75 or 90apo

[leica1215]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have no experience with either one, I plan to take portrait with it, it seems more like people have hard time choose 35 or 28..

 

Will 90 apo very difficult to get the focus right?

Thanks in advance

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[microview]

No, but it is a very heavy lens! Almost no depth of field at wide apertures and you need fast shutter speeds to avoid shake/blur.

[Advertisement]

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

[Peter Kilmister]

From what I have heard before @Microview gives a sensible summary of the APO 90. I use a cheaper and lighter alternative, the 90 Summarit f/1:2.5 which gives lovely rendering for portraits.

[wda]

Choosing your focal length is first priority. Surprisingly I find a 75mm lens more useful for my purposes. Then decide whether speed is critical for your type of work. Because ISO can offset ultimate lens speed, my choice is for a Summarit which is lighter and less expensive.

[Schrödinger's cat]

While I can't tell you which lens you should get, I can offer a couple of observations that might influence your decision.

 

I don't generally use my Leica for portraits, so my criteria are likely different from yours.  I use the Leica as a travel camera.  I don't like to carry a lot of stuff when traveling so I like lightweight lenses.  I prefer to photograph with one lens on the camera and one in a pocket, so lens weight and size are very important.  The 90mm you mention, while a truly outstanding lens, is too large and heavy for my personal preference.

 

I generally make photographs in pretty good light and don't generally attempt to use extremely shallow depth of field to isolate my subjects, which more often than not are architectural.  A max aperture of f4 is fine for how I use the lenses.

 

Think about what's most important to you, small size lenses or large maximum apertures.

 

My personal preference is for a 90mm, as I like the separation between focal lengths of 28, 35, 50, and 90.  Many people swear by the 75, but for my images a 90 works well.

 

So, I have two favorite 90mm f4 lenses.  The 90mm f4 Macro - Elmar, which is the smallest.  And what I actually use.

 

And the 90m f4 Minolta Rokkor - M, which is almost as small, much cheaper, and provides excellent image quality.

Edited April 20, 2016 by Schrödinger's cat

[jdlaing]

Take that 90 out and show me pics of the Trinity River. 

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Both are hard to nail focus with.

 

Both offer superior performance.

 

The 75/2 goes down to 0.7m whereas the MFD on the 90/2 is 1m.

 

I prefer a head and shoulders portrait rather than a mugshot so I tend to use the 75/2 more often for portraits.

 

If traveling, I prefer the extended reach of the 90mm.

 

You can crop the 75mm down to 90mm so that's not a deal breaker.

 

The 75/2 is only slightly bigger than the 50LuxASPH so if size and weight are a priority for you, the 75/2 wins.

 

Rest depends on your style, taste and needs.

 

If you have the SL then nailing focus with either lens is not an issue anymore.

 

You could use the dinky EVF on the m240/m246 but the shortcomings are well discussed and documented.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[otto.f]

75 is better for portraits I think. I use my 90 more for stills, close-up, details. But I wouldn't do portrait with the summicron 75

[NB23]

75 is better for portraits I think. I use my 90 more for stills, close-up, details. But I wouldn't do portrait with the summicron 75

So... Is 75 good for portraits or not?

[otto.f]

So... Is 75 good for portraits or not?

Absolutely, but I would prefer the Summilux 75 and perhaps even the Summarit 75 above the Summicron 75 for portrait

[LocalHero1953]

"Portraits" can mean a lot of things: headshots, head & shoulders, waist up, full figure, environmental etc.

 

You don't have to stick to rules, if you know what you're doing. But the classical reason for choosing a longer FL the more the portrait is a close up is not because of distortion associated with a FL, but distortion associated with being too close, which makes noses, the nearer shoulder etc larger than other parts of the physionomy. You really need to be at least 2 m away to avoid visible distortion of a nose or an ear, preferably more, especially for shoulders towards the camera, or hands and legs reaching out (tho everyone has their own opinion on this). So if you want a headshot, you need a longer FL (you can use a wide-angle, but you'd have to crop it to get a headshot). And I've known some people insist on 150mm or longer.

 

If you want rules, then 90 for headshots, 75 for head & shoulder, 50 for waist-up, 35 for full figure, and 28 or wider for environmental. Whatever.

 

But for every rule like this, you will find photographers who get great portraits with any lens they pick (and vice versa).

 

I have both the 75 and 90 Apo-Summicrons and I like them both, on the M240. But I use the 90 almost exclusively for portraits (all types), while the 75 is my most widely used lens, for portraits, landscapes, street and grandchildren.

Edited April 20, 2016 by LocalHero1953

[UliWer]

With 75mm you get a similar - though not an identic - angle of view for a portrait as with 90mm - if you get closer. Getting closer to a person for a portrait with a camera might change her or his behaviour and expression and the background of the portrait.  Keeping distance might have another effect. There are no rules. 

[Gregm61]

^{Either are good for portrait work. The bigger question to me, unless one has all the money to buy as many of these lenses as one wants, comes down to what other lenses are you building around it. I chose the 75mm f2 Summicron APO to be the third of a trio that includes my "normal" lens, the 35mm f2 ASPH, and 21mm f2.8 ASPH. If I happened to be more of a 28-50 user, I would have picked the 90mm over the 75mm.}

Edited April 20, 2016 by Gregm61

[Schrödinger's cat]

Take that 90 out and show me pics of the Trinity River. 

 

Don't have any.  Will you settle for some pics of the liquor store ?

[jdlaing]

[Jeff S]

 

Will 90 apo very difficult to get the focus right?

Thanks in advance

 

 

 

 

Recent topic....  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/258083-easier-to-focus-75mm-cron-or-90mm-apo/

 

Another consideration might be (or might not be) the frame lines of the 75 vs 90.  Some (myself included) aren't crazy about the 75 lines, which are close to the 50 lines and lack corner definition.  One can get used to them....I did when I owned the 75 Summicron....but I prefer the 90 lines, especially with a 1.25 magnifier.  YMMV.

 

Jeff

[Jeff S]

The 75/2 is only slightly bigger than the 50LuxASPH so if size and weight are a priority for you, the 75/2 wins.

 

 

 

Well, no doubt the 75 Summicron ASPH is more compact than the 90 Summicron ASPH, but it's closer in weight to the 90 than it is to the 50 Summilux ASPH, and roughly the same difference in diameter and length.

 

Specs I found show....

 

50... 11.8 oz, 2.1 inch diameter, and 2.1 inch length

75....15.2 oz, 2.3 inch, and 2.6 inch

90... 17 oz, 2.5 inch and 3.1 inch 

 

It definitely seemed more hefty to me than my 50 Summilux.....but that's not saying much considering most Leica M fast-ish lenses are petite compared to the competition.  One needs big pockets, though, for the 90.....reminds me of a famous Mae West line....

 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

I see you already have 28-35-50 covered with your existing lenses (assuming your profile is up to date).

 

If you press the frameline selector on your millennium (I'm assuming it has one), you will see that the 75 framelines are very close to the 50 framelines.  Hopefully that will give you some idea.

 

I like the 75 focal length (many don't) and I will often pair it with the 28mm and 21mm lenses for a useful travel combination.  Then I tend to miss the 50mm lenses I have.

 

I found the 75 APO-Summicron hit and miss to focus, where I've had no trouble with the AA 90 Summicron.  I eventually sold the 75 Summicron and got a 75 Summilux instead (it has a longer focus throw, making fine focus easier - I use a 1.4 magnifier).  Never had a problem focusing the 90 AA-Summicron.  That said, I use the 75 Summilux more than the 90 Summicron, don't really know why.

 

One word of warning others don't seem to have mentioned - the 75 APO-Summicron gives very fine detail, which is not always flattering for portraits.  Conversely, the 75 Summilux wide open is softer.

 

What 50 do you have? and how often do you use it?

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

Well, no doubt the 75 Summicron ASPH is more compact than the 90 Summicron ASPH, but it's closer in weight to the 90 than it is to the 50 Summilux ASPH, and roughly the same difference in diameter and length.

 

Specs I found show....

 

50... 11.8 oz, 2.1 inch diameter, and 2.1 inch length

75....15.2 oz, 2.3 inch, and 2.6 inch

90... 17 oz, 2.5 inch and 3.1 inch

 

It definitely seemed more hefty to me than my 50 Summilux.....but that's not saying much considering most Leica M fast-ish lenses are petite compared to the competition. One needs big pockets, though, for the 90.....reminds me of a famous Mae West line....

 

Jeff

Thank you for the specs Jeff.

 

Maybe my vision of reality is a little skewed with the weight comparison as I have the chrom version of the 50LuxASPH which is heavier than the black anodized version, thereby leaving me with the impression of a comparable weight with the 75/2.

 

My lenses are getting some personalized loving at Wetzlar at the moment, I will provide "real world" size and weight comparisons when they're back.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[LocalHero1953]

One word of warning others don't seem to have mentioned - the 75 APO-Summicron gives very fine detail, which is not always flattering for portraits.  Conversely, the 75 Summilux wide open is softer.

For those portraits of people of a certain age I have my trusty Hektor 7.3cm f/1.9.