A quick question on SL lenses

[snooper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is not a GAS thread

I started back in 1981 - in my 2Os - with a M4-P and til recently I was very happy with my M10. Then I bought a Q2 and it was a real relief: I use it manual focus, but as I don't have my 20 years old eyes anymore, the focus peaking on the Q2 makes me feel like being on a M without any doubt on the focus... Magic!

So this is the plan: I'll keep the Q2 for my everyday flight bag, and yes, I will switch from the M10 to the SL2. The Cron 35mm is secured, but I have no real clue about the choice between the 75 and the 90 for something I really do: portraits. I surely can make the difference between any 75 and any 90, but I'm asking to those of you who do know these 2 Summicron lenses which one would you recommend... 

Thanks a lot!

[AndreaP75]

Having both lenses, I can reassure you that the only reason to choose one over the other is only due to the preferred focal length. I tend to use the 75mm mostly for still life work and indoor / studio portraiture, while the 90mm goes for outdoor portraits due to slightly less DOF wide open, useful for melting a bit more potentially distracting backgrounds. When traveling, I prefer to take the 75mm. However, that’s only up to our own way of shooting. There’s not a single “technical” reason to prefer one over the other. Both lenses have fast and precise autofocus, outstanding sharpeness and contrast, for a “medium format like” rendering, zero CA or optical limitation whatsoever. 
If you’re planning to go for the 35mm, then the 75mm may be a better match for a duo-lens setup.

 

Edited November 16, 2019 by AndreaP75

[Advertisement]

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

[snooper]

Thanks a lot. This was exactly my question. Just to know if there were any technical reason to prefer one or the other..

 Merci !

[jrp]

I agree with Andrea.  Crudely if you want headshots, go for the 90mm, and if you want top 1/3 of the body, go for the 75mm.  The latter is slightly better corrected for closer focusing distances, but that's hard to see in real life.

[Stuart Richardson]

I realize you are asking primarily about the techincal difference between the SL Summicrons. They are both absolutely spectacular, and I do not think there is a significant difference other than focal length. The bodies are the same, the MTF is off the charts etc.

I am not sure if it is helpful to you, but here are my general thoughts. I think the 75mm pairs best with the 35mm in a two lens kit. If you prefer shooting with a 50mm, then the 90mm is probably a better choice. The reason being is that the 50mm is somewhat close to the 75mm, and the look can be simulated with a minor crop, something which you will have no problem doing with the 50mm APO Summicron and the 47mp SL2. The 75mm, since it is shorter, is a bit more useful as a general purpose "tight" lens. In general it will likely be a bit more versatile for portraiture or travel. But if you want reach, the 90mm is the way to go. If you are thinking more of travel, the last version of the 135mm Tele Elmarit M (46mm thread and sliding hood) is an extremely good and rather compact lens. I have used it to great effect even on the Sony A7Rii, where it was still one of my sharpest lenses. I bought mine for an embarrassingly low price of 250 dollars in 2005 or so, but I think even the newest ones go for less than 1500 dollars. I think the optical formula is the same as the old ones, which are very inexpensive. If you are just looking for a longer lens on the off hand chance you might need it, I think it is a good option. At least with my copy, it is critically sharp across the frame by 5.6 or 6.8.

 

By the way, now that I see your instagram, I might recommend the 90mm if you like to take photos out of planes...I found the 90mm Summicron M to be really useful for that. I think it is a good focal length for aerial landscapes...wide enough to get an impression of a broader landscape, but long enough to bring in the details and to exclude things like the windows and wings etc.

Edited November 17, 2019 by Stuart Richardson

[AndreaP75]

16 hours ago, snooper said:

Thanks a lot. This was exactly my question. Just to know if there were any technical reason to prefer one or the other..

 Merci !

You’re very welcome Snooper!

[snooper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, Stuart Richardson said:

By the way, now that I see your instagram, I might recommend the 90mm if you like to take photos out of planes...I found the 90mm Summicron M to be really useful for that. I think it is a good focal length for aerial landscapes...wide enough to get an impression of a broader landscape, but long enough to bring in the details and to exclude things like the windows and wings etc.

Thanks a lot Stuart.

I've always used something between 180 (the good old AIS 2.8) and 200mm or a 28 (and sometimes a 35). Anything in between was not doing justice to the landscapes as seen from above. Of course this is for daylight. 

So I'll go for the Cron 75 for the SL2, but that lens won't probably be used inflight 😂