Portrait lens

[Rva]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I bought the M9 and the 35 lux FLE few months ago. I am really happy with it. I had Nikon D700 before, and I have to say I don't want to go back. The 35 FLE is amazing, I especially like bokeh, a color. I think the new Lux still suffers from focus shift, but I haven't done any serious testing yet.

I am thinking about getting a portrait lens. I consider either 75/1.4 lux or 75/2 cron. There are many 75 lux on ebay, but only few 75 cron. It's also impossible to find a new 75 cron. Is it the 75 cron so good ? Which one suits for the portrait better ?

I don't know how much the 75 lux suffers from focus shift, I've read somewhere that precise calibration is not easy.

I would appreciate your help.

[Advertisement]

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

[johnbuckley]

The 75 Summicron is a gorgeous lens. It has a glorious conveyance of true color, is sharp as a tack, has a delightful bokeh signature. One of the reasons it was easy for me to understand the fuss being made over the new 50mm Apo-Summicron-Asph is that it offers what the 75 Apo--Summicron-Asph offers, albeit in an updated design. If you can find one, you won't regret buying it. Great portrait lens, great short telephoto lens.

[Gerard]

The 75 lux vs cron debate is years deep. Search here for old threads and back up with image searches on Flickr.

 

The choice is yours.

[algrove]

At the end of this month I will have a 75 cron for sale with time remaining on the original Leica warranty. PM me.

[brill64]

so let's not dig into years and years of debate...the 75lux with it's gorgeous, painterly bokeh is a truly ancient but stella lens in the same league with the 50 noctilux so if you're willing to pack that heavy weight in glass & metal, not to mention if your eyesight can master it's razor thin focal plane with that tiny rangefinder patch, it's definitely going to pay off for you. a 1.4x magnifier would help, even doubled and/or maybe have your eyes tested first & if that passes reasonably well, check the focus one by one until you can get a copy that's bang on with your rangefinder. you may have to get that adjusted for it which may throw all your other lenses out a bit..he-ho... it's certainly a feisty beast to handle though & at f2 you could almost say it's a summicron....but, no, it's not.

more of a refurbished collector's hot cake expensive item these days & if you can find one you like you can be sure the price will steadily climb so don't think about it for too long and do use it but look after it in case you decide it's not for you.

 

the smaller, lighter, more modern (in outlook) 75 f2 asph. is more clinical (again modern) in it's rendering at f2 but still has great bokeh...depends how painterly you will be wanting to go with your images?..it does appear to be in shorter supply than the lux & difficult to find even at elevated prices & almost impossible (never say impossible with internet) to find new, however they do pop up from time to time but some copies back focus a bit so watch out for that. I guess people who bought one (like me) kept it for a reason. i like the look you get from the older glass of the lux more but not the cost (yet), size & weight. both at 2.8 are starting to be quite hard to tell apart. both are going to set you back a pretty penny so i can understand your need to research so go google and set some of your favorite images from both side by side, they can be quite different but the only real way to do it is to test them on your own camera.

[JWW]

Regarding your question on the 35 FLE, from reviews that I have read such by Erwin Puts, the focus shift is very reduced but still there, although in real use I never notice it.

 

I have the 75 lux and I really like making portraits with this lens. The bokeh is exceptional. Of course its relatively big and heavy but I only take this lens when I know I'll be using it for it's characteristics. Focus wide open is critical and I usually focus bracket if I can. I had mine calibrated by DAG.

[Photoskeptic]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Consider the 75 Summarit, lighter, smaller, less expensive and very decent bokeh. Erwin had nice things to say.

[algrove]

Agree the 75 Summarit is very nice too, but when I tired one a few days ago at a Leica dealer I found my fingers repeatedly losing grip on the focus ring due to the rubberized feel of the ring versus the Summicron varieties of any focal length which have a much more positive feel to their focus rings. But hey for around half the price that is not much of a complaint. Whether the image quality is the same as the Summicron I do not know. It is truly a pocketbook decision.

[mwilliamsphotography]

The sleeper portrait lens in the M line up is the 90/2.8 ... nice late model versions can be had for $800 to $1,000.

 

After getting my 90/2.8, I sold the 75 Lux which I found to hit-and-miss for portrait work when shot wide open.

 

-Marc

[Rva]

Regarding your question on the 35 FLE, from reviews that I have read such by Erwin Puts, the focus shift is very reduced but still there, although in real use I never notice it.

 

I have the 75 lux and I really like making portraits with this lens. The bokeh is exceptional. Of course its relatively big and heavy but I only take this lens when I know I'll be using it for it's characteristics. Focus wide open is critical and I usually focus bracket if I can. I had mine calibrated by DAG.

 

Has your 75 lux been facing focus shift issue? Which version have you got ?

[Rva]

The sleeper portrait lens in the M line up is the 90/2.8 ... nice late model versions can be had for $800 to $1,000.

 

After getting my 90/2.8, I sold the 75 Lux which I found to hit-and-miss for portrait work when shot wide open.

 

-Marc

 

That's an interesting point. Can you say a little more about a difference between both lenses?

[JWW]

I never noticed any focus shift in my 75 lux in regular use but have never tested for it. I usually use it wide open or stopped down a bit to get the maximum bokeh effect. The focus on this is so razor thin wide open it makes the Noctilux a snap to focus in comparison but when you can get it right on it looks great.

 

Besides the 90/2.8 that Marc mentioned, which I have never had the chance to try, I do like the 90mm 2.0 latest preasph which has a good bokeh and it's easier to focus than the 75 lux but only focuses down to 1m ( relatively inexpensive also).

[Paul J]

I have a 75 Lux. Extraordinary lens. Truly truly magical and unique characteristics. The way it renders really should be described as paints. It's gasp inducing. The colour the tonality the way it renders skin tones are very milky, very creamy.

 

People will tell you it's soft, maybe I just have a good copy but mine is really very, very, sharp. But with it's slither thin d.o.f it's not the easiest lens to use. It's not a lazy lens you have to concentrate and work for it. But when you get it rightl it it really rewards.

 

in the beginning I questioned it's sharpness but found out quite quickly that I simply missed the focus, being back or forward of what I focussed on. I'm not sure entirely if it's focus shift or just user error as any slight movement and you've most likely slipped focus. Once you've focused and recomposed you've most likely changed the plane of focus enough to miss the eyes a little. Wide open it's still sharp, at least mine is, but the contrast is low and things are surrounded in "the glow". It's a beautiful mix of soft and sharp.

 

All my testing on a tripod shows that it is focussing accurately. I did a tripod mounted test from 1.4 to 16 and the way the lens changes from dreamy to very sharp is really incredible, unique and valuable in my opinion. It really is split personality. The sharp to soft transition is liquid and luscious.

 

I just bought a 1.4 magnifier and I HIGHLY recommend it. Try one out for sure. It really helps tame the beast. Some say that the reduction in contrast from the magnifier is inhibiting but not for me. What I gain in extra visibility outweighs the reduction in contrast which I have found to be noticeable but slight enough not to bother me. Basically, I can see skin pores in the focus patch now and it is a great help.

 

Sometimes I find myself yearning for the 75 Cron though, but I couldn't ever bring myself to part with that Lux. I will probably, at some stage, buy the Cron too. It's another tool on the tool box and it's clarity and sharpness are staggering. I have tested it and really loved it's look too.

 

I love the 75mm focal length. It's part of my 3 favourite lenses. 35, 50, 75. My original reason for buying it was to compliment my noctilux. For when I wanted that sort of look but wanted a tight head shot that the Noctilux does not allow. You can certainly get a nice tight head shot but it's actually turning into one of my favourite and most used focal lengths and I'm using it more and more.

 

If I was to choose only one it would certainly be the Summilux. Personally, I think it's THE portrait lens.

[mwilliamsphotography]

That's an interesting point. Can you say a little more about a difference between both lenses?

 

Click this link:

 

LEICA 90mm f/2.8 ELMARIT-M

 

While the 75/1.4 is indeed a magical lens, it is extremely difficult to focus (as mentioned by others here), and it is a bit shorter than a 90, (IMO 90mm is a nicer focal length for portraits). In many cases when working closer for a head and shoulders shot you have to stop down the 75/1.4 to get both eyes and nose in focus anyway.

 

IMO, the 75 is more of a low light tool, and like the Noctilux 1.0 tames flare in situations with strong light points in the frame like shooting at night, etc.

 

Lastly, the 90 Elmarit is much smaller, more compact, and doesn't block the viewfinder like the 75 does.

 

I no longer use the M camera for any portrait work, but still use the 90/2.8 when I need a bit more reach than the 50mm ... like the images attached below.

 

-Marc

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!

[algrove]

I have a 75 Lux. Extraordinary lens. Truly truly magical and unique characteristics. The way it renders really should be described as paints. It's gasp inducing. The colour the tonality the way it renders skin tones are very milky, very creamy.

 

People will tell you it's soft, maybe I just have a good copy but mine is really very, very, sharp. But with it's slither thin d.o.f it's not the easiest lens to use. It's not a lazy lens you have to concentrate and work for it. But when you get it rightl it it really rewards.

 

in the beginning I questioned it's sharpness but found out quite quickly that I simply missed the focus, being back or forward of what I focussed on. I'm not sure entirely if it's focus shift or just user error as any slight movement and you've most likely slipped focus. Once you've focused and recomposed you've most likely changed the plane of focus enough to miss the eyes a little. Wide open it's still sharp, at least mine is, but the contrast is low and things are surrounded in "the glow". It's a beautiful mix of soft and sharp.

 

All my testing on a tripod shows that it is focussing accurately. I did a tripod mounted test from 1.4 to 16 and the way the lens changes from dreamy to very sharp is really incredible, unique and valuable in my opinion. It really is split personality. The sharp to soft transition is liquid and luscious.

 

I just bought a 1.4 magnifier and I HIGHLY recommend it. Try one out for sure. It really helps tame the beast. Some say that the reduction in contrast from the magnifier is inhibiting but not for me. What I gain in extra visibility outweighs the reduction in contrast which I have found to be noticeable but slight enough not to bother me. Basically, I can see skin pores in the focus patch now and it is a great help.

 

Sometimes I find myself yearning for the 75 Cron though, but I couldn't ever bring myself to part with that Lux. I will probably, at some stage, buy the Cron too. It's another tool on the tool box and it's clarity and sharpness are staggering. I have tested it and really loved it's look too.

 

I love the 75mm focal length. It's part of my 3 favourite lenses. 35, 50, 75. My original reason for buying it was to compliment my noctilux. For when I wanted that sort of look but wanted a tight head shot that the Noctilux does not allow. You can certainly get a nice tight head shot but it's actually turning into one of my favourite and most used focal lengths and I'm using it more and more.

 

If I was to choose only one it would certainly be the Summilux. Personally, I think it's THE portrait lens.

 

+1, well put. On Memorial Day I posted a May 2012 75 Lux shot in Arlington Cemetery.

 

I picked up a 90/2.8 lately and find it is quite sharp. Look at the hair on the dog's belly-great! My old eyes for all my lenses are helped by Walter eye pieces. My hit rate is WAY up since getting them.

[darylgo]

 

If I was to choose only one it would certainly be the Summilux. Personally, I think it's THE portrait lens.

 

Paul, great write up, +1 on every point.

 

For portraits it's hard to beat the 75/1.4, at f1.4 it's magical, the sharp/soft rendition is flattering.

 

The differences in the lenses: 75/2.5 Sharpest of the group, more contrasty, beautiful lens, can use for portraits in low contrast situations. 75/2 beautiful contrast, color and sharpness, I find this lens the most difficult to focus, used for portraits it will not disappoint. 75/1.4 lower contrast at f1.4, contrast from f2 is beautiful. My wifes preference: 1.4 for it's flattering rendition, although if she knew the price paid I don't think it would be.

[henning]

so let's not dig into years and years of debate...the 75lux with it's gorgeous, painterly bokeh is a truly ancient but stella lens in the same league with the 50 noctilux so if you're willing to pack that heavy weight in glass & metal, not to mention if your eyesight can master it's razor thin focal plane with that tiny rangefinder patch, it's definitely going to pay off for you. a 1.4x magnifier would help, even doubled and/or maybe have your eyes tested first & if that passes reasonably well, check the focus one by one until you can get a copy that's bang on with your rangefinder. you may have to get that adjusted for it which may throw all your other lenses out a bit..he-ho... it's certainly a feisty beast to handle though & at f2 you could almost say it's a summicron....but, no, it's not.

more of a refurbished collector's hot cake expensive item these days & if you can find one you like you can be sure the price will steadily climb so don't think about it for too long and do use it but look after it in case you decide it's not for you.

 

the smaller, lighter, more modern (in outlook) 75 f2 asph. is more clinical (again modern) in it's rendering at f2 but still has great bokeh...depends how painterly you will be wanting to go with your images?..it does appear to be in shorter supply than the lux & difficult to find even at elevated prices & almost impossible (never say impossible with internet) to find new, however they do pop up from time to time but some copies back focus a bit so watch out for that. I guess people who bought one (like me) kept it for a reason. i like the look you get from the older glass of the lux more but not the cost (yet), size & weight. both at 2.8 are starting to be quite hard to tell apart. both are going to set you back a pretty penny so i can understand your need to research so go google and set some of your favorite images from both side by side, they can be quite different but the only real way to do it is to test them on your own camera.

 

Whether a lens back focusses or not is a design issue and not due to sample variation. Ultimately, all lenses shift focus over some apertures and at some distances. Whether it makes any differences in your photos is another matter. Misfocussing is certainly a lot bigger deal with the Summicron. The Summilux is another matter, but the focus shift can be handled with a bit of practices. The latter and the last pre-AA 90 Summicron are my favourite portrait M lenses, with the thin Tele-Elmarit not far behind. All are essentially indistinguishable by f/5.6 from their more modern counterparts, but give you options for smoother, i.e. softer renderings. Lenses like the 75 and 90AA's and the 90/4 macro always have a very sharp focus plane, and it can be a bit too much; also the contrast is higher which is not always best for portraits.

 

Henning

[Gerard]

Is the 75 Lux sharp?

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/244459-who-says-75mm-summilux-aint-sharp.html

 

You tell me.

 

 

 

Is the 75 Lux a great portrait lens?

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/nature-wildlife/243682-proud-beast.html

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/227430-through-fathers-eyes.html

 

I think so. But so are many other lenses. Which is for you depends on budget and need ('fingerprint').

 

 

 

Don't forget the 75mm focal length is also great for landscape; I find the Lux quite painterly.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/233143-england.html

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[AB007]

That 75 Lux looks great.

 

This week, I received my new 90/2 AA. I have been using an older non-6 bit version in excellent condition which I bought used from eBay. I loved it so I ordered a new one few months back.

 

The Nikkor 105/2.5 LTM is another fav portrait lens of mine. It resides on my M3.