50mm or 75mm

[tony740607]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi L Camera users,

 

I have got help from you many times before and now it is time again.

 

I have following equipment today:

M9, 28mm cron, 35mm lux FLE, 90mm Tele-Elmarit

I am shooting mostly landscape and portraits and would like to shoot more portraits of my daughter now when I am leaving for three months parental leave.

I am thinking of 50mm Lux or 75mm Cron (current ones). In my opinion 90mm is too tight.

 

I have tried them both several times but are pending back and forth. I like them both but can only afford one right now. I like the focusing knob on the 50mm and the closeness of the 75mm. I do not like getting too much into the frames of the 50mm but I also do not like the focusing frame lines for the 75mm etc. etc. etc. But I like very much the 1.4 on the Lux and the distance to your subject for the 75mm etc. etc. :)

 

For those of you that have used those two lenses much more than I have, what is your experience? What are your pros and cons? How would you do?

 

Thanks.

[Advertisement]

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

[wattsy]

It really depends upon the kind of "portraits" that you intend to do. That said, you've indicated that your 90 is "too tight" so I'll hazard a guess and suggest that a 50 might be more useful to you than a 75.

[lct]

+1. You miss a 50 between 35 and 90 imho and i would reconsider the tightness of 90 for portraiture but it's just me. The 75/2 is a superb lens though but you will find it taller and heavier than your Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 by a non-insignificant margin.

[Berth]

+1. You miss a 50 between 35 and 90 imho and i would reconsider the tightness of 90 for portraiture but it's just me. The 75/2 is a superb lens though but you will find it taller and heavier than your Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8 by a non-insignificant margin.

 

On the other hand the f/2.5 Summarit is extremely compact. I'd probably go with the 50mm though.

[cpclee]

For me a fast 75-85mm lens makes hands down the best portrait lens. A 50 is good for people photos of all kinds, but in the specific application of portraiture I'd find a 75 more useful. The slight perspective compressions very naturally draws your viewer to the subject, but it doesn't compress so much like a 90mm or longer that your subject starts to look fatter than he or she really is.

 

Also, given you already have a fast 35, I think a fast 75 (like the cron) will complement it better. You can always get a cheap 50 like an Elmar-M or a vintage 50 as I think it is an extremely useful focal length, but you won't need the most speed there because of the 35 lux and 75 cron you'll already have.

[pgk]

I have 50, 75 & 90 lenses and cannot make the decision about which I'd recommend - all get used.

[Mr_Jones]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the 50 lux (asph) and 75 summarit. I almost never use the 75, I find it works well for small children and domestic pets but it's probably got a lot to do with the distance I like to maintain between myself and the subject!

 

You should get a 50mm of some kind anyway, it's a great focal length. The 75 1.4 is a great lens though, it draws so well and the results always catch my eye.

[MarkP]

It is all personal but if it was me I would go with the 50 without doubt.

 

35mm used to be my main lens but I've migrated to 50, with 28 my second most used focal length. 50mm is far more versatile than 75 - it can be a normal or short telephoto lens and is still fantastic for portraits. 50 is excellent as a single lens as a change from 35. 50 also pairs fantastically as a two-lens kit with the 28.

 

I have the 75 Summicron and 75 Summilux but 50 is just so versatile[/i].

[billo101]

I have 35 Lux FLE and 75AA, great combo, I have no need 50mm.

 

b

[pfhrased]

I'm seriously considering parting ways with my 50 1.4 and going with the 75 AA - I love the 75mm focal length, where 50 doesn't do a lot for me.

Prefer it for portrait and for landscape.

 

I've had the 75 1.4 which I sold because I grew to prefer the modern lens rendering, and the CV 75 2.5 which is actually pretty damn stunning .. just again a more classic look (though it seems better corrected than the 75 1.4 was).

 

I also found that with the 50 I felt like I wanted to stop it down when shooting across-table portraits, because otherwise I'd only get one eye in focus.

[cpclee]

I go through phases with my 50. There are periods when I don't use it much, but then I'd come back. It's so good for that back to basics look especially for B&W. I think it's a worthwhile focal length to have in the arsenal, but I decided for myself a cheap Elmar-M serves my need plenty enough!

 

The fast mid tele (eg. 75-85) for me serves a very different use. I use it almost exclusively for portraits. I may or may not take it out on travels, but when I'm doing a portrait session it's the first (and sometimes only) lens I'd grab.

 

The fast mid tele is an important member in the lens lineup of any camera system. The 85 1.2 or 1.4 is always a big seller due to portraiture use and is featured prominently in any catalog. Recall when Zeiss launched their primes for the various SLR systems the 50 and 85 were almost always the first lenses to be launched, where the 50 is sold as the universal prime and the 85 the portrait prime. I feel that in the M system, the mid tele is somehow downplayed in importance because of the frame line situation.

 

 

I'm seriously considering parting ways with my 50 1.4 and going with the 75 AA - I love the 75mm focal length, where 50 doesn't do a lot for me.

Prefer it for portrait and for landscape.

 

I've had the 75 1.4 which I sold because I grew to prefer the modern lens rendering, and the CV 75 2.5 which is actually pretty damn stunning .. just again a more classic look (though it seems better corrected than the 75 1.4 was).

 

I also found that with the 50 I felt like I wanted to stop it down when shooting across-table portraits, because otherwise I'd only get one eye in focus.

[cpclee]

First shot is 50/2 Summicron-R (on Fuji Provia F 100 pushed to 400). This is when I'd use a 50 for a portrait, when I'm trying to include the a bit of the environment.

 

Second shot is with 75AA (on the cropped APS-C sensor of the Ricoh GXR M module). The 75 is to me more suited for typical portrait situations.

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!

[bephoto]

If you get 50mm you will need 75mm for close up portraits. 50mm @70cm is just not close enough.

maybe on M240 with macro adapter and evf you can get closer with a 50 but that won't be a comfortable solution.

[otto.f]

For children up to 8yrs I would certainly recommend a 75, although I do not know the 75AA out of own experience, I would say the Summilux for the bo-keh and selective focus

[Three Legged Cat]

Tough question!

 

My first lens on the M240 was a 35 Cron, and then added a 75 Cron, which I felt gave me great coverage for a '2-lens' system. I found the 75 Cron to be a really wonderful, sharp and surprisingly versatile lens, which gave me interesting opportunities to include 'background context' when using it for portraiture - my only personal niggle was the lack of a 'knob' on its focus ring..

 

I've since added a 50 Lux, which is just a beauty in every respect, as well as the new 90 Macro-Elmar. However, I do go back to the 75 on a surprising number of occasions, and not just for portraits; sometimes the 50 Lux just feels a bit too 'obvious' if I want to do something different - if that makes any sense - and looking through the 75 often gives me a different perspective on the World.

 

Although you certainly wouldn't be disappointed with the 50 Lux, In your situation I think I'd try the 75 Cron...

[A miller]

I don't find the 75mm frame-lines anywhere near as easy to use and accurate as the 50mm. So therefore they are less versatile for broad use. Of course, with digital one can use trial and error when shooting.

[paulsydaus]

You said you can't afford both, but have you considered this option.

1. 50/2 Summicron (non APO of course)

2. 75/2.5 Summarit

The 75/2.5 is supposed to be a fabulous lens.

You could pick up both of these for the same price as the 50/1.4...

 

But on your original question, I would choose 75 if you are looking for more intimate portraits (i.e. less background context) and also you will be able to stand further away and be less intimidating to your daughter...

Good luck...

[swamiji]

On the M9 I would get the 75mm Summilux. I go 75 when I can't make up my mind 50/90... The Summilux gives that extra stop, which is nice. It is my portrait goto lens, and stopped down its as sharp as the M9 can handle. It's drawback is size and weight, plus you really need to practice with it because of the narrow DOF and long focus.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[algrove]

+1 on 75/1.4, but it may be beyond the OP's current budget.

[jedi996sps]

Hi, i have both those lenses which i have been using with a sony A7r but now also have the M240 yay :-).

The 50lux is my favourite lense for a portrait where i want some body in the shot and want to be kind if it is a female sitter. The 75cron is razor sharp and works well for closer head and head and shoulder shots. If i only had to have one, i would keep my 50lux.

Happy to do a sample shot with both and put them in a drop box for you if that helps.