Summilux-R 80/1.4 vs Summicron-R 90/2 direct comparison with samples?

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My opinion for the Summilux-R 80mm is : it's not ( not intended by it's creator Dr. Mandler and his team ) there for universal use.

When we need to use f/1.4 , there is no other choice ( by then of course, now it's different we have choices ) , so it was from it's time.

Not at top when used full aperture but, for me I rarely use at full aperture it shines when stop down even at f/2 (to show those subtle color hues or creamy "unsharpness"

which enhance the main subject), ...

so searching for "sharpness" may be better done with other lenses ( "apo or asph." out there ).

Sometimes, the lack of d.o.f. at f/1.4 close distance can be "seen" as lack of sharpness : same with Noctilux lenses, same misinterpretations.

 

Another "flaw" is that the 80mm has more curvature of field than 90mm R, so for this Elmarit-R 90 is much better if we need this properties.

 

For more infos on these "flaws", we can download here technical data of Summilux-R 80mm

to compare with Apo-Summicron-R 90mm

or A.M.E.R. 2.8/100mm

 

Edited March 23, 2020 by a.noctilux

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

My opinion for the Summilux-R 80mm is : it's not ( not intended by it's creator Dr. Mandler and his team ) there for universal use.

..........when stop down even at f/2 (to show those subtle color hues or creamy "unsharpness" which enhance the main subject), ...

so searching for "sharpness" may be better done with other lenses ( "apo or asph." out there ).

Sometimes, the lack of d.o.f. at f/1.4 close distance can be "seen" as lack of sharpness : same with Noctilux lenses, same misinterpretations.

Yes, I have understood it: for this reason I have searched for a lens with a great, magic, dreamy bokeh and I thought, I hoped that Summicron-R 90/2 was the little choice: it has proven itself much better than Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 ZF.2 for my porposes, on the field, with the exact situation, in the same condition, situation, but I would like even more: I understand what you described, it is the famous Leica soft, dreamy rendering at full aperture, thesame which I'm searching for: my "issue" is if the lacjk of sharpness is exaggerated, very high at f/1.4 and f/2, or no, but if you say that at f/2 there's sharpness (how I can see on the web), Summilux-R 80/1.4 is really my right lens, it should replace SUmmicron-R 90/2 for those situations.

[a.noctilux]

For what it is, not really helpful, please compare the FTM curves of the lenses that I provided links to Leica website.

I know those are not "real life use", but I understood the "flaws" of my lenses better studying those curves at aperture of interest.

 

Don't forget that there is not "magic" out of the box, we need to learn/understand those flaws or characters for each use.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

 not really helpful, please compare the FTM curves of the lenses

Generally I don't read MTF curves, I search for experience of others users, but you're right, if it could be useful to understand a little aspect of the personality of a lens.......

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Don't forget that there is not "magic" out of the box, we need to learn/understand those flaws or characters for each use.

Of course, this is a foregone conclusion, I used that term to refer to the famous particular bokeh at wide open.

[a.noctilux]

For me, Noctilux or Summilux are "average lens" with overdrive to f/1 or f/1.4 when needed.

For other apertures, they are not up to other cheaper/lighter lenses, so better choosing those smaller/lighter lens for better results.

Some other people would use only at wide open ( that is not wrong if they are happy, why not ) , I use them as "normal lens" at best aperture f/1 to F/16 ( and 1/2 settings ! )

required by the results and/or the subjects/situations, etc.

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, a.noctilux said:

Sometimes, the lack of d.o.f. at f/1.4 close distance can be "seen" as lack of sharpness : same with Noctilux lenses, same misinterpretations.

I know, for example, the dof of the Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 at f/1.4: there isn't the danger of misinterpretations. I hope:

1) At f/2 Summilux-R 80/1.4's sharpness to be the same of the Summicron-R 90/2;

2) At f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8 Summilux-R 80/1.4's bokeh to be very great, much better then Summicron-R 90/2's (I have seen it on web and I don't think that it comes from postproduction, while I don't know about sharpness.

[Guest]

I found your valuable tips on this forum and so I was able to choose Summilux-R 80/1.4 for my needs. However, I also found this, on this forum:  

However, in fact, I was impressed with this photo, on the same thread, which is done with Summicron-R 90/2:

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!

 

Also Summicron-r 90/2 seems to be soft as Summilux-R 80/1.4, a few times, after seeing some photos, like this above....... Which one should I choose? In reality I am still undecided...........

Edited March 24, 2020 by Guest

[Guest]

I found your valuable tips on this forum and so I was able to choose Summilux-R 80/1.4 for my needs. I also found this, on this forum:  

I was impressed with this photo, on the same thread: 

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!

 

Although I think I will use it little for portraits (but you never know!), However, the focus is wonderful, even if the sharpness does not seem to be very high (at least from this photo, but according to some of you, it also stands on high values already at f / 2).

 

Any possible new contributions, especially of direct comparison between the Summilux-R 80 / 1.4 and the Summicron-R 90/2, would be very welcome. I thank you again.

 

[james.liam]

What are you looking for? The R 80/M 75 Summiluxes are very specialized lenses that continue to demand a premium. you buy it for the color palette and bokeh at the widest apertures. 

If all you need in f/2, then save your money. 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, james.liam said:

you buy it for the color palette and bokeh at the widest apertures. 
If all you need in f/2, then save your money. 

Hello, thanks for your intervention. As I said at the beginning of the thread, I chose to put Leica next to Zeiss, in fact they coexist in my equipment, because I didn't like Zeiss lenses' results for some kinds of shoots, not only for portraits. For portraits, for example, when I started using Leica, I managed to get what I wanted in some untype types, results never achieved with Nikon and Zeiss, especially regarding  colors, chromatic shades, out of focus, magic, warm rendering, three-dimensional, separation of the subject, reading in the shadows. In portraits Zeiss lenses were too contrasted, not very respectful of the complexion skin, not very delicate: Leica Elmarit-R 90/2.8 I, for example, is a wonderful, great, fantastic lens for portraits:  it is clear, but not intrusive, respectful, not contrasted, delicate with the skin, it gives real colors, natural colors, three-dimensionality and reads shadows well. Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 ZF.2 and Makro-Planar 100/2 are great lenses, but very different........, Zeiss and Leica are two different schools, two different worlds, two different  conceptions. You know it. With Leica Elmarit-R I have found my portrait lens, after a long travel through Nikon AF-D 85/1.4, Nikon 105/2.5 AI-s, Nikon AF-D 105/2 Defocus Control, Nikon AF-D 135/2 Defocus Control, Zeiss Planar 85/1.4, Zeiss Makro-Planar 100/2, Zeiss APO-Sonnar 135/2 ZF.2, which are excellent lenses, but different lenses.......... 

I also entered in my equipment Leica Summicron-R 90/2, because I search sometimes for dreamlike, magical atmosphere, suspended in time atmosphere, veiled, for example when I shoot to old abandoned country houses, castles, fortresses, old abandoned ruins, old abandoned villages. Before I used for this shoots Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 and Nikon 105/2.5 AI-s, but I wasn't satisfied with the result: too cold and little dreamlike, first of all with Zeiss, also at f/1.4. When I have bought and I have tried Leica Summicron-R 90/2 I, I have compared directly it (at f/2) with the Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 (at f/1.4) for old abandoned country houses and i saw that Leica is much better: I have noticed that Summicron-R 90/2 is sharp for the subject in focus, like the Planar 85/1.4 (maybe even slightly more), but there is a great difference in the bokeh: Planar is sharp also near, back and front the subject in focus, while Summicron-R 90/2 blurs very quickly, although the Summicron was at f / 2 and the Planar at f / 1.4 !! In addition, the colors of the Summicron are warmer and more magical: I was looking for this type of rendering, therefore I am very satisfied, for this type of shots, of the SUmmicron-R 90/2 I, but I am looking for something even more accentuated for the atmosphere dreamlike focus, even softer, more delicate, imaginative. Precisely for this reason I am moving towards the Leica Summilux-R 80 / 1.4 and with this discussion I would like to ask you: the Summilux-R 80 / 1.4 retains the same type of focus as the Summicron-R 90/2, indeed it accentuates it, it is even more beautiful, more dreamlike, also thanks to the f / 1.4? Is the performance similar, but more accentuated in Summilux-R?

In my opinion, in this case, specific speech, the important thing is not if lens is f / 1.4 or f / 2, but what is the lens with the most suitable personality for my needs (I repeat: not particularly portraits, but for dreamlike, magical atmosphere, suspended in time atmosphere, veiled, for example when I shoot to old abandoned country houses, castles, fortresses, old abandoned ruins, old abandoned villages ), because, as I personally experimented and I previously said, for example, the Zeiss Planar 85 / 1.4 af / 1.4 is less soft than the Summicron-R 90/2 at f / 2 for the subject in focus and it does not start to blur immediately and magically, both in front and behind the main subject, as it does instead the Summicron-R 90/2: Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 always remains a bit too sharp and not very magical in bokeh, in out of focus areas: the Summicron-R 90/2, in direct comparison, with the right and the same subject, won against Zeiss Planar 85/1.4 and Zeiss Makro-Planar 100/2, for the colors and the bokeh, above all, which are the two most important aspects for me, but I am looking for something even stronger and I wrote this discussion to ask you if the Summilux-R 80 / 1.4 is capable of d weapons more than the Summicron-R 90/2 in these types of shots, with reference above all to bokeh and colors. 

Of course, the sample which I have posted, the picture of the asiatic girl, is of the Summicron-R 90/2 and there bokeh and colors are wonderful!!...... My question is: Would the Summilux-R 80/1.4 Would have been bigger in colors? Thanks.

 

Edited March 26, 2020 by Guest
forgotten phrase

[Guest]

Thanks.

Edited March 26, 2020 by Guest

[a.noctilux]

3 hours ago, Jedi said:

Hello,

..... My question is: Would the Summilux-R 80/1.4 Would have been bigger in colors? Thanks.

 

In my experiences with the two,

NO

As such the Summicron-R 90mm IS great lens, and the ONLY difference is f/1.4 of the Lux 80mm.

The OOF blur may be stronger at f/1.4 that means the Lux is harder to use et f/1.4.

Side note, if used at f/2 the 80 Lux would give "worse" light spots (aperture not "round") ...

 

Edited March 26, 2020 by a.noctilux

[Guest]

Thank you, a.noctilux, your contribution has been invaluable. At this point I should think about it a little longer. As for the difficulty of shooting at f / 1.4, I photograph, especially at that aperture, still, non-animated subjects and a few volts with the tripod. Summilux-R 80/1.4 in a monster: below are some photos taken by Flickr......., but if you say that the colors and the bokeh would be the same of the Summicron and without the cat's eye circle of the light points with light sources........ I trust you!

 

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!

 

[Guest]

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!

 

[Guest]

@ a.noctilux:

So do you think the Summilux-R 80 / 1.4 is much less soft at f / 2 than the Summicron-R 90/2? Is it true?

Edited March 26, 2020 by Guest

[Alon]

6 hours ago, Jedi said:

@ a.noctilux:

So do you think the Summilux-R 80 / 1.4 is much less soft at f / 2 than the Summicron-R 90/2? Is it true?

I do not agree with Arnaud  that colours of the Lux 80 are the same as for the Cron 90. They are not and will never be.

The Lux 80 is simply a better lens with it's flaws making it even more attractive for artistic photography.

You want standard pictures then stick with the Cron 90.

The Lux 80 has the famous Leica Glow and the Cron 90 does not.

Granted that I don't have the Cron 90 nor do I intend to acquire it as the Cron 90 can never do such rendering as achieved with the Lux 80:

 

 

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!

 

 

 

 

 

Stop procrastinating and get the Lux 80. You can always sell it back if you do not like it.

 

[wlaidlaw]

I prefer the APO 90 Summicron to the 80 Summilux but then I have a Summarex 85/1.5 for when I want a "bokeh master" . I love the soft swirly bokeh of the early Leica fast lenses, such as the 50/1.5 Summarit and 85/1.5 Summarex, as a result of the coma/spherical aberration of the outer areas of the lens. However I also love the pin sharpness of the 90 APO Summicron-R. I was very torn as to whether to buy the 90 APO Summicron-R or the 100 APO Macro Elmarit-R but in the end as I had found one with the ELPRO 1:1 attachment and extension tube, went for the 100mm. It is currently winging its way to me from Greg at Auckland Photo in New Zealand. 

Wilson

 

Edited March 26, 2020 by wlaidlaw

[AZN]

The 80-Lux and 100-MACRO-APO are obviously different beasts.  Something not mentioned yet is that the 100-APO at f2.8 can give beautiful results, sharp without the baroque swirl & field curvature of the 80-Lux at f2.

Which is why I got both lenses.

I never really looked at the 90-APO as the 80mm plus 100mm more than cover my needs.  Again, YMMV.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, Alon said:

I do not agree with Arnaud  that colours of the Lux 80 are the same as for the Cron 90. They are not and will never be.

The Lux 80 is simply a better lens with it's flaws making it even more attractive for artistic photography.

You want standard pictures then stick with the Cron 90.

The Lux 80 has the famous Leica Glow and the Cron 90 does not.

Granted that I don't have the Cron 90 nor do I intend to acquire it as the Cron 90 can never do such rendering as achieved with the Lux 80:

 

 

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!

 

 

 

Stop procrastinating and get the Lux 80. You can always sell it back if you do not like it.

 

 I'm about to finally convince myself to buy the Summilux-R 80 / 1.4: then, actually, to the limit; you're right. I could sell it, if I didn't like it ......, but it seemed increasingly improbable to me. I'm searching for artistic results: Summilux-R 80/1.4 is the right choice.............