Macro-Elmar 90mm f/4 vs Summarit 75mm f/2.4

[grillo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know it is an apples and oranges comparison, but that is why I find it so hard to make up my mind.

 

I'm looking for a longer lens (I shoot 99% of the time with the Summicron 35mm), for portraits and near macro. I did some calculations and for near macro my minimum requirements are met by a 75mm at 0.70m distance (I am assuming the Summarit f/2.4 really focuses down to 0.70 m., which would mean a 1:7 reproduction ratio). I have a strong preference for small and light, so I didn't consider other 75mm lenses. But when I was almost decided I started to think about the Macro Elmar. It is even smaller and lighter than the Summarit, and it should have better performance at closer focusing distances. The only downside is that it is an f/4 lens, and I photograph a lot in low light, mostly at ISO 3200, 1/60 s. and f/4 and lower. In these conditions I guess I would have trouble hand-holding the Macro-Elmar. So it comes down to 1.5 stops better low light capability versus a more compact and light design. Does anyone have experience with the Macro Elmar in low light?

 

 

[lct]

The 90/4 macro works fine in low light but it will need at least 6400 iso (here at 12800). As for the 75/2.4 i have no experience with it but the 75/2.5's closer distance is 0.9m. If you have an m240, did you think of using an R lens like 60/2.8 macro for instance? Another idea could be an M 75/2 which goes down to 0.7m.

 

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!

[grillo]

Yes, I have the M240. I thought of the R 60/2.8 macro as part of a backup two lens solution, because I prefer something longer (and range-finder coupled) por portraits.

 

Thanks for the image. Maybe I should explore what can I do with ISO 6400. I tried it once and I didn't like it, so I have stopped at 3200 ever since.

[lct]

Yes so did i with the M240. Too noisy at 6400.

[uhoh7]

F/4 will not cut it in low light unless you are shooting a A7s. 2.4 is already straining.

[wda]

grillo, I think your preference is a good one. The newer 75mm Summarit is identical optically to its very popular forerunner but does focus slightly closer. The lens is light robust well-made and leaves nothing to be desired from a perfomance point of view. While some claim the Summicron is better, by being slightly faster, only you can decide the relative values to you. I do think the 75mm makes an excellent companion to a 35mm lens. If you can see your portrait subject clearly, then you can shoot it with confidence with either lens. Happy Christmas!

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

[...] The newer 75mm Summarit is identical optically to its very popular forerunner but does focus slightly closer. [...]

 

Interesting indeed. Would you have a link about this? Just curious.

[pop]

www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2014/09/leica-summarit-m/

[tobey bilek]

Macro elmar is a killer lens at any distance or aperture.    My chrome one is pretty heavy.

 

I think my 75 APO is not as good in close range,  but still nice.   Never used a Summarit,  but reports say it is not as good.

 

If you are splitting hairs between lenses and not using a tripod or electronic flash,  you are wasting time.

 

My opinion is if you need more than iso 1250 and do close photography,  you picked the wrong camera.

 

My favorite for that work is Nikon with 100 2.8 APO Macro.  Get a D750 for high iso and D800 series for low iso.  Leica are pretty specialized for where they work best.  

[grillo]

Thanks for your inputs. More than splitting hairs about image quality (I think I will be more than satisfied with either lens) for me it is a question of 1.5 stops in favor of the Summarit versus 25% less weight and almost half the volume when collapsed in favor of the Macro-Elmar. In general I prefer small and light, but I worry about the low-light ability of the 90mm f/4. I guess I'll have to handle both lenses to get a better idea of the trade-off.

[Jeff S]

Thanks for your inputs. More than splitting hairs about image quality (I think I will be more than satisfied with either lens) for me it is a question of 1.5 stops in favor of the Summarit versus 25% less weight and almost half the volume when collapsed in favor of the Macro-Elmar. In general I prefer small and light, but I worry about the low-light ability of the 90mm f/4. I guess I'll have to handle both lenses to get a better idea of the trade-off.

[Emphasis mine] Be aware that the hood on the newest Macro-Elmar no longer reverse mounts on the lens for storage as with the prior version, significantly increasing its potential volume.  

 

Always best to try for yourself....and make prints to discern practical results.

 

Jeff

[grillo]

Thanks, Jeff. That's one of those things one only notices when it's too late.

[microview]

May I add that extreme caution is required to fit the hood to the current 90 f4. I found the claws had cut straight through the black finish when I first took mine off. (Retouch perfect with a black Sharpie however.) I don't normally use the hood. It is a lovely, light lens.

[lct]

I felt the same the first time i used a clip-on hood on the 50/2 v3 of my M4 in 1971 so all hope is not lost .

[MarkP]

I use the 2.8/50mm Elmarit-M E39 hood (12550) on my 4.0/90 Macro-Elmar v1.  This was suggested by someone here on the forum some time ago.  Incredibly compact, no claw marks on the lens, and works exceptionally well except in the most challenging of lighting situations.

[MarkP]

May I add that extreme caution is required to fit the hood to the current 90 f4. I found the claws had cut straight through the black finish when I first took mine off. (Retouch perfect with a black Sharpie however.) I don't normally use the hood. It is a lovely, light lens.

 

Same as the clawed hood grip on the E49 MATE. Very annoying.

[asiafish]

I had the Summarit 7mm f/2.5 and other than the minimum focus distance at .9 meters it was a fantastic lens.  I plan on buying the new f/2.4 version eventually, as it solves that issue.

[RCW]

I have both the Macro-Elmar 90mm f.4 (older version) and the latest Summarit 75mm f.2.4.   Both are excellent lenses, but since I bought the Summarit a few months ago I have been using it much more often than the Macro-Elmar. 

 

The Macro-Elmar is a classic lens and I would not part with it, but mine is the chrome version, which feels heavy for such a small lens.  More importantly, I find the Summarit less fiddly to use (no need to extend and lock the barrel) and easier to focus. 

 

The Macro-Elmar may have the edge optically, especially in macro photography, but the Summarit is a joy to use and I cannot fault the image quality it provides.