50 summilux or 75

[andy_piper2]

From Photo.com's MTF tests

 

<p>

 

50 'Lux at f/1.4 (center image) 40 lpm - 50% contrast, 10 lpm - 90%

contrast

 

<p>

 

75 'Lux at f/1.4 (center image) 40 lpm - 32% contrast, 10 lpm - 80%

contrast.

 

<p>

 

The 50 is sharper (40lpm) and contrastier (10lpm) wide open - by a

significant (but not huge) amount. No questions of focusing accuracy or

lens shake in MTF charts. It may be an older design, but it's also a

less challenging focal length to design at f/1.4 - and throws a

sharper, contrastier (but not necessarily 'better') image than the 75.

 

<p>

 

The 75, however, pulls 'way ahead, especially at the frame edges, at f/

8.

 

<p>

 

FWIW the few 'live' shots I've done with the two lenses pretty much

mirrors the MTF charts - the 50 was acceptably sharp (for me) at 1.4,

while the 75 was not. At f/5.6 or f/8 the 75 was very pretty.

[andy_piper2]

That should be - "From Photodo.com's MTF charts"

[james_.1]

Yes indeed would've child's play to capture the real "decisive

moment" with a Canon or Nikon! Those pups run around changing range

on me, guess I should be more adaptable, but I think that would

cause some camera shake. My girlfriend has a rebel and the kit

zoom, but it's a breeze to get such action shots.

 

<p>

 

I'd say if you miss out on some shots that you got with your old

setup, sounds like it would be valuable in your kit, unless of

course you are getting more valued ones with your 90 (which you

don't know yet). hard choices no doubt.

 

<p>

 

Yah my 1N was nice, but I was thinking, heck, bust out a camcorder!

I had a Canon GL-1 which I sold, since I think its replacement

should be coming within the season. They are priceless for

graduations, weddings, dogs playing, etc.