50mm lens shootout

In <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00HChb">this

thread</a>, I promised Marc Lieberman I'd shoot the same portrait with the

50/1.2 Noctilux and a Non-ASPH Summilux at f/1.4 for comparison purposes.

<p>

When the day came, I thought "as long as I've got a model, why not shoot a bunch

of 50's at a range of apertures?", so that's what I did.

<p>

The equipment: M3 SS (Kermit) with known accurate rangefinder. Bogen ballhead

on Manfrotto tripod. Kodak Portra 400 NC. High-resolution scan from Wolf

Camera (you don't think I'm gonna scan 21 photos at high resolution for a lens

test <i>myself</i>, right?). Scans resized to 511 and borders added per my

usual practice, but no other manipulations performed.

<p>

The setting: Reed's Jazz and Supper Club, Austin, TX. In the attached photo

(Summilux at f/1.4, by the way) I've drawn red circles around a background

specular highlight and a candleholder, which you should use to compare bokeh.

<p>

The exposure: 1/250 @ f/1.4; shutter speed adjusted to match aperture for all

other shots. Lighting did not change during the period of shooting.

<p>

The lenses: 50/1.2 Noctilux, 50/1.4 Non-ASPH (latest) Summilux, 50/1.4 LTM

Nikkor, 50/2 DR Summicron, 50/2 Summitar, 50/3.5 Cosina-Voigtlander Color-Heliar.

<p>

Subjective conclusions:

<p>

Bokeh: Noctilux wins hands down. You cannot make it produce bad bokeh at any

aperture. Much better to my eye than samples from the 50/1 Noctilux, which (in

the interests of full disclosure) I've never used. Interestingly, the Nikkor

looks second-best, with the Summmilux only third. The Summitar, unsurprisingly,

is worst in this category, with ring bokeh not completely gone at f/4. All the

other lenses were fine by f/2.8, except the DR cron which is hard to judge

because the bartender walked in front of my specular highlight.

<p>

Color rendition: Lux and DR Cron are "cool neutral". Summitar is "warm

neutral". Noct and Nikkor are "warm yellow", and Heliar is "warm pink".

<p>

Sharpness: Not a hairsbreadth between them at the center. These are all damn

fine lenses. At the edge - who knows? Nothing's in the plane of focus at the

edges in these pictures. Photograph a newspaper if you're interested in this.

<p>

Drawing: The poses in the shots with the Noct at 1.2 and the Lux at 1.4 are

similar enough for an almost direct comparison. I like the Noct's drawing much

better. I also like the drawing of the Nikkor better than that of the Lux. The

Summitar is really beautiful at f/2. The DR Cron doesn't draw that well, but it

has a beautiful smoothness. Texture-wise, the Noct has a "creaminess" (probably

low microcontrast) which is distinctive and different from all the other lenses.

<p>

Conclusion: If you're shooting portraits with any of these lenses, the factor

most limiting the quality of your results is you. Pictorially, I like the

Noctilux best. From f/1.4 to f/2, my second choice would be the Nikkor, with

the Summilux third; from f/2.8 up, I'd reverse these two. Despite being

convincingly worse on all technical factors except sharpness, the DR Cron and

the Summitar produce really excellent pictorial results. The Heliar really

isn't in this class - it's too slow for my usual portrait environment. Still,

on a tripod it produces a fine result, though a little more "plastic" than many

of the other lenses.

<p>

The complete set of photos can be found <a

href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=621221">here</a><div></div>

And here's the Noct at f/1.4 for purposes of comparison<div></div>

:-( The 511-pixel limit is really not very nice here, and I sized all the gallery photos for that format too. I'll replace the gallery images with bigger ones later today.

OK, the gallery images are now 1024 pixels wide, so you can evaluate sharpness more accurately.

And... sigh... after I carefully uploaded them in the right order, the Gallery software seems to have randomized them. Click on "details" to get captions describing which photo was taken with which lens at which aperture.

Cool, Bob. If you'd warned me, I would have lent you my CV Nokton and freshly cleaned collapsible Summicron (don't suppose there'd be much interest in the black f/1.8 Canon). Tell me if you ever want these for a future evaluation.

Many thanks for using a cute chick for the test instead of a brick wall.

I don't meet a lot of brick walls; I guess I need to start hanging out in higher-class places :-)

I never knew about the 50/1.2 Noctilux until you started posting some pix using this lens. I thought that perhaps it was just an over valued collectors lens. But now I believe that it is the finest Leica 50mm lens ever produced. Its unfortunate that most of these lenses are sitting unused, owned by collectors. Oh the humanity.

I agree that Bob does justice to the 50/1.2 Noct. Good set, Bob.

 

I can't help notice the differences in colors from the same lens/settings/model at different apertures. I think it is due to exposure mishaps.

Excellent post, Bob. I remember when the f1.2 Noctiluxes were on dealer's shelves in Chicago, as new equipment. They were just beyond my reach. Even more so now!

Can't see with the set-up and subject matter of these photographs but 'smooth bokeh' has

another quality. Doesn't seem to get much airplay, but the gradual and smooth look of the

transition from sharp plane of focus to non-sharp foreground and background is also a

major part of what 'bokeh' is. The abrupt falloff of sharpness to out of focus area is one of

the criticisms of the aspherical lenses. Lenses like the 35 and 90 pre-ASPH Summicrons are

known for their 'smooth-sharpness' bokeh.

Thank's Bob. Great post.

fascinating post Bob, thanks for sharing :-)

Thanks Bob

 

My son has a 1.0 Noctilux for his M bodies & also has the 50 1.4 for a Nikon S2 & it's a good comparison you show as the Noctilux is great & the Nikkor 50 1.4 has a nice look as well.

 

I know it takes a bit of work to do these things plus all of the after-chatter so thanks again for the time spent.

Vivek, you're right about some exposure inaccuracy. There are two sources of this. The first is that the M3 doesn't have a stepless shutter, so I couldn't shoot f/1.2 and f/1.4 a half stop apart - thus f/1.2 is shot at the same speed as f/1.4 and therefore a half stop overexposed.

 

The second source of variation is that when my model leaned forward, she was closer to the light source (a frosted window), and what with the inverse square law & all, there was some variation in exposure due to this.

 

When I lay the prints out on the table though, the color is pretty consistent among shots from the same lens but noticeably different among shots from different lenses.

 

I do think the 50/1.2 is very very good, but at 1.2 it's hard to use if your subject's face is at an angle, because the far eye falls out of focus. This effect has to be carefully managed. It also has less resolution than "sharper" Leica lenses.

 

It is my favorite 50, but for portraits I still think the 75 Summicron beats it.

Robert, you're RIGHT ON about bokeh and smooth fall-off - actually this is the MOST important part of bokeh when you're taking portraits, which is why I love the 75 Summicron so much - because it does "smooth falloff" better than any lens I've ever used in any format.

 

incidentally, the best picture of the session was a candid I took after I finished testing. Here it is:<div></div>

"At the edge - who knows? Nothing's in the plane of focus at the edges in these pictures. Photograph a newspaper if you're interested in this."

 

Sorry but I think your dissmissal of edge performance as almost being irrelevant isnt valid. Its improvement of edge performance which often results in a sacrific in smooth bokeh transitions. Each person needs to evaluate which they value more but I think alot would sway towards edge performance which is where lenses like the 50mm Summicron would come into its own.

I didn't say that edge performance is irrelevant. It is, however, not very important when you're photographing up close in a dark room. And I think it's pretty clear from the pictures in this test that the DR Summicron isn't as good a portrait lens as the Noctilux, or, for that matter, the Nikkor.

Thanks for the test, Bob.

 

Raid

"Sharpness: Nothing's in the plane of focus at the edges in these pictures. Photograph a

newspaper if you're interested in this."

 

 

I did this with my brand new pre-Asph Summilux just a month ago. The excercise is not

worth it as the detail falls away quite quickly at all apertures.

 

I concluded that the lens was about making beautiful images, rather than checking it's

value as a copy lens.

Great test, thanks for sharing. The Noctilux shots do look amazing. I like the Summilux look too.