1970s 90mm Summicron

[TigrisJK]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey guys. I'm considering buying a 1970s Leitz Canada 90mm Summicron for my M (240).

 

I do a lot of studio work and I'm looking to get a 90mm for portraits so I can basically ignore my SLR gear forever. f/2 is nice, but not completely 100% necessary... I'm looking more for the character of the lens (and, at the moment, the price). From what I've seen, I love the Summicron's rendering and sharpness wide open is amazing.

 

The only worry I have is the size, really. I mean, it's not so critical in the studio, but it may mean I'll have to invest in another 90 (maybe a tele-elmarit) for shoots on the go down the road.

 

Anyone have any other suggestions for 90s that they'd shoot wide open? Or just want to speak up for Summicron love? Especially at a sub-$800 price range? Sample images would be lovely!

[rirakuma]

I have an old 90 cron in the R mount but from what I understand its optically identical to the M mount cron. Its not the APO version but its very sharp wide open with very attractive character. Some samples wide open:

 

 

[TigrisJK]

Och, those are lovely. Thanks for the quick response!

[Simey]

Mine's a 1968 version with the removable head and preset ring. But otherwise it's the same lens I believe.

 

It's a great lens IMHO. These are shot at f2.

 

L4801400 by mrsyettigoosecreature, on Flickr

 

L4801405 by mrsyettigoosecreature, on Flickr

 

L4800231 by mrsyettigoosecreature, on Flickr

 

And one a bit more stopped down.

 

L4800303 by mrsyettigoosecreature, on Flickr

[tobey bilek]

I looked at a few and did not like them, soft. But naturally they were all used in the 80`s.

 

90 mm is not the easiest lens to use on an M, focusing difficulty. I would hesitate to use even a good copy for studio portraits because of this. At least get the proper magnifier eyepiece.

 

The other issue is low microcontrast. In beginner terms it means skin texture and details will not show well. Also true of the first tele summicron from middle 80`s which is what I have. It works well on film and was my go to lens for portraits because it had a natural softness under 6 feet. Never did portrait work with the 90 APO, but have with 100 APO R. Superb rendering digital. Learn to retouch or the people will not like the pics.

 

90 2.8 Elmarit is the best portrait lens from the 60/70 era. Not the tele version, either one. They are nice for travel, not so great for close in work. The Elmarit is a visoflex lens and made to work close and far.

 

My favorites for the digital M are 50 1.4 ASPH and 75 Summicron. They are very similar designs , render nice backgrounds, have close range correction or floating elements so close subjects are sharp. The 90 APO needs to be redesigned for this.

 

Save yourself a lot of trouble and get a D800 Nikon, 105 mm or 85 .

[pgk]

Mine's a 1968 version with the removable head and preset ring. But otherwise it's the same lens I believe.

 

It's a great lens IMHO. These are shot at f2.

Interesting. Even at web-size several show (characteristic) green fringing (chroma) on oof highlights (candle flames) or even in areas of white (as in the cat). Personally I'm not so keen on this since it is not the pleasantest of colours to inject into light areas so this isn't a lens that appeals to me and, although I've owned several copies, I've eventually disposed of each one.