90 apo vs Otus 85mm... buyers remorse

[ZHNL]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My experience is consistent with that of Lenstip: that my copy of the 85 Art is at least as sharp with very low CA as the Otus. The rendering is slightly different, less warm to my eye, but the differences are small.

https://www.lenstip.com/491.4-Lens_review-Sigma_A_85_mm_f_1.4_DG_HSM_Image_resolution.html

 

And the Art is autofocus...

And can be extensively user-calibrated with the Sigma dock...

And three times less expensive!

I don't need look for review. Just a few clicks you will know lens optical performance though Bokeh and rendering evaluation need more time.

 

It has strong CA, period! I have it next to me. It is a sharp lens, a great performer just not OTUS great.

 

135 ART is a better lens over all to my eyes. As sharp, no CA problems. This is first and only ART truly approaching OTUS level performance.

[Advertisement]

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

[Paul J]

I handled multiple copy of 90APO, I haven't seen a single image within 2M sharpness deserve its reputation yet. Do you mind post a example or link of image to show that? I am not talking about focus issue. Modern M you can always focus LV if in doubt. Without close focus element (FLE), the lens performance degrade with closer distance shooting quite dramatically.

 

The 75APO has floating element design to cover close focus distance. The same as 50mm summilux M, even with that, 50lux has degraded performance than its infinity but 90APO has nothing special at close distance to my eyes. At infinity though, it is one of best in M line even with today's standard.

 

Yeah I think it's fairly well accepted that the 90mm APO isn't as great as it could be up close. An update with a floating element would be good.

[Jeff S]

Puts specifically notes (in his Leica Chronicle):

 

"The only weaker point of the APO is its performance at closer distances (0.7 - 2m). Here we see some softness and loss of contrast. When optimum quality is required in this distance region, one has to stop down to 1:4."

 

Jeff

[frank_dernie]

I remember many years ago one of the Leica designers saying how easy it was to design a good lens if there was no size or weight limit. I never thought any monster lenses would be saleable, so have been quite surprised by their arrival on the market. I certainly wouldn't consider one as a tool I would use. My 90 f2 is so big and heavy most of the time I use my 90 f4 macro

Personally I am completely sure I would very rarely use a lens as big and heavy as the Otus, but I suppose if you are also carrying the tripod necessary to get the best out of it its weight and size won't be the biggest limiting factor.

[otho]

I have both mentioned APO 75&90. I think, that they equally perfect. APO 90, even in close focusing distance is great and APO 75 is maybe only very marginally better.

[pgk]

Puts specifically notes (in his Leica Chronicle):

 

"The only weaker point of the APO is its performance at closer distances (0.7 - 2m). Here we see some softness and loss of contrast. When optimum quality is required in this distance region, one has to stop down to 1:4."

 

Jeff

 

With all due respect to Puts, he's a lens tester, not a photographer who actually uses lenses to their full potential. Nobody make 'bad' lenses these days, if they did they wouldn't be able to sell them. Comparing two extremely good lenses and trying to determine marginal differences which are extremely unlikely to be detectable in real world photography isn't a logical thing to do. Far better to look at their ergonomics and usability with the cameras they are intended to be used with.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With all due respect to Puts, he's a lens tester, not a photographer who actually uses lenses to their full potential. Nobody make 'bad' lenses these days, if they did they wouldn't be able to sell them. Comparing two extremely good lenses and trying to determine marginal differences which are extremely unlikely to be detectable in real world photography isn't a logical thing to do. Far better to look at their ergonomics and usability with the cameras they are intended to be used with.

 

You obviously didn't pay attention to my earlier post above...    https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/277519-90-apo-vs-otus-85mm-buyers-remorse/?p=3370404

 

The Puts quote was only in response to a technical issue, not a commentary on its practical implications.

 

Jeff

[cpclee]

With its wider aperture and closer minimum focusing distance (0.8 as opposed to 1.0m), the Otus can be a better choice for some people if the primary application is portraiture, especially studio portraiture. For all other applications, especially as a walk around or travel lens, I’d defintiely favor the 90AA.

 

 

 

I finally made a decision and got the 90 apo, and it is a beautiful lens, but tonight I realized that for the same price I could have gotten the Otus 85mm 1.4. I've never tried the Otus, but the images I've seen from it look superior to the 90 apo. I'm shooting on the SL, so the Otus should work fine... should I return the 90 apo and get the Otus, or are there reasons to keep it other than its smaller size?

[pgk]

You obviously didn't pay attention to my earlier post above...    https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/277519-90-apo-vs-otus-85mm-buyers-remorse/?p=3370404

 

The Puts quote was only in response to a technical issue, not a commentary on its practical implications.

 

Jeff

 

You're right. I'm just baffled by threads comparing chalk with cheese .

[ZHNL]

No intention to down grade your/my loved Leica. It is FYI. Take whatever you feel useful to decide your purchase. For close focus portrait shooting, it seems fine but then I am not a big fan of its Bokeh as well. It is another topic.

 

And picture taken is another totally different topic, any modern 85mm will do fine.  

 

I general agree that these two are really hard to put into the same category for purchase decision. For 90mm Lens, ask Summicron with/out APO between Summarit or Elmarit seems make more sense.

[michaelwj]

 

Personally I am completely sure I would very rarely use a lens as big and heavy as the Otus, but I suppose if you are also carrying the tripod necessary to get the best out of it its weight and size won't be the biggest limiting factor.

 

 

Or it will be even more of a killer because you'll be also carrying a tripod

[lct]

Using 85/1.4 manual lenses handheld without IS camera... Only Leica users or motion blur lovers can like that .

[Neko]

Using 85/1.4 manual lenses handheld without IS camera... Only Leica users or motion blur lovers can like that .

  Using wider apertures allows you to increase the speed, therefore the camera shake blur is reduced. Motion blur is related to the speed of the subject in relation with the camera and shutter speed, consequently a wider aperture in combination with faster stutter speed reduce motion blur.

 The problem of shooting wide open with fast lenses is the thinner DOF and focus accuracy.

 And since you mentioned IS, the weight, size and balance of the camera-lens combo is important shooting handheld. Leica M  is generally a light, well balance system. If I sometimes complain about the balance and weight of my Mono 1- 90APO combo I can not imagine myself shooting handheld with a big DSLR and an OTUS 85.

[lct]

Sure the wider the lens the heavier it is but i get less motion blur with big lenses on big bodies than with big lenses on small bodies generally. With some exceptions though. The tall Summicron 90/2 v2 does fine on my little Sony A7s mod for instance. At 660g it is still a much lighter lens than the 1,140g Otus though. The latter could fit a bulkier camera like the SL i guess but on a Leica M it sounds like a curious idea.

[pgk]

Using wider apertures allows you to increase the speed, therefore the camera shake blur is reduced. Motion blur is related to the speed of the subject in relation with the camera and shutter speed, consequently a wider aperture in combination with faster stutter speed reduce motion blur.

The problem of shooting wide open with fast lenses is the thinner DOF and focus accuracy.

And since you mentioned IS, the weight, size and balance of the camera-lens combo is important shooting handheld. Leica M  is generally a light, well balance system. If I sometimes complain about the balance and weight of my Mono 1- 90APO combo I can not imagine myself shooting handheld with a big DSLR and an OTUS 85.

 

 

I used to use a Canon 1DS with the 85mm f/1.2 Mk1 - these combined into a big heavy lump which I simply never got on with and finally gave up on. Focus was accurate enough but the viewing system whilst good did not really allow for as precise placement of the focus point as I often felt was needed. Consequently it was not exactly hit and miss, but failed to deliver as precise focus as I wanted in terms of exactly where I had intended the point of focus to be. It was big and heavy and this, contrary to what some seem to believe, leads to muscle fatigue and increased motion and more potential for motion blur.

 

I now use an M9 with the 75mm Summilux and its a completely different way of working. Whilst focus accuracy can still be tricky depending on subject matter, the ergonomics, size and weight make the combination far more 'usable' and this is, to me, the deal breaker. I would far more rather have something which I am happy to use than something which might deliver marginally better results but I don't enjoy using and consequently don't.

[Csacwp]

I'm confused. Regarding the 90 apo, wouldn't some softness and loss of contrast be a good thing up close for a portrait lens? It still has the better colors and corrections of an apo lens. I mean, people here go on and on about how the soft Mandler lenses are wonderful for portraits, but then they bash the 90 apo for being soft up close, despite it performing better from longer distances than any Mandler M lens. Wouldn't the 90 apo truly be the best of both worlds?

[ZHNL]

Not bash, just state fact.

 

Mandler M lenses' charming is not just soft but some signature look out of it. I am not here to comment that because that can be personal. I like 80lux personally and feel that is one of best Leica glasses along with 35lux pre-ASPH. However, if anybody claim it is sharp WO, I will say it is not just like here to state 'fact'.

 

There is no personal thing going to say 90APO has PF or not sharp at MFD.

 

As for bokeh, again, I'd say I don't like it at all, but many people may like it, I won't argue it is right or wrong as there is really no right answer as long as 'you' like it.

[pgk]

Mandler M lenses' charming is not just soft but some signature look out of it. I am not here to comment that because that can be personal. I like 80lux personally and feel that is one of best Leica glasses along with 35lux pre-ASPH. However, if anybody claim it is sharp WO, I will say it is not just like here to state 'fact'.

 

Modern lenses are technically more advanced and produce more precise images. But older Mandler designs may still produce a more preferred, aesthetically pleasing look wide open although technically they are inferior in technical terms and not as 'sharp'. Both are 'facts' (the second depending on the viewer's point of view of course) but we can back the first up with numerical analysis whilst the second is as you say a personal opinion.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[michaelwj]

I'm confused. Regarding the 90 apo, wouldn't some softness and loss of contrast be a good thing up close for a portrait lens? It still has the better colors and corrections of an apo lens. I mean, people here go on and on about how the soft Mandler lenses are wonderful for portraits, but then they bash the 90 apo for being soft up close, despite it performing better from longer distances than any Mandler M lens. Wouldn't the 90 apo truly be the best of both worlds?

The 90 APO is touted by Leica on its website as "virtually unmatched" and that "its brilliance and quality of resolution are exemplary even at full aperture." It's their technically 'best' 90mm lens, I'd expect it not to lose resolution or contrast at any point.

[lct]

The 90/2 apo is a bit softer on closeups but not enough so to be a good portrait lens IMHO, unless skin defects are the things to show. Better use lenses like 90/2 v3 or 90/2.8 v1 for that. YMMV.