Jump to content

75 Summilux


Paul J

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm trying to decide between a 75 Summilux and a 90 Summicron. I'm leaning heavily towards the 75 at this stage. Can someone please describe or show a picture of a headshot at closet focusing in portrait format? I'm wanting to see how much it fills the frame for an average sized adult noggin and also to see how much barrel distortion there is. I've been searching for such a picture but it's never spoken wether it's at closet focus distance or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I put mine on the M8 because it that is what is handy. The long side of the frame is 8 inches ( 8x5+). On any other M camera it will be 12" (8x12). That close distance is .7 meter or between 2 and 2.5 feet. That will be a tight face shot.

 

If you were take a portrait from 2.5 feet, the apparent distortion of the facial features is going to be large and the subject will look like Pinochio ( marienette with the growing nose).

 

A pleasing distance for 35 mm portraits is around 5 feet. At that distance the 75 mm lens will cover 22x14+ inches. It will be 25% smaller on an M8. This is probably small by some factor as the frame lines do not "grow" as focus distance is increased. On the M8 they are correct at .7meter and too small at all other distances.

 

A 90 mm at 5 feet is 16"x10+", 75% of that on the M8.

 

When I did head and shoulder portraits with film M cameras and a 90 mm, I would set everything up, focus the lens on 5 feet, and move in until the catchlights in the near eye would merge. This is much easier than trying to focus at wherever distance you happen to be standing. Naturally you can use any distance you wish preset on the lens.

 

All things considered, with full frame I found a 90 more pleasing than my 75 which pretty much lived on a shelf. I took it off the shelf when i bought the M8 in Dec.

 

The 75 lux sharpens up nicely at 2.5. Close to APO sharp at 5.6. I was shocked the first time.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone please describe or show a picture of a headshot at closest focusing in portrait format? I'm wanting to see how much it fills the frame ...

The minimum focusing distances are 0.75 m for the Summilux-M 75 mm and 1 m for the Summicron-M 90 mm (and Apo-Summicron-M 90 mm Asph, too). So the maximum magnification at the minimum focusing distances is bigger for the 75 mm, it's 1:8 or 1:9.2, respectively. So on a 35-mm-format camera (i. e. all Leica M models except M8/M8.2), the height of the field-of-view in portrait orientation is 28.8 cm (11 1/3 inch) for the 75 mm or 33.3 cm (13 1/9 inch) for the 90 mm. By the way, the Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph can focus down to 0.7 m which yields a magnification of 1:7, or a width of the field-of-view (= height in portrait orientation) of 25.4 cm (10 inch).

 

An average adult's head's height is about 25 cm (10 inch) from the tip of the chin to the top of the head (or a little more when there's a lot of hair). So with both lenses, you can capture a head-only portrait with a few centimeters of space between the head and the frame's borders (or no space with the Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph). With the 90 mm, this extra space will be very slightly more ... but the perspective will look nicer due to the longer distance. In real life, usually you'll want a little more space around a person's head, so all these lenses basically are equally well-suited for portraiture.

 

If you want to get closer than head-only—say, face-only or eyes-only—then you'll need to crop, or use an M8, or use the Macro-Elmar-M 90 mm, or go for an SLR camera.

 

My advice is—when choosing a short telephoto lens for Leica M, namely 75 mm or 90 mm, then do not base your decision upon minimum focusing distance or maximum magnification but upon focal length, perspective of view, and how well it fits into your existing lens line-up. A 75 mm lens is more kinda longish standard lens while a 90 mm is more like a short telephoto.

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to all. Great info.

 

I should have stipulated I am using an M9. I want the 75 Summilux over the summicron because it's look is more in keeping with my 0.95 Noctilux.

 

I prefer the wider perspective of the 75 over the 90 or even an 85. It just suits my style. I'm also contemplating the 90 Macro for those times I am filling the frame with the face or need a more relaxed angle but thikn the 75 will be a good place to start.

 

I would very much still appreciate if someone has a vertical framed portrait at closest focusing on the 75 summilux. Muchos Appreciatos.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks to all. Great info.

 

I should have stipulated I am using an M9. I want the 75 Summilux over the summicron because it's look is more in keeping with my 0.95 Noctilux.

 

I prefer the wider perspective of the 75 over the 90 or even an 85. It just suits my style. I'm also contemplating the 90 Macro for those times I am filling the frame with the face or need a more relaxed angle but thikn the 75 will be a good place to start.

 

I would very much still appreciate if someone has a vertical framed portrait at closest focusing on the 75 summilux. Muchos Appreciatos.

 

Just a small comment, but in many reviews the Mandler lenses are less in keeping with the modern lenses of today such as the 0.95 Noctilux. The 75 APO would, in my opinion, be "more in keeping" with your 0.95 than the 75 Lux. I own both the 75 Lux and the 1.0 Nocti and to me they are both in keeping with each other. I own many newer lenses such as the APO 90, Macro 90, and 50mm and many wides, etc and to me they have different rendering than Mandler lenses.

 

Why not ask Huff if in any of his photos using the 75 Lux did he shoot at 0.75 meters? He is good at answering back.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll be able to fill the frame a bit better with the 90 Macro. Great lens.

 

I do have one portrait (attached below) with the 75 Summilux that I know was shot at minimum focus distance, but it's not vertically framed. I have a few others as well at 0.75 m, but they are of my dog and not a person, as I tend not to take portraits where face completely fills the frame.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are a few portraits on the M9, but not all of them fill the frame:

 

(after linking, just click on the images to enlarge them)

 

 

Blue, redux.

G – A portrait.

Jason and the Canadian Suit Drive.

K – A portrait.

Fenced.

The piano tuner, Part 2 of 3.

 

Peter.

P r o s o p h o s

 

Thanks - amazing. Shots like these make me excited about this lens.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 75mm Summilux is my favorite lens hands down. Shot wide open @ 1.4 (and I own the 50mm Summilux ASPH, the 35mm Summilux FLE and the 90mm Elmarit). This image of my son was taken with an M9.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by egrossman
  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

No portrait, well sort of ... Just in a zoo with the 75mm- SUMMILUX.

 

 

best

GEORG

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

nice, what actions did you use on the eyes?

 

Image processed in CO6p. Converted to B&W with adjustments to red and yellow channels (to soften the skin tone) and very small increase of exposure on the eyes... and that's it. The general effect here is all thanks to the Summilux.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Shots like these make me excited about this lens.

:rolleyes:

 

Don't be too disappointed when you own this lens one fine day and still don't get pictures like those. It's not the lens; it's the photographer.

 

 

Has anyone done a comparison between the Apo-Summicron-M 75 Asph and the last Summilux-M 75?

There's no difference between the first Summilux-M 75 mm and the last (I mean, in terms of image quality) but quite some difference between these and the Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph.

 

At f/2, the Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph is clearly better than the Summilux, even though the former is wide open and the latter stopped down one stop from full aperture. It's sharper from center to corner, has better contrast, deeper colours, and less chromatic aberrations. Very little vignetting, too. The Summicron's performance at full aperture is almost super-natural—even better than the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph at f/1.4 or f/2.

 

At f/1.4, the Summilux-M 75 mm is not so great, in a technical sense. Contrast is pretty low with laid-back colours, and there's quite some chromatic aberrations everywhere. Coarse detail is rendered fairly sharp at the core but with some kind of corona of veil which, in combination with the lowish contrast, gives a rather painterly and softish impression. That's great for portraiture, but for real good sharpness, the lens must be stopped down to f/2.8 or more. At f/2, the painterly effect gets pretty much reduced but not entirely eliminated. Someone called this a split personality—painterly and impressionistic at wide apertures, tack-sharp when stopped down—and I can confirm this notion. Another lens, by the way, that shares this split-personality character is the old Minolta MC Rokkor-PF 85 mm 1:1.7 ... wonder if that's just coincidence? After all, there was a close co-operation between Leitz and Minolta back in the '70s and early '80s.

 

The Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph is not 'painterly' at all, at no aperture. Some call it 'clinical' ... an assessment I cannot acknowledge in any way, as the Summicron's rendition is so incredibly plenteous and luscious. What you get when using it is no lens, just picture ... umm, provided there's no flare. It's very similar to the Summilux-M 50 mm Asph, and then some—except there is some tendency to flare in an unpleasant way in some situations.

 

Another nasty thing about the Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph is the extremely short throw of the focusing ring. The Summilux-M 75 mm's throw, in contrast, is extremely long, and some may dislike that. A perfect throw would be half-way between these, but the longer throw is much better than the Summicron's short throw which definitly is way too short to make sense.

 

Overall, I prefer both the Summilux-M 75 mm and Summarit-M 75 mm over the Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph, for various reasons. If however both the inclination to flare and the absurdly short focusing throw would get improved then the latter would be the closest thing to a perfect lens ever.

Edited by 01af
  • Like 11
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...