Zeiss 85 vs. Leica 75 cron on M9

[ohnri]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Does anyone have experience with these 2 lenses for portraits?

 

I have the 75 cron and it is a wonderful lens but some people feel the Zeiss 85mm f/2 is superior for portraits.

 

I would appreciate hearing about any relevant experience, especially with the M9.

 

Best,

 

Bill

[Advertisement]

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

[Shootist]

The only problem with the 75 Cron is that it captures every detail, good or bad, of the subject. But you can PS those out and add some blur.

Why anyone would want a lens that didn't capture every detail I don't know.

Sorry never used the Zeiss 85.

[Gentleman Villain]

I've used those focal lengths extensively for photographing models. I absolutely LOVE the 75mm focal length for working with people, but found that I can only use it effectively in certain situations. This is just my personal experience, so it might not be shared by others. The 75mm, in my experience, can often feel very much like a long 50mm in the sense that it can compress the subject a bit but still relate to the background like a normal 50mm focal length. For example, let's say that I want to photograph a subject sitting on a chair in a room and 50mm perspective would be perfect for the shot. But let's imagine that the subject's hands are closer to the camera lens than the rest of her body. If I use a 50mm then her hands might start to look too big in comparison to her head. No problem, this is when I'll switch from a 50mm to a 75mm and the added focal length compresses her body parts until her head looks more balanced with her hands while at the same time the background still relates to the subject in a very similar way as it would to a 50mm lens. In this sense, I view the 75mm focal length as a sort of long 50mm

 

The 85mm is a totally different lens to me. It's nothing like a 50mm in the way that it relates a subject to the background. It definitely compresses the scene in such a way that the subject starts to look very separate from the background. I generally choose 85mm-90mm focal lengths when I want the subject to be completely separate from the background and in no way relate to the background as would a normal 50mm focal length. So let's imagine that I'm photographing a subject sitting in a room similar to what I described previously. But let's imagine that this room has a very distracting background and would look horrible if shot with a normal focal length. This would be the time that I'd want to use an 85-90mm lens so as to minimize the distracting background.

 

Basically, I think that the 75mm focal length will compress people's body parts in a similar manner as an 85-90mm, yet still maintains the relationship between the subject and background that is similar to a 50mm lens. Meanwhile, the 85-90mm focal lengths compress the scene so much that the background no longer relates to the subject in the same manner as a normal focal length and the two become very separate from each other.

 

I'm not in any way talking about DOF or selective focusing or the myriad of a tricks that a photographer can use to work with the subject and background. I'm really talking specifically about the focal length as it relates to the subject and background in terms of perspective.

 

Not sure if that helps or not but good luck with the purchase. I've found that I like both focal lengths depending on the situation. Most of my experience with these focal lengths is not on the M...but rather with Canon and Nikon Slrs

[ohnri]

I've used those focal lengths extensively for photographing models. I absolutely LOVE the 75mm focal length for working with people, but found that I can only use it effectively in certain situations. This is just my personal experience, so it might not be shared by others. The 75mm, in my experience, can often feel very much like a long 50mm in the sense that it can compress the subject a bit but still relate to the background like a normal 50mm focal length. For example, let's say that I want to photograph a subject sitting on a chair in a room and 50mm perspective would be perfect for the shot. But let's imagine that the subject's hands are closer to the camera lens than the rest of her body. If I use a 50mm then her hands might start to look too big in comparison to her head. No problem, this is when I'll switch from a 50mm to a 75mm and the added focal length compresses her body parts until her head looks more balanced with her hands while at the same time the background still relates to the subject in a very similar way as it would to a 50mm lens. In this sense, I view the 75mm focal length as a sort of long 50mm

 

The 85mm is a totally different lens to me. It's nothing like a 50mm in the way that it relates a subject to the background. It definitely compresses the scene in such a way that the subject starts to look very separate from the background. I generally choose 85mm-90mm focal lengths when I want the subject to be completely separate from the background and in no way relate to the background as would a normal 50mm focal length. So let's imagine that I'm photographing a subject sitting in a room similar to what I described previously. But let's imagine that this room has a very distracting background and would look horrible if shot with a normal focal length. This would be the time that I'd want to use an 85-90mm lens so as to minimize the distracting background.

 

Basically, I think that the 75mm focal length will compress people's body parts in a similar manner as an 85-90mm, yet still maintains the relationship between the subject and background that is similar to a 50mm lens. Meanwhile, the 85-90mm focal lengths compress the scene so much that the background no longer relates to the subject in the same manner as a normal focal length and the two become very separate from each other.

 

I'm not in any way talking about DOF or selective focusing or the myriad of a tricks that a photographer can use to work with the subject and background. I'm really talking specifically about the focal length as it relates to the subject and background in terms of perspective.

 

Not sure if that helps or not but good luck with the purchase. I've found that I like both focal lengths depending on the situation. Most of my experience with these focal lengths is not on the M...but rather with Canon and Nikon Slrs

 

I really agree with your comments. I know that just backing up with a 75 and cropping will give a similar perspective as an 85 but in real life usage I have found your analysis to be spot on.

 

I have an 85mm f/1.4 that is magic with my Nikon D3x and I wonder if the Zeiss 85 f/2 M mount would be similar on my M9.

 

Thanks,

 

Bill

[ohnri]

The only problem with the 75 Cron is that it captures every detail, good or bad, of the subject. But you can PS those out and add some blur.

Why anyone would want a lens that didn't capture every detail I don't know.

Sorry never used the Zeiss 85.

 

I have taken most of my best portraits over the last 6 months with my M9 and Noct f/1, usually set at f/1.

 

No one will ever accuse the Noct f/1 of having an abundance of sharpness wide open but it provides a great image if you know how to use it properly. There is no way I could achieve the same result with any reasonable amount of PP work.

 

Think of it this way, level of detail is but one factor in an image, and, in my opinion, it is far from the most important. And that goes for landscapes as well.

 

Color, tone, shading, light, emotion, geometry, texture ... the list goes on and on of qualities that really make or break a great photo as opposed to a documentary image. Choosing the right lens will often get you more than half way to the result you envision. I will take a lens that helps me get great emotion from an image over one that has great detail every time. I am often throwing detail away in PP even with lenses that are "soft".

 

Don't get me wrong though, at times I do want a great deal of detail and, at those times, I will choose my lens appropriately.

 

Best,

 

Bill

[Jaws]

Stick with the 75 Summicron. You won't achieve any more or less with the Zeiss at the same speed and only 10mm different. Focus on taking better pictures! Its a bitter pill to swallow when on that treadmill, but its the only one that will help.

[gpwhite]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have used both lenses quite a bit on an M8 (with $1000 worth of upgraded framelines). I am still waiting for my Steel Gray M9.

I agree with the comments above about the substantial differences in composition that can be achieved between these two lenses... but I imagine you were asking for a more subjective comparison, given that both the 75 Sumicron and the 85 Sonnar are exceptional lenses. I sold my 75 and prize my 85 Sonnar because I found the Zeiss to deliver higher contrast, and I prefer the tighter framing... it feels to me that the actual difference in focal length might be greater than 13%. For the M9, my hunch is that the 75mm might be a bit wide in FF (exacerbating the compositional issue raised in the post above).

Finally, I would add that you must apply a certain amount of care in shooting with the Sonnar. I set f/2.5 to 3.5 and usually need to bracket with exposure compensation to correct the M8's speed selection. In high contrast situations, it shows color fringing around shadows in the periphery, and of course always requires critical focusing. I never found a technical weakness in my 75 Sumicron and have many great shots.... but I feel the images from the Sonnar definitely have more life.

This recent image was cropped just a tad, has no color adjustment, and I did not use Unsharp Mask after the RAW converter (of course the web-posting blows out the color quite a bit, and I have not saturated to compensate for that).

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!

[ohnri]

Stick with the 75 Summicron. You won't achieve any more or less with the Zeiss at the same speed and only 10mm different. Focus on taking better pictures! Its a bitter pill to swallow when on that treadmill, but its the only one that will help.

 

Quite the contrary! There is no bitter pill at all. I am always focused on taking better pictures which explains my interest in the Zeiss lens.

 

Has your experience with your M9 and 75 cron and 85 Zeiss led you to your conclusion?

 

If not, then how did you reach it? Have you read or seen something that leads you to believe the lenses are all but identical?

 

Best,

 

Bill

[Gentleman Villain]

gpwhite, thanks for the sample image

 

that's a beautiful lens drawing and a very pretty subject

[ohnri]

Yes, thanks gpwhite. Your post was quite helpful. I love the 85mm focal length on my FF Nikons.

 

Best,

 

Bill

[adan]

Erwin Puts compared and contrasted the 75 Summicron and 85 Sonnar (as well as the 90 Summicron and Canon 85 f/1.2):

 

Leica, Zeiss, Canon telelens

[richard_man]

If your main goal is portrait, especially on non-20 something women, get the 75 Summilux. It will serve you much better.

 

The 85/2 is deadly sharp, probably very similiar to the 75 cron in that aspect. A great lens. It's not really bigger or heavier than the heavy hitters in Leica lineup, e.g. 90/2AA, 75 'lux, 21 'lux etc.

[Jaws]

I know I probably come across as abrasive, but promise that is not my intention at all:

 

The lenses are of course not identical, but are both capable of such amazing results that nobody looking at your images is going to think about the lens used. Only frustrated amateurs who fail to produce work close to that which inspires them worry about such semantic differences. Sure, top photographers worry about speed, or handling, or reliability... or just 'it feels right, I like it.' They worry about real world function, like whether the focal length is right for them, or lens spacing, or whether they keep missing the aperture ring, or whether the lens is too big to it in a favorite bag which they operate eyes closed. If the lens belts out great IQ, thats the end of that discussion there and then, other things matter more.

 

You will not be shooting comparative photos in the real world so unless the 75 is somehow deficient, what will you gain from the Zeiss that will make people think your images are better? In terms of focal length its also very close and while some might be happier with a longer lens, you have not mentioned finding the 75 too short. Hating the 75 framelines would probably be the best reason to leave the 75, but you might like the 75 lines - that's personal.

 

I own none of the kit mentioned but shoot Leicas extensively and the same debates crop up everywhere. I also recognize the hole you are stuck in and would urge you not to trade your Summicron unless you find something wrong with the handling/FL/frame lines. Spend the difference on ten second hand inspirational photography books. Read them and read them until you are burning to get out of that door and photograph, then do so and keep doing it. Come up with project ideas that really allow you to work towards defined objectives and bring together cohesive work that has an effect on people.

 

Good luck!

 

Quite the contrary! There is no bitter pill at all. I am always focused on taking better pictures which explains my interest in the Zeiss lens.

 

Has your experience with your M9 and 75 cron and 85 Zeiss led you to your conclusion?

 

If not, then how did you reach it? Have you read or seen something that leads you to believe the lenses are all but identical?

 

Best,

 

Bill

[ohnri]

I know I probably come across as abrasive, but promise that is not my intention at all:

 

Not at all.

 

 

 

 

I own none of the kit mentioned but shoot Leicas extensively and the same debates crop up everywhere. I also recognize the hole you are stuck in and would urge you not to trade your Summicron unless you find something wrong with the handling/FL/frame lines. Spend the difference on ten second hand inspirational photography books. Read them and read them until you are burning to get out of that door and photograph, then do so and keep doing it. Come up with project ideas that really allow you to work towards defined objectives and bring together cohesive work that has an effect on people.

 

Good luck!

 

Thanks so much, but I think I haven't been 100% clear.

 

I am keeping the 75 cron, it's a versatile lens and I can't think of anything negative to say about it. However, I read Steve Huff's comments about the Zeiss 85 and was quite intrigued.

 

I'm not having any difficulty with inspiration or with projects and I've been fortunate enough to produce some great portraits with a variety of lenses on my M9. As I mentioned previously, my current favorite is my Noct f/1.

 

I'm really just wondering if the 85 Zeiss provides a look that is different enough from the 75 cron to justify it's purchase.

 

So, while I am grateful for your encouragement, and I agree completely with you about desire and inspiration being far more important than specific gear, I assure you that I have that end covered and am really just wondering about the gear at the moment.

 

After all, in the end, the tools we use really are an important component of our photography and I am occasionally interested in enlarging my tool set.

 

Thanks again,

 

Bill