The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

leica 50mm apo or 50mm lux

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Hi Bob,

The astronomic APOs are never ever used outside of infinity. That isn't the case with a regular photographic lens (despite the astronomic price).

If the bokeh is distracting because of the CA, it is a problem, especially for Leica lens, I would think.
Sorry,

Focus on the Moon ... and then focus on a deep space object...not the same... so what is infinity?

The DOF even with an APO refractor is exceedingly small ... so OOF areas indeed show CA...no big..just an indication you need to turn the focusing knob a bit.

I agree that excessive CA is distracting...I do not see this with the 50 APO. And I do not think it is too clinical...then again my favorite camera was the Mamiya 7 with 43, 65 and 80 .... or the ALPA TC with 35 and 47 APO's .

A beautiful lens that is sharp and well built does not negate the need to focus, frame and have a context in mind when one exposes a picture...neither does it diminish the content ....

JMHO.

Bob
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
BTW,

I almost never shoot wide open...most always at F 4 to 5.6 on these micro cameras...so the 50 1.4 or older Summicron works for me.

Bob
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Not even Capa's famous blurry/soft image of the soldiers. All the magic is in the eye connected to the finger.

The 50 APO is a status symbol.
At last, my take on the APO is very simple. It is a status symbol. And probably a very solid performer. A total waste on the MM. This is why even cheap glass picks up more and more details as the sensor has more and more MPs. And it's all about viewing distance, anyways.

The 50 APO? Only for fondlers. Capa wouldn't have benefited from it even if he had run for his life, case proven by his famous shot. Or Ulevich's Pulitzer image, where he almost got killed. No APO or ASPH would have been relevant at all.
WHich begs the question as to why Capa bothered with the Leica at all...one assumes he picked the best camera and lens extant at the time...the inherent slowness of focusing is why his beach landing pics were all so full of energy and out of focus...engaging, but would they be more so if they were in focus. No one knows but it does not diminish the value of good optics, sensors or film and technique.

I posit that these were the best of the captures and are what we are given...please understand that I love them...but do not think that Capa threw out all the in focus captures to leave us with these...in spite of their merits.

And I agree that the 50 APO will be a very compelling lens...if Leica were not selling them we would not have the option of buying such a superb optic.

I personally can justify the 50 APO prior to the 11K of the Noctilux....

I imagine that HCB would have loved the 50 APO for his portraits...consider
An Inner Silence...The Portaits of Henri Cartier-Bresson....90 percent ultra sharp but the pathos and immediacy of the pictures is wonderful.

Bob
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Lotsa funny info going on here and in the Leica world in general.

APO is beneficial for Color where all three primary colors match at the same focus point.
Actually, three wavelengths, if you really care about funny info. The primary colors are actually a spread of wavelengths.

The 50 APO is a status symbol. Your girlfriend loves Gold and big Diamonds? You love the 50 APO. It's as simple as that.
Sorry, your equipment does not matter argument can only be taken so far. Technical control and perfection does matter or we would still be shooting glass plates with doublets. How important it is is up to the photographer. To simply brand a photographer that wants this lens as shallow is really unfair and not a bit insulting. I personally think either lens the OP is interested in will make fine images. But it is up to the OP to weigh the pros and cons of each and then decide.
 

Hosermage

Active member
APO is beneficial for Color where all three primary colors match at the same focus point. The people and the weekend-reviewers who want to sound expert about it and who recommend the APO for the MM are not to be listened to. They give very weak arguments.
First, let me apologize if I'm wrong, but I thought the reason to use APO lens on the MM is precisely for the alignment of the focus point of the 3 wave length on the sensor. As the red wave length will likely focus behind the sensor from a non-APO lens, one is more likely to get an out-of-focus shot with a red filter. I'm no expert, but this is what I've learned from this lively discussion from LUF thread.
 

Shashin

Well-known member
David, you are right. CA is a problem with monochrome images as well as color ones. It does not matter whether the camera can distinguish color, but it has to do with sharpness--the CA will affect that. It is emphasized when a color contrast filter is used. Apochromatic optics has benefits.
 

PeterA

Well-known member
There is a difference especially at the edges, so no, they don't perform equally on a 35mm sensor.
How does the APO50cron perform at F1.4 or F 0.95?

I'd suggest that for lux and Nocti owners that is the MTF they are interested in seeing if they are into stuff like that - just guess.


Me? I own and use 3 different verions of a 50 lux - never on a tripod so my shots will never test the outer or inner boundaries of sharpness or resolution - I reserve that fuss for Rodenstock or Schneiders on an Alpa or Artec.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
If it were my money I'd probably buy the 50 Lux and a 35 Cron ASPH. If money were no object I'd own every Leica M body/lens and an Leica S kit as well.
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Lotsa funny info going on here and in the Leica world in general.


Also, the APO is not a no-brainer. Just look at a HCB print, or McCurry print, for example. The last thing you'll even think about it all this technical junk. And no, none of their images would have benefited from a better lens. Not even Capa's famous blurry/soft image of the soldiers. All the magic is in the eye connected to the finger.

At last, I have always been very disapointed in the Leica crowd in general as they're usually proven that they don't really know much about photography in general. Take the 50 Lux Asph for example: It used to be maligned because it was "too perfect", or "too clinical", which just isn't true. That particular lens is a top performer on all aspects and it has plenty of character. Plenty. Exactly the opposite from "clinical", a term that I suspect was simply coined by a couch photographer who couldn't' afford it and was looking for a reason to love his old glass a bit longer. And now, it seems that good old "modern 50 asph lux which is too clinical" has suddenly become old glass to the Leica crowd. Quite funny.

The 50 APO is a status symbol. Your girlfriend loves Gold and big Diamonds? You love the 50 APO. It's as simple as that.

At last, my take on the APO is very simple. It is a status symbol. And probably a very solid performer. A total waste on the MM. And a total waste if you want to improve your photography. And I don't believe in diffraction. It's true in theory, but in practice it vanishes. This is why even cheap glass picks up more and more details as the sensor has more and more MPs. And it's all about viewing distance, anyways.

The 50 APO? Only for fondlers. Capa wouldn't have benefited from it even if he had run for his life, case proven by his famous shot. Or Ulevich's Pulitzer image, where he almost got killed. No APO or ASPH would have been relevant at all. A Pulitzer just doesn't doesn't care. I believe the APO, beyond any of its "perfections" will show a unique character.
Will it be worth it? If the resale value doesn't drop, it's always worth it, even at 25,000$. Simply logical.
---------------------

A great book that I recommend to all those who think that photography is about the equipment, be prepared to be smashed: Moments: The Pulitzer Prize Winning Photographs by Hal Buell
NB23

Hope you feel better having gotten all that off your chest . Reminds me of a political debate where you string together so many insults ...the other participant can t remember them all in the rebuttal .

I see no reason to defend having an interest in equipment as I pursue photography for the "joy of the process". In a thread where the topic is really ..."what do you think about a new Leica lens " ..generally that a tip that the discussion will be about finer points of equipment . Receiving a lecture about how equipment doesn t matter ..isn t appreciated .

Over the past five years ..I have spoken to or discussed photography with some of the worlds best including a number of Pulitzer prize winners . While they clearly focus on a more practical application of their equipment ..they appreciate and are constantly looking for an edge to improve their work .

You mention HCB and Steve McCurry as two examples . While HCB had a simple kit ...he was obsessive about his black and white prints . He would accept only the best printers and provided strong feedback on his prints . Steve McCurry has always been well know for his Nikons and Kodachrome . His archive is priceless and he has spent a small fortune in post processing to wring the last possible IQ out of his masterpieces . If you follow his work you will see that he transitioned to HB for his field portraits a few years back .

One of my good friends actually won the Pulitzer and while he clearly doesn t obsess about equipment ....he pays attention to things that he can apply to his work . He called me to learn about the MONO and was interested in how it would affect his black and white work . When he does a gallery exhibit he has huge prints larger than 30x40 and he cares about how the images will hold up . He cares about high ISO performance and his ability to work with out constraint in low light . He cares about the ability to shoot at F1.4 and still have sharp detailed images . He cares about the tonal quality of his prints .

No you will not find the great photographers debating the fine points of Leica M lenses and clearly having the very best equipment has little to do with capturing a Pulitzer .... But in the context of creating a body of work (a more attainable goal ) it does matter . Part of the fun of debating equipment is to learn about what others see or perceive .
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Lotsa funny info going on here and in the Leica world in general.

APO is beneficial for Color where all three primary colors match at the same focus point. The people and the weekend-reviewers who want to sound expert about it and who recommend the APO for the MM are not to be listened to. They give very weak arguments.

Also, the APO is not a no-brainer. Just look at a HCB print, or McCurry print, for example. The last thing you'll even think about it all this technical junk. And no, none of their images would have benefited from a better lens. Not even Capa's famous blurry/soft image of the soldiers. All the magic is in the eye connected to the finger.

At last, I have always been very disapointed in the Leica crowd in general as they're usually proven that they don't really know much about photography in general. Take the 50 Lux Asph for example: It used to be maligned because it was "too perfect", or "too clinical", which just isn't true. That particular lens is a top performer on all aspects and it has plenty of character. Plenty. Exactly the opposite from "clinical", a term that I suspect was simply coined by a couch photographer who couldn't' afford it and was looking for a reason to love his old glass a bit longer. And now, it seems that good old "modern 50 asph lux which is too clinical" has suddenly become old glass to the Leica crowd. Quite funny.

The 50 APO is a status symbol. Your girlfriend loves Gold and big Diamonds? You love the 50 APO. It's as simple as that.

At last, my take on the APO is very simple. It is a status symbol. And probably a very solid performer. A total waste on the MM. And a total waste if you want to improve your photography. And I don't believe in diffraction. It's true in theory, but in practice it vanishes. This is why even cheap glass picks up more and more details as the sensor has more and more MPs. And it's all about viewing distance, anyways.

The 50 APO? Only for fondlers. Capa wouldn't have benefited from it even if he had run for his life, case proven by his famous shot. Or Ulevich's Pulitzer image, where he almost got killed. No APO or ASPH would have been relevant at all. A Pulitzer just doesn't doesn't care. I believe the APO, beyond any of its "perfections" will show a unique character.
Will it be worth it? If the resale value doesn't drop, it's always worth it, even at 25,000$. Simply logical.
---------------------

A great book that I recommend to all those who think that photography is about the equipment, be prepared to be smashed: Moments: The Pulitzer Prize Winning Photographs by Hal Buell
Did Capa actually use Leica all the time?
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Sorry,

Focus on the Moon ... and then focus on a deep space object...not the same... so what is infinity?

The DOF even with an APO refractor is exceedingly small ... so OOF areas indeed show CA...no big..just an indication you need to turn the focusing knob a bit.

I agree that excessive CA is distracting...I do not see this with the 50 APO. And I do not think it is too clinical...then again my favorite camera was the Mamiya 7 with 43, 65 and 80 .... or the ALPA TC with 35 and 47 APO's .

A beautiful lens that is sharp and well built does not negate the need to focus, frame and have a context in mind when one exposes a picture...neither does it diminish the content ....

JMHO.

Bob
Interesting defense. Almost effective too. :)
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Interesting defense. Almost effective too. :)
Vivek,

Please understand that I assumed we were not discussing Lateral CA which would not hold in the aforementioned instances...and yes in the morning light I would add that you are correct :thumbup: that the APO refractors ... mine fluorite... have a small range of distant focus and their design does not need to consider near range effects.

Bob
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Vivek,

Please understand that I assumed we were not discussing Lateral CA which would not hold in the aforementioned instances...and yes in the morning light I would add that you are correct :thumbup: that the APO refractors ... mine fluorite... have a small range of distant focus and their design does not need to consider near range effects.

Bob
Bob, the image of the champagne bottle shows no CA whatsoever. Also, CA is most noticeable in an in focus image. It dissipates in an out of focus image. But this lens is showing no CA.

So, if you are thinking say the OOF edge of the car lamp is showing color, a little green, it is, but it is not CA. It is the transition of the OOF images of the lamp and green foliage behind it. If you look at the other metalwork, it changes color--CA is a separation of specific wavelengths and so will show the same color unlike the image which is showing different colors depending on what is influencing the tradition zone. And where it is neutral, it stays neutral--that is not what CA does. This lens is about as color free as you can get.

CA is also about bringing different wavelengths of light to a single point or plane of focus. That is a problem of frequency, not object distance. It really does not matter whether you are talking about infinity focus or something closer.
 
Last edited:
V

Vivek

Guest
Bob, I appreciate the discussion. Meaningful, on topic and polite! :thumbs:
Thanks! :)
 

docmoore

Subscriber and Workshop Member
Bob, the image of the champagne bottle shows no CA whatsoever. Also, CA is most noticeable in an in focus image. It dissipates in an out of focus image. But this lens is showing no CA.
If you reread the posts above I posted the picture as a wonderful color example of the 50 APO and agree that with my vision...I see no CA at all. I believe that was brought up by someone else...

I do believe that the new 50 may be as good as the Coastal Optics 60mm f/4 UV-VIS-IR APO Macro or very very close.

Bob
 
Top