Portrait lens recommendation

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What's the best, in your opinion, longer, fast portrait lens to use on the M8?

 

I have a 50 lux ASPH, and will get a Nocti one day.

 

But I'd like something with a bit more reach.

 

So what's best? The older Midland 90s? I borrowed the new 75 Lux which seems sharp as tacks, but sharpness isn't everything in portraits and I'd like more opinions from people who shoot other things.

 

Are there good Zeiss or CV options here? Or, given that I like to have the option to shoot between 1.4 - 2.0, should I just stick with the 75 Lux?

 

I'm sure Guy has asked all these questions before I just haven't found the thread!

 

Thanks in advance! Pictures would be good too.

[grober]

I had the 75 'Lux and sold it to get the new 75 'Cron. The Summicron handles much better. But it's still too sharp for most portraits so I got a Zeiss Softar filter to soften things up a bit.

 

-g

[Advertisement]

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

[rosuna]

I borrowed the new 75 Lux which seems sharp as tacks, but sharpness isn't everything in portraits and I'd like more opinions from people who shoot other things.

 

I would like to have more comments about the 75 lux.

[canlogic]

I bought the new 75 cron for this. It seems really excellent but I had to exchange it as the camera was bringing up the wrong frame lines and it was not showing up the exif data. Although focus etc seemed fine, I am waiting for its replacement to arrive.

[Jamie Roberts]

Did any of you try the 75 Lux between 1.4 and 2.0 for portraits? I mean, did you find it softened up any?

 

In terms of handling, you mean the 'cron is easier to focus, perhaps? Or just that much smaller?

 

Thanks! I haven't seen the 'cron yet.

[canlogic]

I found it very easy to use, not much bigger than the 50 1.4 lux. I handled the the 75 lux in the store and it seemed pretty big, he didn't have both there at the time to do a direct comparison. The cron is 49mm filter size 50 lux is 46 so mainle the length difference.

[carstenw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jamie, the 75 Lux-M really ought to be very similar to the 80 Lux-R, as they are both the same design, and both by Dr. Walter Mandler. The 75 Lux-M has a reputation for being a little sharper wide-open, but not quite as sharp stopped down. I love the 80 Lux-R myself, and still consider getting the 75 Lux-M rather than the 75 Cron. The Lux is more expensive new than the Cron, but it is also much older, and it is possible to find a much cheaper copy used. Eventually, the decision comes down to weight and sharpness, I suppose. They are both 100mm equivalent, focal-length-wise, on the M8 though, which might be too long for your purposes.

 

If you manage to make a decision between the two, let me know. I am still struggling...

[Eoin]

Let me put it this way, I had many pros and cons regarding the summilux v summicron 75 choice and at the end of the day I figured shooting head and shoulder type portrait anything below f:/2.8 is not going to give all facial features in focus.

 

Yes the two draw differently but at the end of the day I chose the summicron APO ASPH and am very happy with it, Sometimes it can be just that little to sharp but it's easy to correct within C1.

 

Apart from the obvious size and cost difference I believe the results from the cron will not disapoint you.

[Bob Ross]

What's the best, in your opinion, longer, fast portrait lens to use on the M8?

 

I have a 50 lux ASPH, and will get a Nocti one day.

 

But I'd like something with a bit more reach.

 

Hi Jamie,

I'll throw in a vote for a 90mm Summicron-M pre-ASPH Canadian:) I used this for years with film and have found it nice with the M8, too. You didn't mention how much reach you want, but at 3ft the 90mm has a field of 12" X 8"....partial face...or head and shoulders at 6ft. The long side field dimension is about 1/3X of the distance to the subject and the short side simension is 1/5X (on the M8). Probably not as sharp as the ASPH version, so maybe nicer for portraits. I also have the R version which I now use on my E-1.

Bob

[blakley]

As always, my vote is for the 75 Summicron. It's the best portrait lens I've ever used on any camera in any format. Here it is on film (Portra 400 NC; 1/60 @ f/2)

 

 

And here it is on the M8, with Tiffen Hot Mirror, B&W mode, JPEG fine, 1/180 @ f/2:

 

 

Clicking on either image will allow you to see larger sizes.

[rob_x2004]

I am not sure how you would use 1.4 for traditional portrait. Be pretty abrupt at 75 wouldnt it? Never seen it done sucsessfully. Anyone?

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

If you manage to make a decision between the two, let me know. I am still struggling...

 

Carsten--comparing it to the 80 Lux R pretty much makes my decision for me, thanks Sigh. I wish I had more time to play with it! But for the stuff I do, the 80 Lux is the best, even on the DMR (full frame it's great too). So I think that would be just right on the M8...

 

EDIT: Of course, then I scroll down and see Bob's stuff--and it's great, too!

[Jamie Roberts]

I am not sure how you would use 1.4 for traditional portrait. Be pretty abrupt at 75 wouldnt it? Never seen it done sucsessfully. Anyone?

 

Well, you need to back it up a bit, so it's not at all traditional in terms of heads and shoulders. But if you have just the right angle, 1.4 - 1.6 can be spectacularly dramatic (though things like ears start to drop from focus very quickly).

 

Very popular in wedding and fashion circles. But it's got to be done just right.

 

Not exactly the same here, but you get the idea, this is the 50 Summilux R at f1.4... I just had it handy and it shows the look (though less compressed). Her right eye is still in focus, but just barely

 

I'll find an 80 Lux 1.4 or 1.6 shot and post it too (I've posted a couple in the past from the DMR to the people forum)

 

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!

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Okay i am one of those weirdo's when it comes to portraits i use a LONG lens. i like the compression thatit does for the face. My favorite is the DMR and the 180 F2 lens about F8 were the face is sharp but when you hit the ears it just falls off in softness. i love this look. Now i need to find the M system . So far i have the 75 cron which i really like but I did get a 90 F2.8 elmarit that maybe interesting as well. This depends though on how you shoot also . studio guys may pick a different tool than a editorial shooter. Most of mine are executives so having one eye lash in focus is not going to get the job done

[rob_x2004]

1.4 - 1.6 can be spectacularly dramatic (though things like ears start to drop from focus very quickly).

 

Yes I understand that. But a lot of people shoot wide open and justify it as interpretation of art, seemingly oblivious that the subject has more in common with the background out of focus. The subject no longer pops.

 

Your fifty shot I would say is not a keeper, what is the point of the viewers focus? It seems split between the flowers and face, and the back of the head begins to lose into the background. I should imagine the girls outfit and jewelerly are important to her, as well as her chin and lips, and dont need to be relegated as they are. Not having a dig, just my take.

 

The 75 f/2 shot looks pretty damned good to me. I noticed in the comments at flicker one or two people responded that the second eye out of focus wasnt for them, but really that was the photographers choice and it a pretty fine portrait. Real good. As comparison, and just to see it, would have been interesting with an extra stop.

 

I am sure there are some fine wide wide wide open portraits at 75 to 100. I just havent seen any.

 

Regards

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}Most of mine are executives so having one eye lash in focus is not going to get the job done

 

Guy--it's hilarious you should say that. I don't do that many corporate "head shot" things but we just did a set of executive head shots at BBM Canada, and they were all women executives who hated having their picture taken!

 

So after all the lights and safe shots and libraries and such, I put the 80 Lux R on the DMR and we moved them to a window and shot it like a wedding portrait; natural light, very soft and very loose and feminine for business pix. They loved it (and most ordered personal copies too)! So it was strange, but I was glad to have that 80 Lux in the bag

 

Ok--so thanks to Guy for tweaking my memory here are the 80 Lux portraits at about 1.6...

 

Ahem Not all executives look like this:

 

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!

 

 

Or like this:

 

 

But this is still a look I'd like on the M8

 

PS-- I like portraits with the 180 R as well, though I only have the Elmarit Not going to happen with the M8, though.

[Jamie Roberts]

{Snipped}Your fifty shot I would say is not a keeper, what is the point of the viewers focus? It seems split between the flowers and face, and the back of the head begins to lose into the background. I should imagine the girls outfit and jewelerly are important to her, as well as her chin and lips, and dont need to be relegated as they are. Not having a dig, just my take.{snipped}

 

I totally respect your view, though I completely disagree. She has dozens of shots at f 2.8 and above, where all her accoutrement are in focus (and the background isn't).

 

If this was the only shot of her, you'd be completely correct!

 

But as you said yourself, the focus here is precisely split between flowers and face (well, and her earring, actually): and so there's a direct, unadulterated visual metaphor / comparison going on--even if she can't articulate that. It was one of her favourite--and most ordered--shots.

 

Oh--and the light also leads to her eyes--more in the print where I've dodged it than in this proof

[blakley]

Jamie, I LOVE your 50/1.4 shot. I also really like the 80 lux shots - but then, I seldom take portraits other than wide open. Here are two at f/1.2 (original 50/1.2 Noctilux); the first is with an MP on XP2 Super - note how radically the focus falls off. The second is on the M8 at 1/15 (!) - nothing is sharp here due to camera motion, but I like the look.

 

 

[Jamie Roberts]

Bob--those are both great. Sigh. If I wasn't already sold on a Noctilux I would be after seeing those (and I love the look of the M8 shot, too!)....

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[blakley]

Jamie, the 50/1.2 Noctilux has a really different look (much smoother bokeh, for example) than the current lens. You should carefully avoid being sold on one, though, as they're really expensive (mostly owned by collectors).