First grabs with the Summilux 24

[jaapv]

I think I'm in love I only had the lens for a couple of hours and grabbed a few shots by the side of the road as I drove home, in failing light.

And a 100% crop. Note the DOF that is at pixel level, and the focus that I put on the flowerbuds smack in the middle of the native DOF of the sensor...

 

[stevem8]

Wow...this is on my "Dream Lens" list. One day...

I am happy for you that you were able to get this lens, now go out and shoot and post more images! These samples looks great!

 

[cam]

not looking... not looking... not looking.... enjoy, Jaap!

 

[jonoslack]

not looking... not looking... not looking.... enjoy, Jaap!

nor am I . . . nor am I

jaap is an illusion . . . the 24mm summilux doubly so!

erm. did someone say something about a lens?

 

[Stuart Richardson]

This lens must be heaven on film -- and hopefully one day there will be a full frame digital. But yes, fabulous shots jaapv, particularly the second one.

 

[robmac]

Gorgeous shots - enjoy.

 

[woodyspedden]

I will have mine in about a month and can't wait. Everything I have read and seen says this is a spectacular product. I struggled as to whether to buy the 21 or the 24 Lux and concluded the 24 high speed is the best choice for me. I have a silver chrome 21 Elmarit which is a very very good lens and one I will hold on to. An extra two stops would be nice but I can't afford two of these puppies.

Woody

 

[jaapv]

You will be very happy, Woody. My case contains the 24 and 75 Summilux only now, with the 1/8000th body. It will be a while before I get back to the 35-90 Summicron asph couple....

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Looks like a Lux. Okay we are jealous. LOL

I played with it at PMA and it was a sweetie

 

[jaapv]

YOU jealous, Guy??:bugeyes: You have gone through more lenses than most of us have gone through girlfriends:ROTFL::ROTFL:
It does indeed look like a lux, and more specifically, a Mandler-type lux. The microcontrast and resolution is obviously 2009, as is the correction, but the macrocontrast and bokeh look a lot like older lenses. Strange thing: If you stop down, macro contrast seems to stay the same or even get slightly lower. It is a character I like very much. If you look at that 100% crop you see that the lens resolution is way beyond the sensor resolution, making the DOF of the crop diffraction-limited.

 

[Bob]

MUST NOT LOOK
TURN AWAY
CLOSE WINDOW

 

[jlm]

man, that is a $6000 lens!
i read sean reid's review and the two new luxes look best at less than wide open, so that extra stop or so is not only double the price, doubles the lens bulk and weight, but also suffers in resolution.

you had better really need that 1.4

 

[Daniel]

I think I'm in love I only had the lens for a couple of hours and grabbed a few shots by the side of the road as I drove home, in failing light.

wow, this looks like it's a fun lens.

this is on my list of lens to buy as soon as i amass enough cash from sale of my paintings.

by the way, did you have any difficulty composing in the viewfinder? how did you work with it?

 

[ddk]

I can only echo everyone else's comments, what a wonderful and dreamy lens, wish I could adapt one to my cameras...

 

[ptomsu]

Great lens!

I was definitely not planning to buy it but now ..... :angel:

 

[jaapv]

wow, this looks like it's a fun lens.

this is on my list of lens to buy as soon as i amass enough cash from sale of my paintings.

by the way, did you have any difficulty composing in the viewfinder? how did you work with it?

No.The focussing throw is long, but very precise. I focussed on the flower buds and they are on the plane of focus, depite failing light. I would guess the lower righthand 15% or thereabouts are lost, but it is no more than the WATE or the Elmarit 24 with hood, so that is fine.

 

[jaapv]

man, that is a $6000 lens!
i read sean reid's review and the two new luxes look best at less than wide open, so that extra stop or so is not only double the price, doubles the lens bulk and weight, but also suffers in resolution.

you had better really need that 1.4

Hmm- I read that review too and that is not quite what it said. In practice it is d@mn sharp wide open and firms up to a retina-scratching sharpness at 4.0. Did you actually look at that 100% crop I posted of the lens wide open? If that is not a high resolution, nothing is....But using a lens like that wide open is not about high resolution, it is about the separation and quality of the OOF areas, and that is superb.

 

[jlm]

i agree the separation and quality of the oof is outstanding, in your image in particular. the wider aperture you go the better that works, eh?
i would think that with a wide angle in particular, that separation is harder to get, so the 1.4 is a boon.

i'll have to go back to sean's tome; usually i only have the patience to skim read

 

[mwalker]

I wanted and had one on order but I opted for the 24 3,8. I hope I don't regret it. Congrats jaapv! Lets see some more.

 

[jonoslack]

I wanted and had one on order but I opted for the 24 3,8. I hope I don't regret it. Congrats jaapv! Lets see some more.

Hi Mike
Once again I find myself agreeing with you . . I don't have the 24 3.8, only the lowly WATE (and a Zeiss 25 f2.8).

I'd love Jaap's 24 'lux, but, truth be told, generally speaking I like small lenses on my M8 (not that the WATE is THAT small, but it's mine, and I like it!). (incidentally, WATE = 335 gms, 24 'lux = 500 gm 24 'elmar = 260 zeiss biogon 260gm)