Sohail Posted January 9, 2020 Share #1 Posted January 9, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi all, I've been experimenting a lot with my 75 Summicron-SL (which I own). I'm very happy with it, but (much to my peril) I'm also very impressed with some of the shots I took with the 90 Summicron-SL while I was loaned it by the Leica Store. Would it be total madness to get both? Is there much difference in the perspective of these two focal lengths? I took the shot below with the 90 Summicron-SL and love how it renders. Is this a 90mm perspective or are we simply talking about moving a step or two closer? Your thoughts would be warmly appreciated. Cheers. Sohail Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/305211-rationalizing-a-7590-combo/?do=findComment&comment=3888377'>More sharing options...
Sohail Posted January 9, 2020 Author Share #2 Posted January 9, 2020 Here's another with the 90 Summicron-SL: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/305211-rationalizing-a-7590-combo/?do=findComment&comment=3888378'>More sharing options...
m9photo Posted January 9, 2020 Share #3 Posted January 9, 2020 If you have the funds, why not? you only live once! 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sohail Posted January 9, 2020 Author Share #4 Posted January 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, m9photo said: If you have the funds, why not? you only live once! Why not? Funds aside, if they end up serving the same purpose and the differences are minimal, it's a bit pointless, no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 9, 2020 Share #5 Posted January 9, 2020 Stepping closer will change the perspective - a bit. But wouldn't the money be far better spent on a photographic trip, workshop, etc.? A crop is cheaper than a lens... 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
m9photo Posted January 9, 2020 Share #6 Posted January 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, Sohail said: Why not? Funds aside, if they end up serving the same purpose and the differences are minimal, it's a bit pointless, no? It's totally different, yes you may step closer to get 90 perspective with 75 lens on hands, but it will still give you different look. Do you feel like tighter crop? then 90 is your better lens, if you like less the 75 is your lens. My current primes (Canon) consist of 35/50/85/135, so in Leica SL , if money allows me, I'd get 35/50/90 or if only two lenses 50/90 or 35/75. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem331 Posted January 9, 2020 Share #7 Posted January 9, 2020 Advertisement (gone after registration) 14 minutes ago, m9photo said: It's totally different, yes you may step closer to get 90 perspective with 75 lens on hands, but it will still give you different look. It gives you a different look precisely because you have changed the perspective (point of view). Perspective is independent of focal length. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 9, 2020 Share #8 Posted January 9, 2020 You might borrow the lens again and shoot the same subject(s), at the same distance(s), (perspective will thereby remain constant) and then crop the 75 in PP to the same FOV to compare. I think you at least started with the right one of the two... you can crop 75 to equivalent FOV, not the other way around. And I like that the 75 has a much more recessed front element for safer use without hood or filter. Only you can decide. I have the 75, but supplemented it with the 24-90 for added flexibility. If I ever add another prime, it would be the 35, which can be cropped to 50 FOV... and Karbe explains why it’s the best performing SL Summicron. Jeff 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sohail Posted January 10, 2020 Author Share #9 Posted January 10, 2020 6 hours ago, jaapv said: Stepping closer will change the perspective - a bit. But wouldn't the money be far better spent on a photographic trip, workshop, etc.? A crop is cheaper than a lens... I don't think stepping closer changes the perspective of a 90mm. It's still a 90mm lens with a 27.3° angle of view. The question is whether the perspective of a 75 or 90 is noticeably different as to justify getting both, and if you were to, could you envisage scenarios in which each could be used? Leica rationalises this by suggesting that 90mm is the "classic portrait lens" and the 75mm is a "universal lens for any situation" for a "street, portrait, or whatever catches your eye". I'm not sure that helps much in my case. I can't imagine street/travel scenarios where I'd want to pack a 75 and a 90. On the question of money, it depends where you are on your photographic journey and how many kidneys you have to spare Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sohail Posted January 10, 2020 Author Share #10 Posted January 10, 2020 5 hours ago, Artin said: I would say if you crop the 75 the perspective would be the same , Lot of money for it I would look into that 135 from sigma it looks impressive from the images I have seen Agreed! A lot of money. Personally, I'm not a big fan of longer telephoto lens. For portraiture, It gives you an overly compressed look where the subjects can look like cardboard cutouts. At least for me and my tastes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 10, 2020 Share #11 Posted January 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Sohail said: I don't think stepping closer changes the perspective of a 90mm. Wrong... the ONLY thing that changes perspective is subject to camera distance. This dictates the relationship between near and far objects. Field of view is a different concept. There are thousands of references available. Better yet, read my prior post and do your own test using 75 and 90 lenses from the SAME location, crop the 75 to the equivalent 90 field of view, and compare near/far subject relationships. Jeff 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sohail Posted January 10, 2020 Author Share #12 Posted January 10, 2020 4 hours ago, Jeff S said: You might borrow the lens again and shoot the same subject(s), at the same distance(s), (perspective will thereby remain constant) and then crop the 75 in PP to the same FOV to compare. I think you at least started with the right one of the two... you can crop 75 to equivalent FOV, not the other way around. And I like that the 75 has a much more recessed front element for safer use without hood or filter. Only you can decide. I have the 75, but supplemented it with the 24-90 for added flexibility. If I ever add another prime, it would be the 35, which can be cropped to 50 FOV... and Karbe explains why it’s the best performing SL Summicron. Jeff Thanks Jeff. Not to sound like a snob, but I'm not big on cropping for perspective. For aspect ratio, fine. The other factor of course is the distance from the subject. I couldn't have got the shots if I'd been closer. I'd have interfered with the subjects' activity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sohail Posted January 10, 2020 Author Share #13 Posted January 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Jeff S said: Wrong... the ONLY thing that changes perspective is subject to camera distance. This dictates the relationship between near and far objects. Field of view is a different concept. There are thousands of references available. Better yet, read my prior post and do your own test using 75 and 90 lenses from the SAME location, crop the 75 to the equivalent 90 field of view, and compare near/far subject relationships. Jeff We might have to agree to disagree on this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 10, 2020 Share #14 Posted January 10, 2020 6 minutes ago, Sohail said: Not to sound like a snob, but I'm not big on cropping for perspective. You wouldn’t sound like a snob; you’d just be wrong. One crops to reduce field of view, not perspective. Move your feet for the latter. Jeff 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sohail Posted January 10, 2020 Author Share #15 Posted January 10, 2020 Just now, Jeff S said: You wouldn’t sound like a snob; you’d just be wrong. One crops to reduce field of view, not perspective. Move your feet for the latter. Jeff That I'm not big on cropping is a personal view. I'm not sure how you can be wrong on a question of taste. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 10, 2020 Share #16 Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Sohail said: That I'm not big on cropping is a personal view. I'm not sure how you can be wrong on a question of taste. You said that you’re not a fan of cropping “for perspective”. Of course not, because that’s not possible. You can crop to change field of view, not perspective. If you use a 90mm lens, you’ll likely stand farther away from your subject when shooting than if you use 75mm. . It’s that change in distance that changes perspective, not the focal length, and not cropping. Jeff Edited January 10, 2020 by Jeff S Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sohail Posted January 10, 2020 Author Share #17 Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) 🙄 I'm not big on cropping for the perspective you'd get from the field of view of a given focal length. And I'll leave it at that. Edited January 10, 2020 by Sohail Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted January 10, 2020 Share #18 Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) One thing that has not been considered is this - a 90mm f/2 lens is going to give you a more shallow depth of field than a 75mm f/2 lens will, particularly at f/2. The 90mm will give you a little more reach, allowing you to not step too closely and disturb your subject(s) or alter their actions by your presence. The 75mm lens will be less of a challenge to use hand held at f/2 in low light situations. The 90mm f/2 will require a higher shutter speed to prevent blur do to camera or subject movement. These are all things to consider. Like you, I too am loathe to crop; it defeats the purpose of having a full frame camera with a high megapixel count. A tiny bit of cropping to clean up an image's edges is one thing but lopping off 1/3 to 1/2 of the image in post processing as a substitute for getting closer to your subject is counterproductive. Lastly, if you can function well with one mid-range telephoto lens and still get the images you are after without making large crops in post processing, that may be the way to go. I have the 90mm Summicron APO for my M kit. It serves me well but once in a while I find myself wanting the 75/2 or the 75/2.4 for a given situation. I do think jaapv has a valid point in his observation, "... wouldn't the money be far better spent on a photographic trip, workshop, etc.?..." But then on the other hand - if you have money to burn, get the 90mm Summicron to go with your 75 Summicron and take both on a multi-week, multi-nation photographic odyssey. After all, we only live once. 😎 Edited January 10, 2020 by Herr Barnack Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
setuporg Posted January 10, 2020 Share #19 Posted January 10, 2020 I have both M 75 and 90 Crons, and also a 75 Lux for that Mandler magic. I rarely use the 90, mostly for speakers far away. I also rarely use the 75mm but more often than 90. They certainly have uses. Most importantly you have to scratch that itch so do get it and then see how you use them!:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sohail Posted January 10, 2020 Author Share #20 Posted January 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Herr Barnack said: Like you, I am loathe to crop; it defeats the purpose of having a full frame camera with a higher megapixel count. A tiny bit of cropping to clean up an image's edges is one thing but lopping off 1/3 to 1/2 of the image in post processing as a substitute for getting closer to your subject is counterproductive. Thanks Herr! Some great points about blur, depth of field and interfering with the action. I completely agree on cropping. What's more, it defeats the purpose of buying an expensive prime lens at a given focal length. On the money point, there are lots of imponderables, but money aside, I can't see a case for packing a 75 and 90 on a trip. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now