Jump to content

Best M portrait lens?


Keith_W

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The way I see it, I have a few choices: 

 

- APO-Summicron-M 75mm f/2

- Summarit-M 75mm f/2.4

- APO-Summicron-M 90mm f/2

- Summarit-M 90mm f/2.4

- Macro-Elmar 90mm f/4

 

There are a few others, e.g. the new Thambar and the 75 Nocti. I will not consider either because IMO the Thambar is too much of a specialist lens, and I won't always want that look. The 75 Nocti is too expensive. 

 

Years ago, my favorite portrait lens was the Canon 85mm f/1.2L. Then I sold it, and I used the Canon 100/2.8L Macro lens for portrait work. After I moved from Canon to Sony, I started using the Sony 90/2.8 Macro. Macro lenses can be great for portraits, but too often the complaint I would get is that they are too sharp and too unflattering. Both the Canon and Sony macro lenses also had a rather clinical look. 

 

My current plan is to get the Macro-Elmar 90/4 and use that for portraits, but I am somewhat concerned that I will only replicate the experience I had with Canon and Sony macro lenses - i.e. clinical and unforgivingly sharp portraits. Given that both me and my main model (my wife) are aging and piling on the wrinkles, I don't think she would want a macro lens pointed at her. I do like the versatility of macro lenses though - not only can they be used for portraits, they can be used for ... macro. 

 

In your opinion, of the lenses I listed above - which is the best for portraits? I can afford all of them except the Nocti. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

In a dark "Leica-less" past, I used the Canon 85/1.2 as portrait lens as well. Today, I am very happy with my Summilux 75/1.4 (not on your list) which is not perfect, but it is for me.

 

It is a little on the heavy side (although I have a v1 @ only 490 gram) and not super easy to focus due to the shallow focal plane. BUT it has a nice long throw which helps to focus on those lashes and most importantly, it is not clinically crisp. That is what I absolutely adore about this lens - a very tiny bit of Leica glow (this should help with your wrinkles) and some pretty decent bokeh. I use an OUFRO if I want to get extremely close.

 

An alternative can be the 85 Summarex 1.5 but I have no experience with that lens.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the Summilux 75/1.4 is that it is only available in the secondhand market. Also, I am not so sure about older Leica lenses because they lack modern coatings. My usual habit with portrait lenses is to shoot into the light, so for me flare resistance is very important (and another reason why the Thambar is out). Would you be able to comment on the flare resistance of the Summilux 75? 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of those two I would choose 75 and/or 90 Summicron. Just IMO.

 

I happily own the 90 APO and also the 75 Summilux and they complement each other nicely for my uses. The 75mm Summilux I own does flare but I would say in normal circumstances, that is the more extreme light, low and right into the lens - but it has a very nice effect that I personally like and use and I find it controllable. If I don't want the flare, a slight shift in position removes it entirely. I've never found it to be a problem. The one thing I would say is the colour of the Summilux is different enough to notice, muted and cyan by bias. I happen to like it's palette though. But mine isn't coded, when I select it manually in camera it is very clean. But in general I have it turned off because I actually like its natural state. I will at times turn it on. the Summilux has a very nice look when converted to black and white, it's very rich. It's probably the lens I reach for if I'm certainly going to shoot B&W because I like the way it looks.

 

The benefit of the Summilux is it is sharp/soft wide open which some people prefer for portraits but razor sharp when you need it stopped down a little.

 

The 90mm has a different affect on facial features and I need both for what I do. The 90mm APO is a stunning lens. The colour, contrast, bokeh, sharpness, everything is very nice. not that long ago it was considered a sort of bench marks for short teles.

 

The 75mm APO-Summicron is a stunning lens too, very under-rated I think. But I found the focus throw too small and actually a bit of a hindrance. It was one of the first things I noticed when trying it. I found it fiddly. Especially with portraits the longer throw is very useful and the Summilux is, I think, very good in this regard.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your list of choices did not include what may be the best of two worlds, the pre-asph. Summicron-M 90mm f2. That lens has two personalities, it is somewhat creamy (a.k.a forgiving) at full aperture to suit your portrait needs, but renders images beautifully sharp and contrasty from f2.8 - 4 onwards. Late examples have up to date coatings and should not be more flare prone than other, more modern Leica lenses. No macro capabilities though.

 

The current 90mm apo lens is very sharp right from f2 (as is the 90mm Macro f4).

 

Andy

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

"The way I see it" is good description. The way I see it - any 50mm M lens (I'm aware of) on any M camera is great portrait lens. And last lens which I would use for portrait is with Macro label on it. Macro is not for portraits. And 90mm is "for passport" lens. 

IMO. :)

 

BTW, I never used "portrait" lens on Canon. I had them, sold them, 28-75 and 70-200 does the better job for me. If I need extreme bokeh, it is 200 and f4. And good portraits, IMO, never come with f1.2. :)

Edited by Ko.Fe.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it, I have a few choices: 

- APO-Summicron-M 75mm f/2

- Summarit-M 75mm f/2.4

- APO-Summicron-M 90mm f/2

- Summarit-M 90mm f/2.4

- Macro-Elmar 90mm f/4 [...]

My current plan is to get the Macro-Elmar 90/4 and use that for portraits, but I am somewhat concerned that I will only replicate the experience I had with Canon and Sony macro lenses - i.e. clinical and unforgivingly sharp portraits. [...]

In your opinion, of the lenses I listed above - which is the best for portraits? [...]

 

None really if you're after a "forgiving" lens. My own favorites are a bit soft at full aperture and plenty sharp one or two stops above which allows to get more or less sharpness at will: Elmar 90/4, Elmarit 90/2.8 v1, Summicron 90/2 v3, Summilux 75/1.4 v3.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

None really if you're after a "forgiving" lens. My own favorites are a bit soft at full aperture and plenty sharp one or two stops above which allows to get more or less sharpness at will: Elmar 90/4, Elmarit 90/2.8 v1, Summicron 90/2 v3, Summilux 75/1.4 v3.

+1!

Have a good day!

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

For years I used a collapsible 90/f4 Elmar for family portraits. I tried the 90 Summicron which was too big and heavy, and these days am enjoying an old 90/4 rigid Elmar often in this role, which I like even better than the 90/2.8 Elmarit. What I often found in the past was as lens design became increasingly more sophisticated, that generally, the central areas of greatest sharpness became more clinical in portrait work. Good for some, but not my cup of tea. Although you have the money to spend on more sophisticated lenses, I'm not sure you would achieve your stated "look" goal. Personally I'd consider some of the older designs and "age away" those wrinkles. That might include some of the LTM lenses with an M adapter.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Think would be nice to hear what defines a good portrait lens. Not a subject I do, but would love to learn.

 

As I said above there's no 'best', or good for that matter. It depends what YOU want. Sharp, contrasty, clinical, soft, dreamy, shallow dof etc.

 

Generally people like to be flattered so the less clinical lenses are more suited to portrait work where the intention is to try and flatter. A documentary photographer on the other hand might want a gritty 'warts and all' rendering.

 

Of course more importantly for portrait work is the lighting.

Edited by earleygallery
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said above there's no 'best', or good for that matter. It depends what YOU want. Sharp, contrasty, clinical, soft, dreamy, shallow dof etc.

 

Generally people like to be flattered so the less clinical lenses are more suited to portrait work where the intention is to try and flatter. A documentary photographer on the other hand might want a gritty 'warts and all' rendering.

 

Of course more importantly for portrait work is the lighting.

Hi Earleygallery!

Pls. share your favourite lens for portrait!

Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

APO 90&75 are my best portrait lenses ever, equally perfect for landscape, building, architecture details & even street photo.

You didn't mentioned Summarit 75&90 f/2.5 (previous, but also very good version). Small, light, cheaper than f/2.4, but with longer minimum focusing distance.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the Summilux 75/1.4 is that it is only available in the secondhand market. Also, I am not so sure about older Leica lenses because they lack modern coatings. My usual habit with portrait lenses is to shoot into the light, so for me flare resistance is very important (and another reason why the Thambar is out). Would you be able to comment on the flare resistance of the Summilux 75? 

 

 

Why is the availability on the second hand market a problem ? A few years ago, I have been able to find one in like new state with box and papers - I am sure there are some good examples available in the market today with people trading up for the new Nocti ?

 

I concur with Paul's comments with regards to flare. I like the color rendering of the Summilux very much and a slight change to your position is ofter sufficient to eliminate any flare. I would say that it it not more prone to flare than my 90 Cron (non APO)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your list of choices did not include what may be the best of two worlds, the pre-asph. Summicron-M 90mm f2. That lens has two personalities, it is somewhat creamy (a.k.a forgiving) at full aperture to suit your portrait needs, but renders images beautifully sharp and contrasty from f2.8 - 4 onwards. Late examples have up to date coatings and should not be more flare prone than other, more modern Leica lenses. No macro capabilities though.

 

The current 90mm apo lens is very sharp right from f2 (as is the 90mm Macro f4).

 

Andy

I love this lens, and it really is as Andy described it.  Find a later one and I think it will do for you what you are looking for at a very reasonable price!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...