a very versatile lens, almost like your planar + sonnar combined into one lens ;) FWIW, I *think* the lux asph is a planar design.
Click to expand...

Aw, c'mon. This is a meaningless comparison. The first shot (very, very nice) is slightly out of focus without a distracting background. The second (also very nice) is in sharp focus with all kinds of background clutter.

Harry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom