75 or 90?

[m9photo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For those who have both or experienced shooting on both, which do you prefer? I currently only have 50 SL. 

[Gobert]

For which kind of photografy?

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

You can't answer that question without saying what you want it for.*

For me: I tend to use a 90mm for upper body portraits. I would use the 75 for full figure and environmental portraits, but also for a wider range of subjects: 75 is the FL that focuses in on a specific part of a scene (the bit you're actually looking at), where a 50 might give you the whole scene. A 35 or wider will give you the scene plus a lot of background that you never knew you needed but sometimes adds to the final image.

I have the 90SL because I only want it for people and portraits. I also have the Apo-Summicron-M 75 which spent a lot of time on my M240 when I had it. I liked it so much that I can't steel myself to sell it, even though it is little used - I tell myself that it is my portrait lens for the CL, even though the 60TL does a more than adequate job already, and with AF.**

 

* This statement should be automatically posted by forum software to 90% of the questions posted on the forum😉

** Which goes to show that photographers aren't as rational as my previous comment suggest you should be!

Edited August 6, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[jrp]

If you already have the 50 then go for the 90 and get the 75 later, after you have the 35.

[Agent M10]

I have the 50Lux, the 75SL, and the 90SL. I decided to take just the 50LX and 90SL on my last working trip. The 50LX hardly left the bag. I just can’t get used to the weight. I used the 90SL extensively, but found that it was somewhat limiting indoors. The 75SL would have been fine. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Agent M10

[m9photo]

2 hours ago, Gobert said:

For which kind of photografy?

Mostly portrait and or street.

[Likaleica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I faced this same dilemma but decided on the 75.  It's a great focal length and you can zoom with your feet if need be.  And if you can't change your position, it's so sharp and the files are so good that you can crop to the 90 FOV.

[didier]

In my view, it depends on the use and on the Lens your are considering.

For portraits, nothing can beat the M summilux 75; I use it even more since I got the SL. The paintbrush like rendering is unique.

I had the opportunity to test the SL75 which is amazingly sharp and clear : wonderful lens, great for any kind of use, but not as perfect for portraits as the lux 75. Bokeh can be a little bit nervous compared to the lux.

I am a 50 person and shoot 80% of my pictures with 50s. I like the 75 focal length as it is gets me a little closer.

A 90 is a small tele and is more specialized in my opinion. For street, I think the 90 can be difficult to use.

I have the M Apo-Asph 90 which I find to be in the same league as the 50 APO and 75SL. Love its rendering and sharpness, but it gets less use than my 75.

 

Didier 

[thighslapper]

I've never understood 50mm as the 'normal' human eye focal length ..... to me 75 has always seemed more in keeping with the perspective that my eye regards as normal. The SL+75 is my usual default combo when I'm out and about and makes you think more critically about composition and framing. The S1R + 75/2 SL produces the most detailed and beautiful images that I have ever seen from a FF digital. 

[scott kirkpatrick]

The 4 micron pixels in the new generation of sensors, coupled with the Karbe f/2 designs that are sharp across the field  ("diffraction limited starting at wide open") does give us the potential to crop stuff down to the FOV that would otherwise require a longer focus lens.  So maybe a Q2 with its 28 and the coming SL APO 50 will meet all requirements, with pixels enough to suit most of us even when cropped two lens-size steps.

On the other hand, my Summilux 90R doesn't crop well, because it tends to render the center and the edges very differently.  It's just what it is, and I like it that way.  The same is true of most other fast lenses. 

[AndreaP75]

I find the SL 75mm a bit more versatile,  I’m using it with great results on both still life and environmental portraiture. On the street, it better complements the 35mm focal lenght, which is a favorite of mine. I would take the SL 90mm for specific and controlled portrait work, or to complement the 50mm FOV.

Both lenses are outstanding, from bokeh rendering, micro-contrast, close focus capabilities. I can’t find any reason to prefer one to the other apart from the slightly different FOV.

[scott kirkpatrick]

We all seem to be able to adapt to whatever we like.  When I started out wide angles on an M2 and a 105/2.5 on a Nikon F both seemed to be perfect for their respective cameras.  The 50 /2.0 Macro that Olympus shipped first with it's E-1 DSLR had the same feel to me as the 105 that I remembered from the F.  I guess I adapt to the lens and camera rather than looking for the ultimate. 

[prismstorm]

On 8/7/2019 at 4:27 AM, m9photo said:

For those who have both or experienced shooting on both, which do you prefer? I currently only have 50 SL. 

I also own the Summilux-SL 50/1.4, and I would recommend going for the APO 90/2, so you would have an appreciable difference between the two focal lengths. For portraiture, the 90mm also gives more compression and bokeh at f/2 than the 75mm. Lastly, you can also save the 75mm focal length for the Noctilux 75/1.25

[lx1713]

I have been having a great time with my 24-90 and found it indispensable but I got myself the 90 because I get to stand off further for the certain types of event situations where flash isn't easy. The 24-90's OIS has been great at keeping the need for the 90mm f2 at bay for a long time. For certain types of portraiture, the 90mm is perfect but like other mentions, the 75mm is just a little difference in distance.

[prismstorm]

8 hours ago, lx1713 said:

I have been having a great time with my 24-90 and found it indispensable but I got myself the 90 because I get to stand off further for the certain types of event situations where flash isn't easy. The 24-90's OIS has been great at keeping the need for the 90mm f2 at bay for a long time. For certain types of portraiture, the 90mm is perfect but like other mentions, the 75mm is just a little difference in distance.

I think a APO 90/2 would be a good light and compact complement to your 24-90, and the difference in speed is greatest at 90mm when pitting the zoom against the SL primes (90/4 vs 90/2, two full stops), just got to watch out for any potential camera shake now that OIS is gone with the prime.  

[LocalHero1953]

7 hours ago, prismstorm said:

I think a APO 90/2 would be a good light and compact complement to your 24-90, and the difference in speed is greatest at 90mm when pitting the zoom against the SL primes (90/4 vs 90/2, two full stops), just got to watch out for any potential camera shake now that OIS is gone with the prime.  

It's a frustrating choice. The 90-280 has OIS and, at 90, is f2.8, which is 'wide enough' for most portraits for me. But it is definitely large and heavy. The 24-90 is smaller and lighter, but is f/4 at 90, and I would like a wider aperture. The Summicron 90SL is small enough and wide enough, but has no OIS, and I have lost a few good shots to camera shake while I've been learning to use it.

My fantasy camera: a Leica Q with Summicron (or Summilux) 90mm lens, designed specifically for portraiture - optimised IS, optimised Face/Eye AF, leaf shutter, built-in wireless trigger........we can but dream.

Edited August 12, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[Jon Warwick]

On 8/7/2019 at 10:39 AM, thighslapper said:

The S1R + 75/2 SL produces the most detailed and beautiful images that I have ever seen from a FF digital. 

I was wondering if you (or anyone else round here) has used the SL Summicron primes on the S1R, specifically tripod mounted in “high resolution mode”, specifically for a landscape or similar subject that contain natural elements like trees, fine branches, leaves etc. I’d be really interested to see how that combo looks (for that subject matter) at its native output of approx 55” at 300dpi.

[CharlesL]

On 8/7/2019 at 1:39 AM, thighslapper said:

I've never understood 50mm as the 'normal' human eye focal length ..... to me 75 has always seemed more in keeping with the perspective that my eye regards as normal. ...

When I mostly used a Fuji X-Pro APS_C, I found 50mm lenses (hence 75 field of view) very pleasant, not generally cramped. But on full frame I much prefer 50mm to 75mm.

Some people say the true normal field of view is at 43mm. The Leica/Minolta 40mm f/2 lens makes a good argument for that.

 

[prismstorm]

16 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

It's a frustrating choice. The 90-280 has OIS and, at 90, is f2.8, which is 'wide enough' for most portraits for me. But it is definitely large and heavy. The 24-90 is smaller and lighter, but is f/4 at 90, and I would like a wider aperture. The Summicron 90SL is small enough and wide enough, but has no OIS, and I have lost a few good shots to camera shake while I've been learning to use it.

My fantasy camera: a Leica Q with Summicron (or Summilux) 90mm lens, designed specifically for portraiture - optimised IS, optimised Face/Eye AF, leaf shutter, built-in wireless trigger........we can but dream.

You really hit the nail on the head Paul .... that is my exact rationale too, and why I am still struggling over these decisions 😅 I found the 90-280 better at 90mm than the 24-90, and it's in between the APO 90/2 and 24-90 in terms of f/stop, has OIS, plus it gives the flexibility of longer focal lengths than 90mm, so I've been sitting pretty with only the 90-280 to take care of all my telephoto portrait needs for almost 18 months now ....

If I do get the APO 90/2, it will be a luxury, 'unnecessary' purchase, since given that it's a prime it will never replace the 90-280 for many shootings scenarios, and of course the lack of OIS does make it more challenging to get sharp shots than when using the stabilized zoom before. No doubt the optics, the size and the weight are enticing, I am just still evaluating its uses given that I will never let the 90-280 go, and will actively have to seek out photo opportunities where the 90/2 SL will win usage over the zoom.  

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[oudjunk]

I have owned the summicron 90 pre-asph V1 and V3, summarit 75 f2.5 and summilux 75 v2 

For me if you have 50 mm i think 90 mm should be better. 

if you do not have 50, i think 75 is the best choice 

for what i like 35 and 75 , 50 and 90  

however, these focal length for me isn't different too much. but from my used in the past i really like the summicron 90 v3 more than others. 

because the bokeh and the reasonable price are the key that make me like it. 

if the money is not factor i would pick the summilux 75 for sure (it's best lens in low light when compare with other lens that i have owned).