A 75 APO-Summicron or a 75 Summilux

[Jennifer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm thinking of getting a 75mm for portraits. My question is should I go for the current APO-Summicron or the discontinued Summilux? I'm sort of leaning towards the Lux as I already own an APO-Cron 90 and I understand that for portraiture the results from the Summilux render an image with a different, softer, "less modern" appearance especially when shot wide open. The other issue is that if I plump for the Lux is there any real difference between the German and Canadian manufactured versions?

 

Having never used either lens at this FL, I have to rely on those with some personal experience.

[algrove]

Will you be using an M240?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Jennifer]

Will you be using an M240?

 

Yes

[jcraf]

If you are doing portraits, get the 'Lux. Of course, it is only available used and is nearly twice the price of a good used 75 Apo Summicron. Mind you I saw a nice used one, UK seller, on a well known auction site for only £2200 this week.

 

I've had both, and prefer the 'Lux, which is now my only 75. The 'cron is fantastic but a tad too clinical for me. And I predict the 'Lux will just increase in value......

 

There should be no difference in quality between German and Canadian-built lenses. What's perhaps more important is to be sure it's bang on focus-wise and is technically tip-top.. With an investment at this level, a trip to Wetzlar for the lens might be a wise precaution.

 

Regards

[algrove]

After purchasing my lux I sent it in to Leica for 6 bit coding and CLA for a digital camera since they were made and developed long before digital Leicas were around.

 

I have no knowledge if German or Canadian are better. Mandler designed and made the first ones in Canada so I do not see why they would not be good. Word of mouth here should be considered since many comment and only repeat hearsay about this subject. Make sure the responder has owned both the Canadian and German versions. Then again back then variations among lenses probably were greater than today as I understand now manufacturing tolerances are much tighter than back in the lux days. Thus, the dilemma begins since you could have some tell you he/she disliked one lens over the other, but did he/she have it tuned for digital use? Also which digital use? M240 users might have different opinions than M9 users. EVF helps.

 

Frankly, I seldom use my 75/2.0 since I like the color rendering of the lux better. That said a respected pro told me to get the most crisp lens available since one can always soften an image that is too sharp, but with a lens that produces images that are not always real sharp for portraiture. it might be impossible to get it much sharper. To me softness is more for female shots (if desired) and sharp male portraits never seem to invoke the "I hate my wrinkles, my look, etc." comments.

 

Again, B&W can be a bit different with the MM and there the 75/2.0 might work out better especially with a green filter for males, but not with females. So if you might someday get the MM that is also a consideration. I actually like the longer focus throw of the lux over the APO. But then again nothing wrong with an APO.

 

I prefer the 60mm filter size of the lux versus the, to me, odd 49mm size of the APO since most of my M lenses tend to the 46mm or 60mm size making filtration purchases easier.

 

Sorry for the rambling on, but you see the dilemma you have created for yourself. Nice dilemma.

 

Just thought about renting the 75/2.0 in to get a feel of how it renders on your camera.

Edited July 15, 2014 by algrove

[Jennifer]

After purchasing my lux I sent it in to Leica for 6 bit coding and CLA for a digital camera since they were made and developed long before digital Leicas were around.

 

I have no knowledge if German or Canadian are better. Mandler designed and made the first ones in Canada so I do not see why they would not be good. Word of mouth here should be considered since many comment and only repeat hearsay about this subject. Make sure the responder has owned both the Canadian and German versions. Then again back then variations among lenses probably were greater than today as I understand now manufacturing tolerances are much tighter than back in the lux days. Thus, the dilemma begins since you could have some tell you he/she disliked one lens over the other, but did he/she have it tuned for digital use? Also which digital use? M240 users might have different opinions than M9 users. EVF helps.

 

Frankly, I seldom use my 75/2.0 since I like the color rendering of the lux better. That said a respected pro told me to get the most crisp lens available since one can always soften an image that is too sharp, but with a lens that produces images that are not always real sharp for portraiture. it might be impossible to get it much sharper. To me softness is more for female shots (if desired) and sharp male portraits never seem to invoke the "I hate my wrinkles, my look, etc." comments.

 

Again, B&W can be a bit different with the MM and there the 75/2.0 might work out better especially with a green filter for males, but not with females. So if you might someday get the MM that is also a consideration. I actually like the longer focus throw of the lux over the APO. But then again nothing wrong with an APO.

 

Sorry for the rambling on, but you see the dilemma you have created for yourself. Nice dilemma.

 

Just thought about renting the 75/2.0 in to get a feel of how it renders on your camera.

 

I appreciate that there is no simple answer to the conundrum. I also take the point that if a lens is naturally sharp the images can always be softened, but not visa versa. If I didn't already have the APO-Cron 90 my decision would be more straight forward.

 

Also to throw into the melting pot is that good 75 Luxes don't come cheap. Prices seem to range from not far short to considerably more than the price of a new 75 APO_Cron, and that's before one factors in the cost of any post purchase CLA/6 bit coding one might need/want to have done.

[wattsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What do you find lacking in the 90 APO that acquiring a 75 is going to sort out?

[Paul J]

If you have the 90 APO perhaps you would be best served with the Lux if you want that rendering. At least if it's not to your liking you can sell it without loss or straight swap it for a Summicron.

[Jennifer]

What do you find lacking in the 90 APO that acquiring a 75 is going to sort out?

 

It's as much personal as technical. Quite apart from the rendering the framing of the 90 makes me feel too remote from the subject. If I get what I expect to get from the 75 I might possibly end up selling the 90.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Jennifer

[Peter H]

Unless you're working in very specific conditions where you can't move forward or back a few inches, I don't think the difference in focal lengths between 75 and 90 will make much difference to anything. A friend of mine is a reasonably famous photographer who has made an enviable reputation and a good living from portraits of the famous, infamous and non-famous. His preferred working lens is anything between 20 and 35. But he found his photographic "voice" long ago.

 

I mention this just in case it helps you consider whether your energy and money is best invested in another lens or in some time out to work with subjects that will really fire your creativity. But if you're way beyond this stage and know that you need a 75mm lens, I apologise because all this will be irrelevant to you.

[Paul J]

The 75mm Summilux is a wonderful lens with a specific look. Personally, I'm at odds with it. At times I am disappointed by the softness and colour and other times it suits the image and love it nothing more. The Summicron is very sharp and has more perfected colour which is what I need a lot of the time too. It's tricky and you can't have the best of both worlds unfortunately without owning both lenses.

Edited July 15, 2014 by Paul J

[Jennifer]

Unless you're working in very specific conditions where you can't move forward or back a few inches, I don't think the difference in focal lengths between 75 and 90 will make much difference to anything. A friend of mine is a reasonably famous photographer who has made an enviable reputation and a good living from portraits of the famous, infamous and non-famous. His preferred working lens is anything between 20 and 35. But he found his photographic "voice" long ago.

 

I mention this just in case it helps you consider whether your energy and money is best invested in another lens or in some time out to work with subjects that will really fire your creativity. But if you're way beyond this stage and know that you need a 75mm lens, I apologise because all this will be irrelevant to you.

 

Of course, you're absolutely right ........... but, alas, the GAS monster has to be fed

[Peter H]

Of course, you're absolutely right ........... but, alas, the GAS monster has to be fed

 

In that case, it's looking like the Summilux....

[JWW]

The 75 Summilux is a lens with a unique wide open look. I don't use it as often as my 35s or 50s but I consider it essential in my kit for the times I do need it.

 

Be aware that these lenses have a very shallow DOF wide open and that these were manufactured years ago where tolerances may or may not have been what they are now. Unless you can try before you buy, budget in money (and time) to get the lens focus adjusted.

 

When I purchased mine (in M8 days) I tried a few out and most were off focus wide open. I sent mine in to DAG and it works perfectly on my M240. However, I didn't feel the need to do a 6 bit conversion.

[algrove]

Of course, you're absolutely right ........... but, alas, the GAS monster has to be fed

 

Ah, now it all makes sense.

[luigi bertolotti]

...an image with a different, softer, "less modern" appearance especially when shot wide open. ....

 

If you are looking for this (and having a 90 APO) .. why not thinking of a Hektor 73 1,9 ? That' a true oldstyle rendering...

[jplomley]

Really surprised Leica have not up-dated the 75 Lux; I'm sure the demand would be there. They think it will be for the 28 mm.

[IkarusJohn]

I'd just like to endorse JWW's comment above.

 

Wide open, and at minimum distance setting:

 

• Summilux f/1.4 at 800 mm, the depth of field is 1mm
   
  
• Noctilux f/0.95 at 1 metre, the depth of field is 2mm
  

 

I say this just to point out that people often say that the depth of field with the Noct is razor thin, when actually there are lenses with thinner depths of field. This is not necessarily a bad thing as, properly calibrated, the Summilux is relatively easy to focus. Not so the APO Summicron 75, with its short throw. Others' experiences differ, but I found this lens extremely difficult to reliably focus, whereas the longer throw on both the Noctilux and the Summilux 75 make focusing a breeze.

 

I have both the AA Summicron 90 and the Summilux 75, and they complement each other well. I would add that the Summilux is only soft when wide open, stopped down, it is as crisp and sharp as the AA Summicron 90. I have used the Summilux 75 quite a lot for landscapes (with my Monochrom), and the images blow up very well with no loss of detail.

 

I hope this helps. I'm not trying to feed your GAS, but the combination of the 75 Summilux and 90 Summicron AA (with M9 and Monochrom) works very well for me. I don't have an M(240).

 

Cheers

John

[IkarusJohn]

Really surprised Leica have not up-dated the 75 Lux; I'm sure the demand would be there. They think it will be for the 28 mm.

 

I read somewhere that Mandler considered the 75 Summilux to be his best lens (it was his last); Peter Karbe hates it ...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hoppyman]

Hi Jennifer. This is one of those questions that, if you ask 20 people you will get 24 opinions All of them will be at least partly right. One person's 'clinical' is another's 'better correction' and vice versa one person's 'glow' is another's under-correction'.

 

I have never owned the Summilux . The APO Summicron ASPH is my favourite lens and I have used it one several film bodies and the M8, M9 and now with my M (Typ 240).

The advantages that I prefer are the better correction, smaller size, closer minimum focus distance, lack of focus shift and shorter focus distance. Those are all things others may see as disadvantages!

 

Most often for portraiture, in natural light I use mine at f/4 because that gives me exactly the DoF I want with . I find the accuracy of focus there perfectly fine and have no difficulty. I don't shoot with the lens wide open often personally. In the studio it would nearly always be at around f/8.

I use retouching of skin texture selectively (and subtle local sharpening) as a normal part of my developing of portraits.

It certainly will record the most fine detail of every pore of skin or eyelash depending on how you light your subject of course. It is up to you how you want to use that and what you do in developing.

Here are some photos in a variety of conditions. There are a LOT of portraits with it in my galleries.

http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/156344992

http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/156520836

sj9657 photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com

skt6365 photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com

ar6480 photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com

Ba1102BW photo - Geoff Hopkinson photos at pbase.com

Edited July 15, 2014 by hoppyman