The €18500 50mm lens test

I could have chosen the title "Is twice as expensive also twice as good?", but would you have clicked here then? So what is it about? It's about 50mm lenses. In the XNUMXmm range, these are called normal lenses because they are relatively close to the diagonal of the image sensor and therefore display the photographed subject normally. They are considered unspectacular lenses. That's exactly why I like this focal length so much, because it doesn't need to be gimmicky in environmental portraits and makes the person look very natural in the room.

And what is the price in the title? I did a comparison test and compared three 50 millimeter focal lengths for the L bayonet from Leica SL, Panasonic S and Sigma fp cameras. Interestingly, one lens is always twice as expensive as the other. And each one is considered a very good lens.

Why did I do that? Because comparison tests usually focus on measurable things like sharpness or vignetting. The latter is pretty uninteresting because lens corrections can calculate this out very well. Sharpness is of course important, but everyone can actually be spicy these days. What is much more exciting is how lenses manage the transition from sharpness to blur. Or what bokeh looks like. But that is hardly measurable. Therefore, from my perspective, it is better to photograph the same thing with different lenses and then see what the images look like. More on that soon…

I compared the following lenses:

• Panasonic Lumix S Pro 1:1.4/50mm – current list price: €2499
• Leica Summilux-SL 1:1.4/50mm Asph. – current list price: €5000
• Leica Noctilux 1:0.95/50mm Asph. – current list price: €11150

The latter is actually just for fun and to increase the total number of lenses for the title. But the result is still exciting...

But first, a quick look at why sharpness alone is not very helpful when assessing a lens. Look at the three images - they are very heavily cropped parts of one large image. The photos were taken with a Leica SL2, i.e. with a 47MP sensor. The difference in sharpness is marginal. Or?

Can you tell which picture was taken with which lens? If you know where to look, you'll at least recognize the Noctilux - but that's not because of the sharpness. Below is the complete scenery. The bottles can be seen in the bottom center. So the magnification is really enormous.

By the way, the bar is a very nice location down by the fish auction halls. And ideal for a test of how the lenses draw. To do this I just have to go right around the left corner. And now I see a wonderful perspective, like the one I show in the examples below. I deliberately focused on a point in the middle of the room.

I can easily conjure up beautiful bokeh even with lenses with a smaller aperture if I get relatively close to the actual object. I actually only need a lens with f1.4 if I can't achieve this closeness but still need a crop. (Light intensity ignored.) The sharpness range with an f1.4 lens is approximately as large with a 50mm lens and 5m distance as with an f4 lens and 3m. (In addition, Leica has proven with the Summaron 28mm f/5.6 that even Such optics can create a 3D effect and exemption.) Back to the example, I of course photographed through the glass, which is why the lens hood allows for other reflections at the edges of the image.

OK, it's immediately noticeable that the 50mm on the Noctilux is probably a little more than 50mm, because the image section is a little narrower. And otherwise? Yes, the chains from the ceiling are in different places - the location is on a floating pontoon. I hope we can all have a drink again and then know that the wavering isn't due to the alcohol 😉

Back to the photo: do you see the differences? I'm assuming you won't notice the differences at this size. Sure, the last one is the Noctilux because the image section is narrower. And which of the other two is the cheaper Panasonic? Which one is the Leica Summilux-SL?

I would venture to say that you only see the difference when you magnify it. More on that in a moment. But even when you magnify it, the differences are marginal. The Panasonic Lumix S Pro 1:1.4/50mm, however, buys the impression of greater sharpness with a higher contrast. That is neither bad nor objectionable. Leica does the same with the Summicron-SL lenses. Since the Panasonic lens is "Certified by Leica", I can only assume that it is an update of the slightly older Summilux-SL lens. That would also explain the slightly smaller design with the same light intensity. In fact, the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 1:1.4/50mm has 13 lenses, 2 of which are aspherical and 3 ED (extra low dispersion), while the Leica Summilux-SL 1:1.4/50mm Asph has 11 lenses, 4 of which are aspherical.

Back to the comparison: look at the pictures in the excerpt. I have adjusted the slightly different angle of view of the Noctilux here.

Let's start with the last picture: the Noctilux naturally has the softest bokeh because of its open aperture of 0.95 - and also the most intense color fringes on the lamp stems. It is an extreme lens and the exact representation of objects is not one of its first areas of application. I will anyway no longer give it away 😉

In the first two pictures you can now see the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 1:1.4/50mm and the Leica Summilux-SL 1:1.4/50mm Asph. You should pay attention to the lines in the background. Thanks to the contrast enhancement of the Panasonic lens, the lines in the first image are a little more defined and the bokeh in the flower is a little less busy.

Did you see the difference in the overall view pictures? And do you see him in the cropped pictures? Is the difference worth the price premium to you?

Before you decide: look at the last example. I'll show you the corresponding enlargements of a much larger image - I apologize for the shift in light and dark in the background and do not take it into account. But please click on the pictures to enlarge them.

Now seriously: all three lenses produce wonderful images and impress with great drawing. Can you recognize which picture was taken with which lens? Here you can also see that even though the white balance is exactly the same, the colors are slightly different. The final difference these lenses make in the finished image.

The first is again with the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 1:1.4/50mm. made, the second with the Leica Summilux-SL 1:1.4/50mm Asph. and the third with the Leica Noctilux 1:0.95/50mm. The latter renders the colors a little cooler. Interesting, right?

Are there any other differences that have nothing to do with the final result? Yes, weight, size and close focusing distance differ. In terms of weight and size, the Noctilux has the edge because it doesn't have autofocus. Among the AF lenses, the Panasonic Lumix S Pro without lens hood weighs 959g on my coffee scale, while the Summilux-SL weighs 1098g. Neither are lightweights, but the Summilux-SL feels superbly balanced in the hand. The Panasonic Lumix S Pro has a quick mechanism for manually focusing. When it comes to the closest focusing distance, the Panasonic Lumix S Pro is ahead at 44cm, while the Leica Summilux-SL focuses from 60cm. The Noctilux is designed for the range finder and is therefore only sharp from 1m.

And? Is twice as expensive now twice as good? I would say not, which is mainly due to the very good properties of the Panasonic Lumix S Pro 1:1.4/50mm lens. Still, I love them drawing from the Leica Summilux-SL 1:1.4/50mm Asph. and how well it feels in the hand.