120mm vs 180mm

[djmay]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would like to hear comments from the community on the choice between 120mm vs 180mm. I do predominantly landscape and cityscape / architectural work. I have used 240mm with 4x5 view camera, almost always with substantial movements. This would be slightly wider than than a 120mm on S, however, I would no longer need to consider movements. I have also used 90mm with M9.

 

I am leaning to choose the 180mm and would like to know how users of 120mm and 180mm relate to the distinction from the 70mm.

 

Many thanks in advance.

Jesse

[nunnzzzz]

I have both

Similiar size and both great but 120 more versatile

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[djmay]

I have both

Similiar size and both great but 120 more versatile

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Can you elaborate what you mean by more versatile?

Regards,

Jesse

[nunnzzzz]

Well I absolutely love the 120 as a portrait lens but I feel the 180 is a little too long for that

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[erlingmm]

I have both. The answer is as usual - it depends.

 

I think the 180 is my most demanding lens. It is difficult to focus wide open, especially close to infinity. It is demanding to hand-hold, due to its FOV. I mostly use it on a tripod. If you have the S007, EVF will help you focusing. I struggled a bit with it on the S006. 

 

The 120 is extremely sharp, has macro, and of course is easier to handhold. Because of the macro it has a long focus throw, and sometimes "hunts", but this has improved with the latest firmware (it helps to approximate focus manually).

[John McMaster]

I have both but use the 120mm far more often, close focussing being a bit to do with it...

 

john

[albertknappmd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have both and agree with erlingmm... Just got the 007 so will use EVF. However, both lenses bast incredible optics.... I do not as a rule use a tripod with the 180mm but favor a bean bag or hand held... The focussing of any long lens is challenging wide open given the limited DOF.

Albert     

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

I have the 120 and it's my favorite lens of all time. I'm now using my Hasselblad 160 on the 007 and love it that's what got me thinking 180mm. I'm thinking it would be great for head jobs.....

[John McMaster]

I'm thinking it would be great for head jobs.....

 

You really need the ELPRO as well unless you want to crop, the 180mm does not focus very close (1.5m) without the adaptor.

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

You really need the ELPRO as well unless you want to crop, the 180mm does not focus very close (1.5m) without the adaptor.

John

Do you find it as sharp as the 120mm. I'm really wanting it for head shots and landscape where you can isolate stuff in the picture. Does the elpro effect the IQ of the lens mate?

[John McMaster]

Don't worry, it is sharp ;-) ELPRO has negligible effect, just look at the cost and weight of it....

 

john

[LorenzoLandini]

Jesse, 

 

I wondered the same and in the end I went for the 120 because of its versatility (macro capability, traditional portrait lens  - approx 95mm in 35mm terms - and it can also be used for landscape that is what I do the most). it was also easier to find a good deal on a pre-owned / used 120 since they sold more 120s than 180s. 

 

The 120 is a great performer, very sharp with nice contrast and nice color rendition. 

 

I would think the 180 would perform very similarly based on the MTF charts, which are similar for both lenses. The MTF shows a bit more astigmatism for the 180 and a slightly better bokeh of the 120 once stepped down (which is irrelevant since usually bokeh is sought after in shots at full aperture). I am not surprised by Erling's comments on focusing: also from the MTF charts the 180 appears to be more challenging to focus having some focus shift. The other difference highlighted by the MTF charts is that the 120 is a more consistent performer across the frame, while the 180 is less consistent with a bit more aberrations at the corners and the above mentioned focus shift. Stepping down increases a bit the performance of the 120 while the 180 increases only micro-contrast.  

 

At the end of the day, they are both great lenses and I would expect the differences in performance are fairly negligible. I like the 120 and I would be happy to consider a 180 if I find a good deal. Performance should not be the determining factor in choosing one or another. In my opinion, the need for macro capabilities and the field of view should be the relevant factor in your decision (keeping mind the above comments on the ELPRO for portraits). 

 

With respect to your comment on the 240mm on the 4x5, that's more equivalent to the Summarit S70 in terms of field of view. The 240 is actually slightly wider than the 70, so the 120 would have a significant narrower field of view similar to a 360, possibly a bit wider. I use a 210 with my 4x5 and that's clearly wider than the 70 on the S. It also depends on how the field of view is measured (diagonally or just the width of the frame since the ratio of a 4x5 is quite different than the S). 

 

My two cents. 

 

cheers, 

Lorenzo 

[djmay]

Jesse,

 

I wondered the same and in the end I went for the 120 because of its versatility (macro capability, traditional portrait lens - approx 95mm in 35mm terms - and it can also be used for landscape that is what I do the most). it was also easier to find a good deal on a pre-owned / used 120 since they sold more 120s than 180s.

 

The 120 is a great performer, very sharp with nice contrast and nice color rendition.

 

I would think the 180 would perform very similarly based on the MTF charts, which are similar for both lenses. The MTF shows a bit more astigmatism for the 180 and a slightly better bokeh of the 120 once stepped down (which is irrelevant since usually bokeh is sought after in shots at full aperture). I am not surprised by Erling's comments on focusing: also from the MTF charts the 180 appears to be more challenging to focus having some focus shift. The other difference highlighted by the MTF charts is that the 120 is a more consistent performer across the frame, while the 180 is less consistent with a bit more aberrations at the corners and the above mentioned focus shift. Stepping down increases a bit the performance of the 120 while the 180 increases only micro-contrast.

 

At the end of the day, they are both great lenses and I would expect the differences in performance are fairly negligible. I like the 120 and I would be happy to consider a 180 if I find a good deal. Performance should not be the determining factor in choosing one or another. In my opinion, the need for macro capabilities and the field of view should be the relevant factor in your decision (keeping mind the above comments on the ELPRO for portraits).

 

With respect to your comment on the 240mm on the 4x5, that's more equivalent to the Summarit S70 in terms of field of view. The 240 is actually slightly wider than the 70, so the 120 would have a significant narrower field of view similar to a 360, possibly a bit wider. I use a 210 with my 4x5 and that's clearly wider than the 70 on the S. It also depends on how the field of view is measured (diagonally or just the width of the frame since the ratio of a 4x5 is quite different than the S).

 

My two cents.

 

cheers,

Lorenzo

Hello Lorenzo,

 

I decided on the 180 because wanted a narrower field of view. Unfortunately, immediately after acquiring the lens, the S camera failed. I have the S repaired and have done some testing. Architectural detail shots are quite nice. I do not normally do portraits except casual portraits of family. The 180 is also quite nice for that. I have yet to try it out on landscape and cityscape, which was the main driver for the purchase.

 

Jesse

 

Sent from my Lenovo YT3-850L using Tapatalk

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Now that my 30mm has just crapped itself two day into a photo trip I won't be buying anything else from Leica. Someone else can have my money

[John McMaster]

I assume you mean that AF is broken? Not the end of the world on a wide lens...

 

john

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

I assume you mean that AF is broken? Not the end of the world on a wide lens...

 

john

Correct. What I don't get is why didn't Leica recall all the S lenses after they found the manufacturing problem and fix ALL of them once and for all......... Not a happy camper

[John McMaster]

I suspect that would be too big a task...

 

john

[MarkP]

Now that my 30mm has just crapped itself two day into a photo trip I won't be buying anything else from Leica. Someone else can have my money

 

 

Is this the second of your S lenses to pack up on you?

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Is this the second of your S lenses to pack up on you?

Mark it's the third. The first was my 70. Second 120 that is currently in Germany getting fixed. Now my 30mm. At least after this I will have 3 refurbished lenses that should last a lifetime as long as the fix Leica are using is a permanent fix

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[EoinC]

I suspect that would be too big a task...

 

john

Too big to do at once, but not too big to do in a controlled manner, especially since it will have to be done anyway. I, personally, don't think this issue has been well-handled by Leica. I think it would have been rather more trust-enhancing to have been more open with owners (and there really aren't that many), providing clarity on the problem, the solution, and constantly updating expected turnaround times. Another step may have been to use existing stock for exchanges, until all contactable owners had managed to go through the rinse and repeat cycle.

 

At the very least, they could have produced some clarity on when (if) they stopped using the failing part/s in new lenses...We can presume that they have identified the issue, and no longer sell lenses with the inherent problem, can't we?

 

I'm not surprised Neil is pissed off. 3 out of 3 lens failures must be something close to a record for any manufacturer. I like Leica, but quality of lenses is not just about the optics.