which lens to choose...50 or 90?

[dong_allen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just got my m9 two weeks ago, but I'm always the unlucky guy:o, my m9 is in Solm for a ccd repair now. Anyway I have time to think about collect lens for it. I got a summicron 35, and a cv 50 1.1, and I'm looking for another lens to buy, but couldn't make a decision between the 50lux and 90cron, I shoot most time portrait, I know 50lux is a all-purpose lens, but if only shoot portrait, is it better than the 90cron??? could anyone help me to make the decision:confused:

[ashwinrao1]

I shoot most time portrait, I know 50lux is a all-purpose lens, but if only shoot portrait, is it better than the 90cron??? could anyone help me to make the decision:confused:

 

I suspect that if portraits are your thing, you should get a 90...you already have coverage at 50, with the Nokton, which is a bit of a beast, but you get a more versatile kit and a focal length that you'll enjoy with 90. A pre-asph summicron can be had for $600-$900, and it makes a terrific portrait lens. I have the 90 APO-cron, and that's a sharp lens, that sometimes gets too many details for portraits....Another excellent and "economical option" is the 90 elmarit f/2.8 (most recent version, with telescoping hood)...it's a jewel of a lens, and I miss mine quite often...perfect combo of sharp, portable, and great for portraits...

[likalar]

My opinion, though I don't specialize in portraits: If you are doing classic, traditional portraits, a 90mm would be a good choice, as that focal length moderately compresses facial features in a pleasing amount. If the subject has a pronounced nose, or small chin, this would definitely be my choice. The 50 is also widely used for many great portraits, also, especially when the shot is not a close-up one. If you like very close-up portraits, avoid the wider lenses (maybe even the 50) that exaggerate pronounced facial features. If you shoot portraits of hip young subjects that enjoy experimentation, break the rules.

 

Larry

edit: Like Ashwin, I too love the 90 Elmarit for the "portrait" shots I've made .

[erl]

Consider a 75mm Cron. Fabulous lens and very well suited to many applications including potraiture. My opinion is that the 90 can be a little long for portraiture unless you have plenty of room in which to shoot.

 

So much of this is personal preference that only you can make a useful assessment of what suits you.

[stevem7]

I have to vote for the 90 Elmarit 2.8, latest with sliding hood. GORGEOUS lens and in a small package.

[giordano]

My opinion, though I don't specialize in portraits: If you are doing classic, traditional portraits, a 90mm would be a good choice, as that focal length moderately compresses facial features in a pleasing amount. If the subject has a pronounced nose, or small chin, this would definitely be my choice. The 50 is also widely used for many great portraits, also, especially when the shot is not a close-up one. If you like very close-up portraits, avoid the wider lenses (maybe even the 50) that exaggerate pronounced facial features.

 

This is an old misconception. Lenses do not compress or distort facial features.* It's the relative locations of subject, lens and sensor that determine the perspective, which in turn affects how a face is "drawn" on the sensor. If you photograph the same person in the same pose from the same position with (say) 21mm and 90mm lenses, and enlarge the 21mm image so the face is the same size as on the 90mm image, the (perspective) drawing of the two will be identical.

 

So: if you want your sitter's face to look as natural as possible, stay between about 1.5m and 3m from them and choose the focal length that gives the field of view you want, from (say) 21mm for an "environmental portrait" through 90mm for head and shoulders to 200mm for face-only. The last is what moviemakers call a BCU - for "big close up" - but that's misleading because it's achieved with a long lens at a moderate distance, not with a standard lens at a short distance.

 

(*OK, fisheye and extreme wide angle lenses can do strange things near the edge of the field of view.)

[lars_bergquist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Giordano is perfectly right. This is something I have often stressed here: All non-fisheye lenses produce the identical, rectilinear central perspective. Various focal lengths do simply crop out pieces of varying sizes from it. It is our change of shooting position that changes the perspective, i.e. the geometrical relations beween different parts of the subject.

 

A good rule of thumb is never to photograph an adult person -- especially not a lady, if life is dear to you! -- from a closer distance than c. 2m. As you will understand from above, this goes for all focal lengths.

 

I'd add only that there is a little lever in front with the aid of which you can try out the image fields of all focal lengths from 28 to 135mm without mounting them, or even owning them. This feature has sold many lenses for Leica. Do some 'dry swimming' and find out what suits you best.

 

The old man from the Age Before Nearly Everything

[Jerry_R]

For any who wants to see examples, go to "Perspective" section:

Google Translate

You will see the same tree photographed on different focals, and then crops of the same part of it.

[viramati]

If you can find one of these

 

Canon Rangefinder (RF) 85 f/1.5 / Canon 85 f/1.8 / SERENAR 85mm f/2.0 short telephoto lenses - MIR Image Library

 

Its the one down the bottom (canon 85 f1.8) its one amazing lens for it's age but is a bit of a collectors item. I use it and love it. Back to leica glass I also use the elmarit-M 90 which is very good and smaller than the cron

[likalar]

I wrote:

 

<<My opinion, though I don't specialize in portraits: If you are doing classic, traditional portraits, a 90mm would be a good choice, as that focal length moderately compresses facial features in a pleasing amount. If the subject has a pronounced nose, or small chin, this would definitely be my choice. The 50 is also widely used for many great portraits, also, especially when the shot is not a close-up one. If you like very close-up portraits, avoid the wider lenses (maybe even the 50) that exaggerate pronounced facial features....>>

Giordano responds:

 

<<This is an old misconception. Lenses do not compress or distort facial features.* It's the relative locations of subject, lens and sensor that determine the perspective, which in turn affects how a face is "drawn" on the sensor. If you photograph the same person in the same pose from the same position with (say) 21mm and 90mm lenses, and enlarge the 21mm image so the face is the same size as on the 90mm image, the (perspective) drawing of the two will be identical. >>

 

Thank you for the correction; I actually knew this, but in the spirit of the original question, was trying to keep it simple. My mistake; I should have explained better and more factually.

 

Larry

[dseelig]

Since you have the nokton get a 90. But do youlike the nokton because the 50 lux asph is a great lens.

[sanyasi]

I got my replacement M9 on Thursday and took it out this weekend. Having come from DSLRs, this is my first serious experience with prime lenses. As I read questions like this one, I have trouble understanding what the point is of asking the question. Everyone has their own style. I normally shoot at a long focal point when in museums (I like people in museums as a subject). But I found that I switched from a 90 to a 50 after about a half hour and was much happier.

 

Bottom line: You have to find your own way, which is why after buying three lenses (35, 50, and 90), I am on hold for at least a year. I want to see how my style develops. This list is good for many things, but not for helping me develop a style.

[innerimager]

You didn't ask about 75mm, but the 75 lux is my favorite portrait lens. For 90, i'll add a vote for the latest elmarit.....Peter

[Pophoto]

Just got my m9 two weeks ago, but I'm always the unlucky guy:o, my m9 is in Solm for a ccd repair now. Anyway I have time to think about collect lens for it. I got a summicron 35, and a cv 50 1.1, and I'm looking for another lens to buy, but couldn't make a decision between the 50lux and 90cron, I shoot most time portrait, I know 50lux is a all-purpose lens, but if only shoot portrait, is it better than the 90cron??? could anyone help me to make the decision:confused:

 

 

I'm trying hard to understand where you are actually coming from. Since you own a 35 and a 50, two very good glass and not the standard portrait lens like the 90. So my question is do you prefer to shoot portrait the non-standard way, which in my opinion is totally fine, since what does my opinion count for!

 

Now since you brought it up, two of the best available at its distance, but why not the 75lux like some have suggested, however, you will definately broaden your range of glass with a 90... so in an effort to answer you in the quality that your question presents: every leica M-glass is great! (but honestly 75-90 is great!)

 

 

 

Pophoto

[ashlee52]

Actually once you get your body back you can easily use the lever which controls the framing in the viewfinder to see what length feels right. Unlike an SLR you don't need to actually have a lens to see how it selects a picture. It's a very cool aspect of a rangefinder...

 

Lots of great environmental portraits have been made with 35's and 50's... but for me a 90 is also a must have lens, Used f2.8 90's are many people's favorites, and are about the cheapest Leica lenses.

[Arif]

A lot of my portraits have been done with the 35 Lux (47mm with the M8.2 crop factor) and even now I tend to use the 35 and 50 for portraits a lot more than my 90. If one has the time with the subject, then my preference is the 75 Lux which I absolutely love (one can get similar/close results with a Summilux --R 80mm on a D3x and have the benefit of focus confirmation).

[be_sure]

Just got my m9 two weeks ago, but I'm always the unlucky guy:o, my m9 is in Solm for a ccd repair now. Anyway I have time to think about collect lens for it. I got a summicron 35, and a cv 50 1.1, and I'm looking for another lens to buy, but couldn't make a decision between the 50lux and 90cron, I shoot most time portrait, I know 50lux is a all-purpose lens, but if only shoot portrait, is it better than the 90cron??? could anyone help me to make the decision:confused:

 

 

I got you! You told me you will sell M9 to me! And I wait, cancelled my order otherpalce, But where is my camera! Fuk!

[Jeff Day]

I just had the same decision to make for my M9 (which I bought from David Farkas at Dale Photo - a really nice fellow). I have a nice black paint Summicron 35/2 ASPH that works really well with the M9, and a CV 50/1.1 which is not quite up to what I see from the best Leica lenses, but still a great lens and a bargain.

 

After reading quite a lot about 90s, I decided on finding a Leica Elmarit 90/2.8, which seems to have a lot of favor these days, even besting the Summicron for a lot of folks (as long long as you don't need the Cron's extra stop anyways). I contacted Ken Hansen, and after a week or two he was able to locate a new old stock (NOS) Leica Elmarit 90/2.8 that will ship on Monday. I'll try to post some impressions on the combo.

 

The Leica Road Show will be stopping in Seattle, WA, next month so I hope to attend and try out some of the other lenses there to see what might make a good choice for a third Leica lens.

 

Best,

 

Jeff

[Guest ccmsosse]

....I decided on finding a Leica Elmarit 90/2.8, which seems to have a lot of favor these days...

 

I got mine used from Tamarkin Camera

 

http://www.tamarkin.com/catalog/products/leica/leicamlens.html

 

i.e. 90 Elmarit-M f2,8 #382xxxxx, near Mint $1,195

No hassles - as promised - great lens

 

Check out the site - lots of great used stuff - can't lose either way

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M