50mm or 75mm

[swamiji]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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

 

 

I really don't know what the current price is. I purchased mine when it was very out of fashion, I think I paid about $750. So from what you say the current price is somewhat higher. That speaks well of Leica lens investment...

[Advertisement]

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

[cpclee]

There was a time when I couldn't give my R lenses away...

[Metin Colak]

Hello folks.. I just would like to know whether I could get more impressive DOF with the Noctilux f1 than Summilux 75mm f1.4. I already have Lux75, and plan to buy the Noctilux f1.. But I can't decide.. I checked these lenses depth of field indexes; Lux75 produces thinner/narrower band of depth of field, at their minimum focusing distances. I just would like to know whether I get more impressive DOF with the Noctilux f1 at its mimimum distance at 1m or not... I couldn't find any compreative reviews, or, photographs on the net.. If you have both lens your comparative photographs will be greatly appreciated. Cheers..

[01af]

... I checked these lenses' depth-of-field indices; the 75 produces narrower band of depth-of-field, at their minimum focusing distances.

That's a pointless comparison. To come up with a meaningful result, you'd have to compare depths-of-field at equivalent distances, not at their respective minimum distances. And then you'll get the thinner depth-of-field with the 50 mm Noctilux, due to the wider relative aperture.

 

.

Edited April 19, 2018 by 01af

[ianman]

What is an "impressive" DOF??

[Exodies]

Take your pick

https://giphy.com/gifs/zu-doff-yidUzvt6eLQIrp9DTG

[Metin Colak]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What is an "impressive" DOF??

 

Really difficult to describe it in words.. I just wanted to hear opinion of users of both lenses.. If you have both of them I would be happy to hear your impressions about their rendering at their minimum f stops and minimum focusing distance... To me Summilux 75 is very impressive, however when I look at the images of Noctilux f1 I see bit different look, a bit more attractive/impressive rendering in terms of DOF. Maybe beacuse of the 40 percent more light gatherings of the Noctilux and its 40 percent more f stop.. 

[Metin Colak]

That's a pointless comparison. To come up with a meaningful result, you'd have to compare depths-of-field at equivalent distances, not at their respective minimum distances. And then you'll get the thinner depth-of-field with the 50 mm Noctilux, due to the wider relative aperture.

 

.

Thank you for your reply.. I just want to analyse their rendering at their minimum distance and at their widest aperture. As you know depth of field is affected by f stop and distance.. I think it would be logical to analyse the DOF of both lenses at their minimum f stop and focusing distance.. I would be happy if anyone has these lenses and show us their rendering at their minimum f stops and distances.. As I explained above I have Summilux, it is amazing at f1.4, I just would like to see a comparative analyses of both lenses... 

[Metin Colak]

By the way, I have  Lux50 Asph. and Lux75 f1.4. Before I purchased Lux75 f1.4 I read a lot of opinions and saw a lot of photographs of Lux75 f1.4. Most of the opinion shared the one idea: It is a great lens. And after purchasing it I experienced the same! It is really an amazing lens! It is different from any other lenses, including Lux50 Asph. It has a dual character; very soft, magical at f1.4, and becomes sharp after 2.0-2.8, very sharp after 4.. One more note: Lux 75 produces especially amazing blue and green.It can only be compared with, I think, Noctilux f1. And unfortunatly I don't have the Noctilux!

[MarkPS]

I have a tele-elmarit /f2.8 that I use for portraits on an M10R and previously on an M6. It gives me great subject distance, background separation and is sharp. Also, it is small and easy to carry when traveling. With an M camera, the 90mm frame lines are closer to the area where the rangefinder focuses and, in my experience, it is easier to get eyes in focus.I understand that the frame lines for a 90 are small but I don’t mind it.    I had a 75 summicron but I hardly used it. i think that a 50 is a more versatile focal length but it is better for half body shots than head shots. If you get too close, certain facial features may be a little distorted. If you use a 50 for head shots, it is better to crop the picture later. If you are going to take head shots or tighter portraits, the 75 might be better but as I said earlier, a 90 mm lens is a more traditional focal length for portraits. If you have a 90 tele and are looking for one lens to do portraits and landscapes then get a 50mm lens. If you only are going to use the lens only  for portraits and do not want to use a 90 mm lens, then get the 75mm. BTW, I use a 50mm on a Fuji X camera, which is the equivalent of a 75mm lens since it is an APS-C camera and the 75 mm equivalent is a little short for portraits in my opinion. On my Nikons I used to use a 85mm f1.4 or 105 2.8 but, of course, those cameras did not pose the frame line issue on an M rangefinder and we’re easier to use for portraits. Sounds like you are leaning to the 75mm lens.  My suggestion is to buy it from a dealer where you can return it after 30 days if it does not work for you. Best of luck. 

 

 

 

[Gregm61]

On 7/4/2014 at 3:15 PM, tony740607 said:

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 try using as "logical" a set of lenses as possible to minimize the load but still have as close a "complete" an M lens system with me as possible. 

My primary outfit (just used in New England this past week) is a 21mm f3.4 SEM (sometimes replaced by the 18mm f3.8 SEM), 35mm f1.4 FLE, 75mm f2 APO and 135mm f3.4 APO.

THAT SAID, I own an embarrassment of 90mm options; a 6-bit coded 90mm f2 non-APO (last version), a 90mm f2 APO I just had adjusted by DAG, and the 90mm f2.8 Elmarit-M, also 6-bit coded.

All that, and I just purchased a Made in Germany 90mm f2.8 Tele Elmarit-M I will eventually send to DAG to have 6-bit coded. The opportunity was there and I just couldn't help myself.

One of the above will be part of a 5 lens 18mm f3.8, 28mm f2.8 ASPH, 50mm f2 (v 5) and 90mm outfit when I want to switch things up.

I have carried a three lens outfit of 21-35-90mm and once or twice have gone 21-35-75mm and the "traditional" 21 (or 18mm)-35-50-90-135.

One of the fun "chores" of my days consist of deciding which lenses and bag to use/carry for the week or a trip,

Lenses I generally do not pair up as they are just too close in my opinion are a 28-35mm and 75-90mm.

Edited October 24, 2023 by Gregm61

[TomB_tx]

10 minutes ago, Gregm61 said:

I have carried a three lens outfit of 21-35-90mm and once or twice have gone 21-35-75mm and the "traditional" 21 (or 18mm)-35-50-90-135.

For decades my travel kit was 35-50-90 for my M4 (my only M lenses for those years) and 60-135 for my Leicaflex SL. Lightened it to just the M set, and added a tiny CV 21 f4 when I got an M9. Now at my age I stay with a single lens for outings, usually 35, sometimes 50, as I don't mind significant cropping on M10.