View Full Version : 50mm Lens comparison - Which one do you like?
I took two quick photos the other day as a comparison when finishing out a roll on new film that I was also trying.
I have two 50mm Leica lenses. One is the 50 1.4 Lux ASPH and the other is a 50 2.0 Cron DR in the 2116xxx serial number range.
Both of these shots were taken within a minute of each other with each lens wide open.
The film is Kodak 100 UC. Scanned with my Nikon 5000 with the same settings ( no sharpness or other mods.) No Photoshop except for conversion to 8bit, sRGB, image size reduction for the web, and both saved at 90% JPEG quality to get file size for the forum.
Ignoring the slightly different compostion as my dog moved on me and I had to move, which one do you like best? (Relative to sharpness, OOF bokeh, vignetting, tones, definition, etc...)
After comments, I'll post which lens is which.
Gabriel M.A.
04-06-2006, 10:26
Hard to pick. But I believe the first one is the 'cron, the second is the 'lux.
der-felix
04-06-2006, 10:34
The second one has to be the summilux as the image has much less sharpness in the backgrond and it opens twice as much as the cron, right?
Anyway, I like the second picture a little more, maybe its the bokeh, this I like in particular. In terms of color I think no one is really superior over the other, vignetting I think is not visible for me. Both are of excellent quality.
Very beautiful dog, by the way....:)
Flyfisher Tom
04-06-2006, 10:37
I don't know which is which, but I prefer the first one.
trittium
04-06-2006, 11:01
I agree, number 2
The out-of-focus ring of gravel(?) at the edge of the grass looks much softer in the shot on the right.
back alley
04-06-2006, 11:05
i prefer # 2
While I like #2 best, I'm not so certain that it's a "fair" test. The greater DOF of the Summicron at f/2 as opposed to f/1.4 has a direct effect upon the OOF image. Take them both at f/2 and then I'd say the comparison is valid.
Walker
But if the one shoots at f1.4 and the other doesn't, that's part of the test!
I certainly hope #2 is the 50/1.4 asph. I've been thinking about getting one to replace my 50 cron, but if the bokeh looks like #1, I'm not so sure if I want it. There are a lot of discussion on the relatively harsh bokeh of the new asph lens.
macnorfin
04-06-2006, 12:34
I think the one on the right is the 'Cron and the one on the left is the 'Lux. The DOF on the left seems a shade narrower and with less highlight detail while the OOF area in the right-hand photo seems a little smoother. Both are obviously from high quality lenses. I like the right one a little better.
Benjamin Marks
04-06-2006, 12:42
I vote for the one on the left as the Lux and the one on the right as the Cron. Nicer bokeh on the cron . . . Hey, and a great looking dog in both pics! BTW, my DR Cron also vignetted a little like the pic on the right when I got it. I would think about a CLA, because once I had mine cleaned by Sherry Krauter, the vignetting went away. Of course if I'm wrong about which is which, I'll be eating some crow.
Ben
JoeFriday
04-06-2006, 12:43
I would easily choose the shot on the right.. the bokeh is softer, less distracting.. but both are clearly nice lenses
matt fury
04-06-2006, 13:33
I like the one on the right, too. It was pretty close, but the pebbles put it over. Don't know which is which though.
vizioneer
04-06-2006, 14:01
I like the 1st one, and I bet that is the lux asph.
vizioneer
04-06-2006, 14:03
I like the bokeh on the 1st- has a nice texturey feel. Different.
OK, after looking at these photos about 5 different times, I am convinced that the left is the ASPH and the right is the DR. I prefer the DR.
If I am wrong, then forget I was ever here :D
Robert
telenous
04-06-2006, 14:43
I think the Lux is to the left, the DR on the right. I prefer the photo to the right, the bokeh appears creamier and it seems to me the contrast is lower. Or not.
I like the second best. I say that's the lux and the first is the dr.
laverda3c
04-06-2006, 14:52
My preference is for #2. The bokeh on the first one looks awful (IMHO) - double lines on the fountain and swirls on the border between the grass and the wall.
Cheers,
Mark -%)
I hope the one on the right is the dr, cause I have one and I can't afford the lux. But, I think not.
My preference is for #2. The bokeh on the first one looks awful (IMHO) - double lines on the fountain and swirls on the border between the grass and the wall.
Cheers,
Mark -%)
I agree 100% with you Mark. To me, the bokeh on the first one is really ugly.
Abbazz
But if the one shoots at f1.4 and the other doesn't, that's part of the test!
Sorry, Nick, but I disagree.... unless it's an apples & oranges test. The difference between f/2 and f/1.4 is sufficient to invalidate a direct comparison at those apertures IMO. They can be compared to each other at f/2. Would anyone accept a comparison between lenses that were a full f-stop difference for each set of images? e.g., two 135mm lenses compared with one at f/5.6 and the other at either f/4 or f/8? In any event, that's just my take and my opinion on it. I'm not trying to start an argument.
Walker
Ronald M
04-06-2006, 16:27
One is the `cron. More debth of field and sharper.
Two as the usual `lux unsharpness.
Madrigal
04-06-2006, 17:05
I definitely find the one on the right more pleasant. OOF areas deciding factor for me, too.
It's downright uncomfortable for me to look at the palms and gravel in the one on the left.
Here a few more photos to make it more interesting yet.
These are taken at the same aperature.
These first three go with the lense of the photo on the left in the original post.
Here are the photos which go with the originals post's photo/lense on the right.
The bottom three hands down.
vizioneer
04-06-2006, 18:11
1st three thumbs are the f/2 lens, 2nd three thumbs are the f/1.4 lens- can see the aperture coming into play at f/2 with the 2nd set.
Gabriel M.A.
04-06-2006, 18:39
Yep, without a doubt, the first one is the 'cron, the second one is the 'lux. You can tell the one at f/2 in the first one is wide open, the second one at f/2 is stopped down. Sorry; me spoil fun? :o
Madrigal
04-06-2006, 19:02
I like the extra contrast in the second batch, as well.
kvanderlaag
04-06-2006, 19:27
Right one is the 'Lux, it vignettes a bit wide open.
I kind of want a 'Cron.
Simon Larbalestier
04-06-2006, 19:52
Ray i see you posted the same question on the Leica Forum
i like the 2nd series of shots in both instances but i've no experience of the DR or the ASPH version of the Lux so it's hard for me to tell but as the OFF areas seem softer on the second series of images wide open i'd guess that the 50/1.4 ASPH is the second set Also there is a slight vignetting of the second picture of the dog and the contrast is higher on the plant images both of which also suggests the 1.4.
Simon
The last group is really illustrative of the differences in these lenses. The first set has the pre-1979 50 mm Summicron veiling flare quality causing reduced contrast and color saturation (especially on the candles) in contra-jour situations. This is most obvious at f/4 and f/11. On the up side, it fills in shadow detail of the potted plant in the foreground as if it had a little more light in those areas. I was surprised to see that the harsh bokeh of the dog shot background was taken with the same lens in the first group of indoor shots which I assume is the Summicron. I guess the bokeh of the new 50/1.4 Asph ain't too bad after all.
I'll go with the group that says the one on the right is the 'cron. Nice images both!
:)
laptoprob
04-06-2006, 23:28
Hopefully I will scan my further comparison of - among others - Rigid Cron and Quinon (Sonnar) this evening.
What I have seen so far is the increadible soft background performance of the Quinon, because I am not that thrilled with the Cron's OOF perfomance. This last test is mainly to compare sharpness.
The comparison in this test shows a similar harsh performance of the Cron.
Post deleted by posters request
OK - THE ANSWER IS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dog #1 (left) and Plant set #1 are from the DR.
Dog #2 (right) and Plant set #2 are from the ASPH.
I really did this to show why I like both lenses so much for different things and to negate the rumors of the the new ASPH being "harsh and clinical".
I love both lenses.
The DR is VERY sharp and also contrasty when fairly open. This is a great lens when not backlit. Bokeh is more defined with this lense, and can be useful depending on your ideas.
The ASPH Lux is a GREAT all around lens for any lighting situation and has very pleasing bokeh. ( "clinical or harsh" - HA - Not in the least)
Hope you guys enjoyed.
Ray
DOF is slightly tighter and the back wall is less defined in the 50/1.4 shot wide open than the 50/2 shot wide open in the first thumbnail. That to me are the clues.
Post deleted by posters request
Madrigal
04-07-2006, 09:18
I now know that should the occasion ever arise, I am definitely a 'lux lens lover, and could make that choice without hesitation.
Of course no. 2's the ASPH (in the dog photographs). I think those that say otherwise are forgetting one very important point which I shall not reveal now (and no, it's neither contrast-related nor back wall-related...).
Cheers!
Okay, I am ready to be enlightened (leitz rookie here)... (Drum roll please!)
Post deleted by posters request
This really upsets me. I'm not upset at being wrong (I have lots of experience at that), but I am upset because I really like the look of the lens#2 pics. This may be the most expensive thread I have ever clicked on :bang:
Magus - thanks for the pat on the back, mate.
Robert
Flyfisher Tom
04-07-2006, 09:39
Great to know that I'm in the minority in liking the first shot and the DR. It will save me some $2000 ;-)
Great to know that I'm in the minority in liking the first shot and the DR. It will save me some $2000 ;-)
I have to laugh even though I am holding the other end of the the stick.
Maybe I should sell you my DR?
Hm, very hard but i take shot number 2
Where is the key to this puzzle? If people cannot tell apart a DR from an Asph Lux, then maybe the DR will get a boost in selling price from now on.
I have mixed feeling about this. The fear of bokeh in #1 was that's holding me back on pulling the trigger on the 50 asph. Now I have no excuse. This is one expensive reading indeed!
Post deleted by posters request
Post deleted by posters request
K.P.
I really wanted to negate all the claims which I read about the 50 1.4 Lux ASPH, being harsh and clinical or having weird bokeh.
Hopefully this opened up everyone elses eyes to how good a lens it really is.
Best,
Ray
telenous
04-07-2006, 11:07
That was a fun test Ray, thanks for posting the photos.
It seems many people here prefer the Lux photos over the DR. I said so myself. But let me add, the choice was a hard one. I was looking for differences because there had to be some, right? And, granted the differences can be corroborated by hard evidence. But it is still very, very difficult to tell the two lenses apart.
If there were no differences then we would have to invent some.
NIKON KIU
04-07-2006, 11:09
You all need to compare your 1.4 ASP to the new Nikon 50mm supplied with the millenium S3.
Kiu
Gabriel M.A.
04-07-2006, 11:15
I like both shots. It depends on what you're aiming for at the moment.
That said, I think I like my pre-ASPH 50 'lux over the ASPH 'lux, and the DR 'cron over my tabbed 'cron (4th version?), yet I like the unique soft light quality I can get with my tabbed 'cron.
erikhaugsby
04-07-2006, 12:34
I really think that the bokeh with the first one (the cron?) is pretty ugly...It really doesn't flow from piece to piece, it kind of looks like miniature, dim, light flares...
celluloidprop
04-07-2006, 12:49
They both look fine to me. The Summilux would, of course, be the winner on speed alone.
Simon Larbalestier
04-07-2006, 20:20
You all need to compare your 1.4 ASP to the new Nikon 50mm supplied with the millenium S3.
Kiu
Kiu
that would be an interesting test for sure.
Leica Magus
i was curious about your postings and now i realised where i've seen your words before on the Leica Forum! as K.P.
Colour tests are hard for me to judge as i shoot only B/W it would be good to see a test of the Nikkor 50 S3 millenium, the Pre ASPH and the lastest ASPH in B/W at 1.4, 2, 2.8 and 4.
Simon
Post deleted by posters request
Simon Larbalestier
04-08-2006, 02:21
Indeed we have K.P.!
Simon
Madrigal
04-08-2006, 03:33
I'm a Leitz rookie too...
I'm not going to serve it raw; take a look at these two photographs:
After looking at both, I am still wondering if there is something I'm missing- you had said it didn't have to do with contrast or OOF area, that important point. My admittedly untrained eye is not seeing anything else.
What am I missing??
Sorry, but I am new to these comparisons. I only know what I like.
Post deleted by posters request
Madrigal
04-08-2006, 04:22
Madrigal, sorry; I am new to Leica optics too, and I didn't intend that in a condescending manner.
I hadn't perceived it as such.
In fact I didn't say it had nothing to do with the OOF rendition, I merely restricted myself, purposefully, to saying it didn't relate to the back wall, and therefore to OOF rendition behind the plane of focus.
Before the plane of focus and in the field, however, is a different matter altogether. If you look at the OOF rendition of the files slightly in front of and to the right of the clock in the Leica Forum comparison, you'll notice that the ASPH renders that in softer fashion than the non-ASPH.
The same is true of the second dog photo when compared to the first.
That was my clue, and the very originator of that comparison got the dog comparison wrong, even though this detail is of paramount importance!
Best,
True enough. Just wanted to make sure there wasn't something else I was missing. Now I have to find out why the pre-ASPH (clock photos) is sharper in that respect...
Am I crazy, or what? I don't even own a Leica... yet!!
I am actually enjoying these comparisons.
Post deleted by posters request
Brian Sweeney
04-08-2006, 06:16
Just to add: Aspherical lenses can have "sweet Spots" with aperture and position in the frame, and "really bad spots" depending where the image falls in the same frame. If you look at the performance of the Leica 50mm F1.2 Aspheric Nokton and the Canon 50mm (55?) F1.2 it sets both extremes for best performance and worst performance for comparable (ie f1.2) lenses. The Aspheric Nokton had "best center, worst 1/3 out, best 2/3 out, worst edge". Same with a similar test on the Canon aspheric.
Post deleted by posters request
Benjamin Marks
04-08-2006, 08:09
OK - THE ANSWER IS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dog #1 (left) and Plant set #1 are from the DR.
Dog #2 (right) and Plant set #2 are from the ASPH.
Hanging my head . . . shows you what I know. Odd, as I own both of the lenses tested. . . .shame shame shame.
raid amin, sorry, but 'people' can tell the DR 'apart' from the excellent ASPH 'lux, as I did...
The DR was simply the means to an end; we are living in interesting times!
Hi Leica _Magus,
Several individuals bounced back and forth between the original two images. unsure which lens was used. This is what I was referring to.
Madrigal
04-08-2006, 17:42
Thank you L. Magus and Brian for the help in understanding these results.
I look forward to the day when I can make my own comparisons.
And thank you, Ray.
Ponsoldt
04-08-2006, 18:00
I like the second one the best.
summilux
04-17-2006, 07:48
it has become quite fashionable to rubbish ASPH lens, but once you have tried the new lux asph, you will find out it is neither harsh nor clinical. I have done a direct test in relation to bokeh, the asph is much smoother than the pre-asph. I sold my pre asph chrome lux.
but i dont like the new focusing tab of the asph lux, it is set to low, it tends to cut into my finger when focusing, as a result, I sold mine and planning to get a LHSA asph lux. It will make a nice match for my mint chrome 60s Lux.
pictures taken at f1.4 by the asph lux are dreamy and creamy, without the nausating whirl of Noctilux.
I hope this test goes a ways towards dispelling the myth that the 50/1.4 ASPH has horrible bokeh. I keep telling people it is rather nice, but no one listens...
Maybe no one listens because it is easier on the wallet. :p
I would love to have one but I'll probably need to save for another year for it. It has past the US$3100 mark here in Singapore (was quoted S$5100).
I think it is similar when people rubbish the 35 cron ASPH.
3100? That is crazy! It is probably 1000 dollars cheaper in Hong Kong...I believe I paid 2150 or so for mine...
Look at the blades of grass.
#1 was taken with a Summicron.
(Good doggie!)
Memphis -- the difference between the summilux asph and the summarit is not measured in speed. The summarit is a very nice lens, but it performs in an utterly different way. Wide open the summarit is very soft, with veiling flare, while wide open the summilux asph is extremely sharp and contrasty. I am not saying one is better than the other, but they are not something that should really be compared. If you want a less expensive lens with closer performance to the summilux asph, you should look to the Voigtlander Nokton 50/1.5 or the f/2 lenses like the summicrons and 50/2 Hexanon and Planars.
summilux
04-18-2006, 05:06
I sold the Nokton 50/1.5, sharp yes, nice bokeh yes, cheap yes, but no shadow details, i did a test between it and the pre asph lux, the lux shows a windows in the background with details such as window rims etc, the Nokton gives a black hole.
I guess in this world you get what you pay for. I got my lux asph for $US2166 here in Hong Kong, paralle imports of course. With this lens, you can sell your Nokton, Summicron etc. I am only keeping my 50/3.5 Elmar for old time sake, and its nice hood for that matter.
3100? That is crazy! It is probably 1000 dollars cheaper in Hong Kong...I believe I paid 2150 or so for mine...
I had the impression that it was the current price even in Hong Kong as the 75 cron (S$3300+) that I bought from the same shop was very close to Hong Kong price. Maybe it was a mistake? Probably he quoted the Noctilux?
Time to go back to get the 50 ASPH!
Wait you are talking Singapore dollars, not US dollars right? I was talking about US dollars. I am not aware of the exchange rate, so perhaps that is a normal price. The US price of the 50/1.4 ASPH should be around 2100 US dollars on the "grey" market -- i.e. Hong Kong prices.
I....I got my lux asph for $US2166 here in Hong Kong, paralle imports of course. ..... Hi, I was doing some research on the 50 lux asph (want one) and came across your post. Would you happen to know if those prices are still that low? Thanks!
I sold the Nokton 50/1.5, sharp yes, nice bokeh yes, cheap yes, but no shadow details, i did a test between it and the pre asph lux, the lux shows a windows in the background with details such as window rims etc, the Nokton gives a black hole.
Very interesting. And what do you do with your window rims in the background? I mean: is it important to your picture? Or is it important to policemen because you can see the murderer in the background if you enlarge the picture? Does it really matter? I don't know.
Could you post a picture taken with your Summilux where we can see the difference between the Nokton and the Summilux?
Best,
Marc
hans voralberg
12-15-2007, 13:43
Hi, I was doing some research on the 50 lux asph (want one) and came across your post. Would you happen to know if those prices are still that low? Thanks!
Unfortunately no, HK price is now ~US$3000. Check here http://www.tincheungcamera.com.hk/index.php?cPath=1_70&sort=2a&filter_id=18
If you search around, there might be better price, it's HK.
Unfortunately no, HK price is now ~US$3000. Check here http://www.tincheungcamera.com.hk/index.php?cPath=1_70&sort=2a&filter_id=18
If you search around, there might be better price, it's HK. Ouch. :bang:
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.