Agent M10 Posted October 2, 2011 Share #1 Â Posted October 2, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I was thinking of picking up the 90mm Summicron APO ASPH for portraits. I sed to have the R version, and thought that portraits came out a bit flatter than the ones I did with a 75 summicron. Anyone have the same experience? or are you satisfied with the 90 as a portrait lens? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 2, 2011 Posted October 2, 2011 Hi Agent M10, Take a look here 90mm APO Flat?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted October 2, 2011 Share #2 Â Posted October 2, 2011 Shoot side by side. If there is one lens that does not deserve the qualification " flat" it is the 90 AA. Superb resolution? - yes - the modern Leica fingerprint? - yes. High contrast both macro and micro?- yes. Flat?-no The same can be said of the 75 Â I was not aware there was an R version of the lens.I see in Puts that it was introduced in 2002. There cannot have been many sold. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_parker Posted October 3, 2011 Share #3 Â Posted October 3, 2011 I have the 90AA in R format and have always found it to be nice on the DMR (see below). Â It's not a focal length I own in the M version but samples I've used belonging to others have seemed to have ample punch and contrast, as does the 75 'Cron, which I have owned. Â Â [ATTACH]281241[/ATTACH] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted October 3, 2011 Share #4 Â Posted October 3, 2011 Well, in photography, "flat" can have several meanings. Â Contrast (or lack of it) - but also the "flattening" of perspective one associates with telephoto pictures. Â Taken to extremes, one could say that a 135 definitely produces "flatter" perspective in portraits, perhaps too flat, than a 50mm, which usually isn't "flat" enough (big noses or foreheads, and such). Â Yeah, I know, properly used, ANY lens can be a portrait lens, blah, blah. I'm just talking about a classical head-and-shoulders in this case. And anyway, Robert's portrait example looks OK to me, and that is a 90 cropped to a "126mm" on the DMR. And Steve McCurry's classic Afghan Girl portrait was made with a 105. Â I notice a bit of difference between the 75 and the 90 as regards perspective effects in portraits, and find the 75 to be a bit more "intimate" in look (which it is - one has to get closer for the same framing, and that closer point of view is reflected in the images). I usually preferred an 85 to a 105 in my Nikon days, for the same reason. Â In any case, the M version of the 90 APO won't "look" any different than the R version. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted October 3, 2011 Share #5 Â Posted October 3, 2011 Well, yes, that is of course fully correct, Andy. However it is a characteristic of a given focal length not of a specific lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 3, 2011 Share #6  Posted October 3, 2011 M and R versions of the AA 90 have the same optical formula and same results apparently. I own none of them though. Tempting… http://tinyurl.com/3w8htqk http://tinyurl.com/3rfvqje Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.