Jump to content

Which 75mm?


manilius

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Algrove, because those serial numbers are a few of the last produced, less ware, etc. :)

 

That could sure be the case, but some lenses are barely used and could be that older lenses have less wear than a newer lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sold my 75 lux. Bought a 75 Summicron and it is a better lens. Sumarits are decent, but slower and do not focus as close.

 

Good points. I have quit using the Summilux wide-open due to eyesight issues. The Summicron is more attractive, now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Summilux is sometimes tricky to focus and always heavy but I like thin DOF and short minimum focusing distance. This one with M8.

 

Regards,

Jouni

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points. I have quit using the Summilux wide-open due to eyesight issues. The Summicron is more attractive, now.

 

Hi Pico,

 

I went the other way for the same reasons - I couldn't reliably focus the Summicron, whereas the Summilux is a breeze to nail - I guess because of its longer focus throw.

 

Incidentally, at 1 metre at f/1.4, the Summilux has a depth of field of 16mm (10mm at 0.8), where the Noctilux at 0.95 has a depth of field of 20mm.

 

Interesting that people make such a big deal over the razor thin depth of field of the Noct, when the 75 Summilux is thinner.

 

By way of comparison, the 75 AA Summicron at f/2 at 1 metre has a depth of field of 21mm (10mm at 0.7), and the 90 AA Summicron (which I was worried about being able to focus) at 1 metre and f/2 has a depth of field of 14mm.

 

I don't wander about taking pictures wide open at 1 metre - you get very strange results this way; but the depth of field figures don't really match ease of focus. Of those lenses, the 75 AA Summicron is the hardest to consistently nail, where the 90 AA Summicron is one of the easiest - actually, I'd put the Summilux, Noct and Summicron together as being relatively easy to focus in my experience.

 

Cheers

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried several Summilux decades ago, keeping the best and it was softish at 1.4 and 2.0. This corresponds with what others found. When the M9 came, I found it was a back focus issue with how the lenses are made. I suspect a focus shift issue as it comes from the Noct design which has focus shift. Read about it in a Leica book and tried myself to confirm.

 

Any way the 1.4 is big and too heavy. Sold. CV lenses are junk in my opinion..

 

Bought a new 75 Summicron and it starts of perfect at 2.0. LOVE it.

 

Second choice would have been the 2.5 Summarit. They are decent for the money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any way the 1.4 is big and too heavy. Sold. CV lenses are junk in my opinion..

 

Bought a new 75 Summicron and it starts of perfect at 2.0. LOVE it.

 

Second choice would have been the 2.5 Summarit. They are decent for the money.

 

I have the 2.0/75 Summicron ASPH and had the 2.5//75 Color-Heliar LTM which was bought unused some years ago for $350 on eBay during a nine month wait for my Summicron to arrive.

 

Although the CV is no Leica, it is not junk. It is still a very good lens, especially for less that one tenth the price of the Summicron.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you prefer 75 Heliar bokeh?

75 Heliar is a sharp lens, but no good bokeh IHMO.

 

b

 

The 2.5/75 Heliar is NOT a sharp lens compared to the Summicron or Summarit, and it's Bokeh is OK.

 

I'd used it in many situations before I got the Sumicron, and where I didn't want to risk my 'better'/more expensive lens and the results were very good.

 

Nevertheless this is not a trash lens at $350, or any price for that matter, it's just obviously not as good as the Leicas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have said before, both myself and Sean Reid disagree, you should read his review comparing the 2.5 Heliar with the Summarit, he suggests the difference in quality is simply down to the rendering each lens delivers, sharpness and overall performance are equal.

 

I know CV may have qc problems with a few individual lenses, but on the other hand they don't have problems making such a good lens design for a reasonable price, so get the good ones and they are the bargain of the century, get a lemon and you forever develop a jerky knee reaction when the topic comes up.

 

As for the 75AA bokeh, you've got to admit it's not a great example, great big round splodges in the background distracting from what is presumably the subject of the photograph in the foreground. The background may have evened out a bit, become smoother if the lens had been stopped down more. This is the problem with some lenses that are sharp wide open, over and above considerations for the available light, they are often used just because they are sharp, not because they necessarily render the scene well. It is a balancing act for the photographer and something that should be considered. The bokeh of the CV Heliar isn't the greatest wide open, neither is the Summarit, but equally it isn't bad, at least it isn't very contrasty and distracting so it mellows the background rather than shouting 'look at me'.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the choice should be made including a number of factors, including price, depreciation/appreciation, size, weight, but of course mainly the image 'quality'

 

Quality will for most encompass more than just image sharpness. Unfortunately other qualities in the way a lens renders, subtleties in colours and bokeh can be more subjective.

 

But..... Take a 75 Summilux out in poor light and there's a quality to the inky blacks that somehow other lenses miss. If you like the 50 Summilux pre asph and the F1 Noctilux I doubt you won't like the Summilux 75. It's huge, it's heavy it only just squeezes in to my AA case that goes with me over my shoulder with me everywhere and it's an old school slow focus which is not my preference, but I LOVE it :cool:

 

The 75 summarit was impressive but I preferred my 90 Elmarit-M in every respect and didn't keep the summarit for very long.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2.5/75 Heliar is NOT a sharp lens compared to the Summicron or Summarit, and it's Bokeh is OK.

 

I'd used it in many situations before I got the Sumicron, and where I didn't want to risk my 'better'/more expensive lens and the results were very good.

 

Nevertheless this is not a trash lens at $350, or any price for that matter, it's just obviously not as good as the Leicas.

 

I started with the CV, had the Cron for a while and settled for the Summarit. I prefer the lower weight and shorter focus throw of the Summarit over the Cron. If 75 mm was one of my most used focal lengths, however, I`d go for the Cron. With hindsight, I should have kept the CV as I believe it`s on of the great bargain lenses nearly as good as the Summarit, but for build quality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...