80 1.4 or new 90 2.0 APO for portraits??

[lennycam]

i would like to hear people's opinions on the 80 1.4 vs the new 90 2.0 APO for shooting portraits. I have the 80, but it seems i can't not use it wide open, it gets too funky. not sure i have a bad sample or it's normal behavior for this lens. i heard the 90 was a little too sharp. any comments??

[rsh]

I really like the 80, not just for portraits, but for general use as well. I do not have the 90 AA R, but I do have the 90 AA M and the100 APO which, as I understand, acts in a similar manner to the 90.

I took two cameras and 4 lenses on a recent trip to Italy: R9/DMR, 21-35, 80 and 180 APO Elmarit, M8 and 28-35-50 Tri Elmar. I used the 80 Summilux 70% of the time on the R9.

[pcsmythe]

Two portraits with the R 90 APO:

Cuba

Everett

I don't find the lens too sharp at all, but it may be a matter of style.

[kim]

I have used both lens and much preferred the 80 f1.4 over the 90 APO for portraits. I rarely used the 80 wide open because the depth of field is too shallow. Try using it at f2.8-4 for portraits. I found that the 90 APO was too clinical for my taste for portraits and I liked the bokeh better on the 80 Summilux.

[4X5B&W]

Another vote for the 80 Lux, just a fabulous lens. If I want really sharp close-ups I use the 100 Apo Macro.

For portraits however, the 80 Lux is almost in a class of it's own.

[lennycam]

thanks, guys, that's what i thought too.

[zapp]

Originally Posted by lennycam

thanks, guys, that's what i thought too.

this discussion came up several times over the last year. For extensive information use the search tool. Also check about the M versions of the lenses. A lot of valid information about the 75 and the 90AA for M applies also for the 80-R and 90AA for R.

[ptomsu]

Originally Posted by pcsmythe

Two portraits with the R 90 APO:

Cuba

Everett

I don't find the lens too sharp at all, but it may be a matter of style.

Both of these samples do NOT really speak for the lens in my opinion.

I would prefer the 1.4/85, which I tried and was more convinced.

[pcsmythe]

The portraits were not done in studio with professional lighting and were not meant to test the limits of the lens. The prints, by the way, are great.

One can't seem to write a line on this forum without being criticized right and left.

[leicapages]

I used the Summilux-R 80/1.4 for years and found it an excellent all-rounder. Plus you get a very bright viewfinder, better it won't get. Later I sold the lens since I acquired a vario lens for the same focal lengths. If faced with the same decision as yours today, it would be a tough one but I'd probably think I'd go for the newer Apo-Summicron-R 90/2.0 ASPH. Better than that you'd be hard pressed to find. While the Summilux remains a truly nice lens, lens development has moved on.

[Jamie Roberts]

Hmm... I love the 80 1.4; it's one of my favourite all-round lenses, period, especially 1.4 - 1.6 for close portraits, but you need to be able to focus and you need to be able to get the subject in just the right position. It does fantastic things in adverse light, has a light vignette which I love, and really looks like a longer focal length Noctilux M in terms of flare resistance, colour and contrast.

Closed up, it's as sharp as razors. But if I was doing typical photojournalistic portraiture as opposed to the wedding stuff--where the vignette etc. is actually a bonus, I'd get the new 90 cron, which is sharp, bright, and beautiful all 'round.