I really Like Lux 24 :)

[turtle]

I have the lux and find it unbelievably useful photographing a project inside the bowels of old buildings, often in very low light with light streaming in. This lens holds an extreme contrast range well. Beautiful rendering, very sharp, nice OOF... magnificent and I have found myself using it about 50% of the time indoors.

This brings me to the off centre focus issue. Technically, if you focus on something pointing straight at it then swing away so it is off centre, the plane changes and so does the required focus distance, but in reality it matters less than you think inless making extreme changes with very fast lenses. it does catch me out once in a while, but so do the off centre focus patches on my EOS! With my 85 1.2L, the centre patch is more reliable, even through recomposition, where the subjects eyes end up 1/3 of the way down a vertical frame, than using the off centre patches. This was messing with my head so I tested it and what do you know? Using the centre patch and recomposing was on average more accurate despite the changed focal plane.

The other issue is that really fast lenses tend not to be pin sharp at the edge of the frame wide open so it is a good idea not to place the subject too far into the outer field wide open.

Sliding left and right is also the technique I use if the shift is dramatic. Works nicely most of the time.

 

[Hacker]

Regardless of the 'lux or focus technique, that's a neat photo.

Thanks. Here is one more, difficult with a moving subject and with extremely low light:

 

[larryk]

I agree with Graham: you gotta give a lot of the credit to the photogapher and the kids on the 4th one. Same with the later one of the girl reaching out of the box. We also now know that the 24 Lux is the perfect camera for photographing your wife across the table at dinner without having to move back or have the waiter do it for you. Not kidding. I've tried that with other lenses and you cannot get the whole table included like that. I'm sure there's other spots like that for the 24mm. Anyone want to comment on the added quality over the 24mm f2.8 lens that has such a great reputation? Is the difference worth the extra $ 2,000?

 

[Don Hutton]

I agree with Graham: you gotta give a lot of the credit to the photogapher and the kids on the 4th one. Same with the later one of the girl reaching out of the box. We also now know that the 24 Lux is the perfect camera for photographing your wife across the table at dinner without having to move back or have the waiter do it for you. Not kidding. I've tried that with other lenses and you cannot get the whole table included like that. I'm sure there's other spots like that for the 24mm. Anyone want to comment on the added quality over the 24mm f2.8 lens that has such a great reputation? Is the difference worth the extra $ 2,000?

2 stops is a lot on it's own - with a 24mm, f1.4 opens up a whole new world of creative potential with selective focus which simply does not really exist with the f2.8.... Is it worth $2000 for the difference? C'mon - this is Leica gear and no-one knows nor cares about the answer to such an obtuse query!!

 

[deepdiver]

pic of my wife and my little boy
This lens never failed to amaze me.... @F1.4

@F4

 

[Paratom]

Great images! and a pretty family!

 

[deepdiver]

Great images! and a pretty family!

Hi T-Streng
Thx u

 

[Lars]

Picture 4 is an example of why I find focusing such a problem with the M system. You had to focus the center of the frame on the child (I presume your daughter) on the right, then recompose, then shoot. If you are at f/1.4, how on earth did you keep the camera from moving forward or back when you recomposed? I would have ended up with OOF on the right side.

BTW it's a terrific shot, Adree.

Actually the problem is even worse, especially with a wide-aperture wideangle lens - if the lens has a flat plane of focus. At an angle off-center the focus distance is actually further away from the lens than on axis. So by definition you cannot focus properly this way unless you compensate focusing distance based on trigonometry. So a 24/1.4 on a rangefinder is unfortunately not a good idea unless your subject is always dead center.

Defocus rendering of this lens is spectacular though. And it better be for that price hehe.

 

[turtle]

So a 24/1.4 on a rangefinder is unfortunately not a good idea unless your subject is always dead center....

Or quite far away in which case the difference in actual focus difference is minimal. Shooting people who are somewhat off centre and the other side of the room allows for DOF to absorb differences even wide open in my experience. I tend to use mine at distance wide open and up close I like to stop down if possible. I am not after the OOF effects but the speed and at medium distance the whole frame tends to be reasonably sharp even with slightly offset subjects.

 

[Godfrey]

Wonderful photos.

You give me ideas for what to do when next I have the copious discretionary income required. ;-)

Seriously, though, I'd love an ultra-fast, short lens like that on a Leica M ... or any other camera. I have the equivalence in a Micro-FourThirds fitted with 12.5mm f/1.4 C-mount lens at present, but it's obviously not the same as a lens which fully covers the format and is of the quality shown in these photos.

 

[nomored3]

My 24 Lux - got it last Friday and it is way better than my new 24mm AFS !

 

[jonoslack]

Wonderful photos.

You give me ideas for what to do when next I have the copious discretionary income required. ;-)

HI Godfrey
It's where my discretionary income runs out as well
considerably short of the noctilux, and I'd like one of them too

 

[Lars]

My 24 Lux - got it last Friday and it is way better than my new 24mm AFS !

Care to elaborate on that?

 

[nomored3]

Care to elaborate on that?

Light. And the focus uncertainty with D3s of the AFS defeats the purpose. But manually focusing it no problem. I'm also old fashioned - the G lens means no aperture ring but yes, it is better sealed against rain.

 

[Lars]

Light. And the focus uncertainty with D3s of the AFS defeats the purpose. But manually focusing it no problem. I'm also old fashioned - the G lens means no aperture ring but yes, it is better sealed against rain.

Yes Nikon doesn't seem to have gotten QC geared up properly on the 24. What about image rendering?

 

[Hacker]

My 24 Lux - got it last Friday and it is way better than my new 24mm AFS !

Shooting from the Esplanade?

 

[nomored3]

Shooting from the Esplanade?

Yeah .. from start of the bridge. Yesterday morning at around 8am - f5.6 i think. Can't wait for rest of skyline to fill up ... too boring for too many years

 

[nomored3]

Yes Nikon doesn't seem to have gotten QC geared up properly on the 24. What about image rendering?

Images if focused correctly is nice / clean. It comes back to whole weight issue - with 24mm f1.4 on M9 i see no point bringing around a SLR, even a D700 class machine is bigger than M9. Final reason i hang on to D3 is to use it at F1 races when i get invited to paddock each year at the Singapore night race

 

[innerimager]

Thanks. Here is one more, difficult with a moving subject and with extremely low light:

I LOVE this shot Hacker......Peter

 

[Paratom]

24Lux...also one of my favorite lenses...