nryn Posted February 26, 2007 Share #1 Posted February 26, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi everyone. Here I am asking for advice like everyone else. I bought an M8 primarily because I like the rangefinder experience more, but also because I want a camera which I can bring with me when I travel for work (I do not work as a photographer). I have the 24/2.8, the 35/1.4, and the 50/2. I plan to travel with two or three lenses (obviously, the more I bring, the less I fulfill the intention of buying the camera, which was to have something lightweight to bring with me on business trips). I'm trying to decide between the 75 Summicron or the 90 Macro Elmarit M kit. They both fill a hole in my M lens lineup--telephoto lenses, and each of them independently satisfies another need. The 75 as a tight portrait lens (the 50 doesn't really do in that regard) and the 90 as a close-focus lens (I like to take "texture" photos to use with my graphic designs). Eventually I'll own both, along with a CV 15, and I might swap out my 50/2 with a 50 Summilux. I will get the CV 15 this year; any other lenses other than the one for the 30% offer will have to wait until next year. When I travel, I'll bring one of the following lens kits, depending on where I'm going, what time of year it is, and what other equipment I need to bring: 24, 50, 90 15, 35, 75 35, 75 35, 75 or 90 I try to bring at least one fast lens, as often I don't get out of the office until very late. When I'm traveling for pleasure, the sky's the limit (I usually leave my computer at home, and my whole carryon is just photography stuff). These pages should give you some idea of the type of photographs I like to take. Bangalore w/M8 Jerusalem w/1DmkII India w/1DmkII Phillipines w/10D The US "Preferential price" on the offer letter: 75/2: $1,875; 90MEM kit: $1,956. In the event that anyone thinks I should swap out my 50 for a summilux now, that price is $2,031. Anyway, with this as context, any suggestions on how I should best utilize my 30% offer? I'd say I'm leaning towards the 90, but whenever I say that, I lean towards the 75. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. p.s. owning all Leica lenses like Guy is not an option for me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 26, 2007 Posted February 26, 2007 Hi nryn, Take a look here 30% off: need help with decision. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 26, 2007 Share #2 Posted February 26, 2007 Sounds like the 24, 35 and 75 may be the best option since you already have the 24 and 35 than make a big jump from there to the 75 cron the 50 is very close to the 35 which should provide that range pretty good. I know I have a slew of lenses and it's a little hard for me to give advice here on a certain level because i do truly use every lens but i always suggest think in terms of total system wide . First figure out your total number you want to deal with so say it is three some will want 4 but for three 24,35,75 or 28,50,90 or 21, 35, 75 and this depends on what you shoot i tend to like the 4 lens setup obviously you have more options but you can simple add to the above with a simple 15mm CV for 400 dollars which given it's size and quality is really hard to pass on . So i think any of the above and add the 15mm to it for a small put in your almost anywhere pocket is worth having along for the ride. Also get the first three with a could spred in focal length than you can fill in the gaps later if needed but cover your wide and long than fill in the middle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted February 26, 2007 Share #3 Posted February 26, 2007 I have both the 75/2 and the 90/4 (Elmar, not Elmarit) and as general purposes lenses, the 75/2 is more useful - faster, larger viewfinder patch for framing, much better hood arrangement (a pain on the 90), though of course the lens is bigger and heavier than the 90/4. Optically, the 75/2 is top notch, the 90/4 is great too but lacks the ultimate bite, though of course some of that might be down to focussing accuracy. The macro adapter and angle finder take the M into an area which is not its natural habitat, it only takes you 20cm closer and as with all macro work, going close can influence the subject lighting and there's no equivalent of a ring flash to allow you to adjust it - though someone did manage to fit a Nikon SB-29s onto the camera but tough to use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted February 26, 2007 Author Share #4 Posted February 26, 2007 See, now I'm leaning towards the 75 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 26, 2007 Share #5 Posted February 26, 2007 Sorry to be not helpful..Is the step from 50 to 75 not a bit small? For travel the 2.8/90 is a great choice: light,small, handy, more than excellent quality and reasonably fast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted February 26, 2007 Author Share #6 Posted February 26, 2007 The step from 50 to 75 is small, perhaps, but the 75 is a much better tight portraiture lens than the 50, and when traveling with it, I'd probably bring the 35. My bigger concern is the jump from 75 to 90, which is even smaller. Might have to get the 135 for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted February 26, 2007 Share #7 Posted February 26, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) The 28/2.8 is a great inconspicuous lens that serves well in a variety of settings, and makes the camera noticeably more responsive than its bigger brothers at 21, 24, 35 and 50. And you can see the whole frame! I say this having both the 28 and the 24. But the 28/2.8 is relatively inexpensive, so using the 30% for the 75/2.0 or (gasp) 75/1.4 offers a greater savings. I think effective 100mm is a great portrait length, having used a fine 50 (x2 = 100) mm macro lens on my Olympus E-1 for several years. The differences between the two 75's has been endlessly debated. The 1.4 is said to have creamy bokeh and be impossible for humans to focus, while the 2.0 is apparently easy to focus -- the complaints are that its superrealistic sharpness is unkind to portrait subjects. Should be awesome if you are a texture collector. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 26, 2007 Share #8 Posted February 26, 2007 I have no problem focussing the 1.4 - maybe I'm inhuman. I've got green antennae which I use to focus though.. The 1.25 Okular helps a lot .... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 26, 2007 Share #9 Posted February 26, 2007 Two thoughts here, the 75 Summilux may be the better lens for portraits @ f/2.2 - f/2.8 and will be sharp enough to match the 75 Summicron @ f/4 and above. The highest reproduction ratios are Elmar 90 f/4 closest focus 0.77m Reproduction ratio 1.67 Elmar 90 f/4 closest focus 0.50m Reproduction ratio 1.30 (with macro adapter) S'lux 75 f/1.4 closest focus 0.75m Reproduction ratio 1.80 SCron 75 f/2 closest focus 0.70m Reproduction ratio 1.70 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted February 26, 2007 Author Share #10 Posted February 26, 2007 I'm of course interested in the 75 Summilux but have targeted the Summicron version of that lens for a number of reasons: Size/weight. I have a Leica publication (the M System brochure) which has a photo of all the Leica lenses, and have downloaded the spec sheets. The comparisons are as follows: 75 Summilux: 80mm, 560g 75 Summicron: 66.8mm, 430g Now that I see those numbers, they seem only marginally different; it's hard for me to abstract how that would feel "in the bag", and that's important to me because I have a bad back (though I doubt 130g would make much of a difference). But I also believe what others have mentioned--it's easier to process a sharp photo in ways that make it less sharp, but that one can't work the other direction. That said, the extra stop does make a huge difference; on the 35mm I use 1.4 quite often. Looks like I'm now debating between which 75. So that all the same information is consolidated in one thread, the US Preferential Price for the 75 Summilux is $2,579. You guys were supposed to help me narrow the choices from two to one, not from two to two! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 26, 2007 Share #11 Posted February 26, 2007 I was going through the same qualms, and ended up choosing the 75 Lux based on two things: it is a few decades old and can be found in great shape for around €1300, and my favorite SLR lens was the 80 Lux, which is the same design. The 75 Cron is a lens which is much cheaper than the 75 Lux new, but there is no need to buy new. I would recommend considering using the 30% deal to get a 28/2 Asph, which is the fastest/widest sweet spot with a nice set of framelines, and then picking up the 75 Lux. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 26, 2007 Share #12 Posted February 26, 2007 Save your 30% for something other than the 75 Summilux, they are better value bought 2nd hand than new. As for the 75 v 75 and toning down the sharpness, yes can be done with CS2/3 but let me put it this way, I have the 75'cron and I just can't create the feeling, mood or whatever you want to call it with it. It's so precise I hate it!. Yea I made a mistake thinking smaller, lighter, newer optics, but this lens is so unforgiving if your over 1 year old and have anything less than flawless skin. Seriously it's a fantastic lens but just a little too fantastic for my taste. I'm debating to use my 30% for a Noctilux or 75 Summilux and pass out the 75 cron if either meets my needs, I kinda thinking Nocti but I know I'll keep the Summicron for the extra length turning my 4 lens setup in to 5 . Even then I've no guarantee I won't still hanker after the 75 Summilux. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 26, 2007 Share #13 Posted February 26, 2007 I'm on a little break here from shooting so i thought i would check in. I have to agree with Eoin and Carsten here. First i would not get the Lux on the 30 percent. i would use it lenses that have a better deal Nocti,WATE,28 cron and 75 cron are some of the better deals. Now i agree the 28 cron is a great lens. It is my lens cap on one body and no question about it's abilities. I went ultimately for the 50 lux , 75 lux and the 90 apo. The 75 cron is a beauty but for portraits and such a little on the sharp side and does not have the lux falloff but for me the 90 apo has the same qualities so I have one that can do that but for the soft falloff the 75mm lux is unique, and buy it used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted February 26, 2007 Author Share #14 Posted February 26, 2007 It did occur to me to get the Noctilux, particularly given the recent price increase, which makes the 30% offer unreal. I don't think the Nocti is a long-term lens for me, but it would be nice to own one while it's in my (imagined) price range. I also thinking about the WATE but I don't think it's worth almost 10 times the price of the CV 15. Really, guys, you're not helping Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 26, 2007 Share #15 Posted February 26, 2007 As another way to look at it, rather than thinking about deals and about bokeh and about prices, how about this: what are the pictures you take which matter the most to you? Do you have the perfect lens in the world for this purpose? That should be where you put your money, even if it means upgrading an existing lens rather than expanding your range. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
innerimager Posted February 26, 2007 Share #16 Posted February 26, 2007 I concur with Carsten. I went for the 50/1.4 ASPH with the discount for just these reasons. Even with 2 other 50/s (noctilux and rigid summicron) between portrait, candid, and lot's of indoor low light, where I want the sharpness at 1.4 only this lens can give, it may well become my mainstay. I also agree with others about the 75 lux, both as a special portrait lens, and that they are available used, I got an excellent sample on e-bay recently. best...Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted February 27, 2007 Author Share #17 Posted February 27, 2007 Well, I went to a local shop today to check out the lenses. The 75 lux is a lot of glass. Not something I could travel easily with. I think the 75 cron is the lens for me; I'll definitely get more use out of a lens I don't leave at home. Carsten, I hear what you're saying and that logic is exactly what I'm trying to employ here. I have the wide angle lenses covered for the type of photography I do; expanding my lens range with a long-ish portrait lens is precisely the type of photography I'd like to do more of, and which I feel I cannot do (as I like to do it, anyway) with my current lineup. Thanks everyone for your help. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted April 7, 2007 Share #18 Posted April 7, 2007 Two thoughts here, the 75 Summilux may be the better lens for portraits @ f/2.2 - f/2.8 Why is it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted April 7, 2007 Share #19 Posted April 7, 2007 I was thinking a lot about what lens to buy, the Summicron or the Summilux. I like supersharp and contrasty lenses but, on the other hand, I think this lens, now dissapeared, will not be replaced by a new Summilux. The second-hand copies have increased their prices (in a German shop, 2000 euros without taxes!), and it is very difficult to find one at a good price now. This is my last chance to get one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted April 7, 2007 Share #20 Posted April 7, 2007 I was thinking a lot about what lens to buy, the Summicron or the Summilux. I like supersharp and contrasty lenses but, on the other hand, I think this lens, now dissapeared, will not be replaced by a new Summilux. The Summicron is the 75mm for the years to come. The second-hand copies of the 75mm Lux have increased their prices (in a German shop, 2000 euros without taxes!), and it is very difficult to find one at a good price now. This is my last chance to get one. Using the 30% discount letter for a 75/1.4 is not a bad idea, because this lens will not be easy nor cheap to find in the second hand market in the future. Anyone knows why this lens has been discontinued? Problems with specific optical glasses? The Noctilux could be affected too soon. If this is the case, Leica would have stocks of the Noctilux lens, but no more production. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.