Your best portrait lens in the Leica SL system

[Sohail]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Which of the Leica SL lenses do you believe render the best for portraiture (primarily headshots and quarter-up shots)? Please feel free to comment in artistic, technical or emotional terms. 

I have owned and used the 50 SL/2, 50 SL/1.4, 75/2 and mist recently the 90/2. I haven't fully made up my mind yet but for now the 50/1.4 is in the lead. 

Thoughts and images are welcome as are your impressions of other L-mount contenders.

Cheers,
Sohail

Edited October 2, 2022 by Sohail

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

I would not use a 50 for headshots or quarter up - too much distortion for me. I use both 75 and 90 summicrons, depending on circumstances - how much of the environment do I want to include, how much of the body. If I'm uncertain (e.g. stage photography) I will go wider for flexibility of framing - or just use the 24-90 VE-SL.

Both 75 and 90 are bleeding edge sharp and detailed, and have gorgeous colour with skintones on the SL2-S. But not all complexions can take that unforgiving view; at present my only alternative is the Thambar-M (sometimes a bit too much in the opposite direction) or the Apo-Macro-Elmarit-R 100 (which I have not yet used for portraits, just copying negatives). As you may have seen from another thread, I'm wondering about the Summilux-M 75, but really I'd rather have an AF lens when photographing people.

SL2-S + Summicron-SL 90

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!

SL2-S + Thambar-M

[Sohail]

Thanks Paul! 

For me it's a trade off between flatness and distortion. The SL 50/1.4 renders beautifully for me right up to the point when distortion kicks in. Here's an example of when it nails it:

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!

 

And another:

Edited October 2, 2022 by Sohail

[Sohail]

Paul, 

I'm still trying to make my mind up on the 90 SL/2. Here's one I took a few days ago:

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!

[hansvons]

8 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I would not use a 50 for headshots or quarter up - too much distortion for me

Vintage Leica 50ies tend to render pretty flat and don't distort as much as modern Leica glass. The 24-90 renders super-dimensional which makes me avoid it for portraits, even at 90mm. I don't own the 50mm Summicron SL, but from what I saw, I'd say it renders images with similar plasticity. And even the 50mm Summilux SL renders with some 3D-pop (as we can see above).

I like to have eyes and nose in focus and prefer the 50mm field of view because it still includes somewhat the environment that can be an important part of the story. Longer lenses lose that. That's why I use for portraits Leica 50mm lenses from the 80ies.

[LocalHero1953]

8 hours ago, hansvons said:

Vintage Leica 50ies tend to render pretty flat and don't distort as much as modern Leica glass. The 24-90 renders super-dimensional which makes me avoid it for portraits, even at 90mm. I don't own the 50mm Summicron SL, but from what I saw, I'd say it renders images with similar plasticity. And even the 50mm Summilux SL renders with some 3D-pop (as we can see above).

I like to have eyes and nose in focus and prefer the 50mm field of view because it still includes somewhat the environment that can be an important part of the story. Longer lenses lose that. That's why I use for portraits Leica 50mm lenses from the 80ies.

My reason for not choosing a 50 for headshot and upper body portraits has nothing to do with how a lens renders and all to do with standing closer in order to frame just the head and shoulders - a matter of perspective, not lens optics. The closer I am, the more nearer elements (perhaps noses, shoulders, hands) show up as disproportionately larger than I like. Faces appear fatter as well. It's just geometry.

[robb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’m a 75 SL fan.  I see no reason to buy the 90 to go with it because I already have the two zooms with 90 in them and a 90 m apo.

I’d like to add a 50 SL 1.4 but I have the voigtlander 50 1.0 which is very nice and a stop more out of focus background.  But I’m tempted by the look of the 1.4 SL.  The 50 SL 1.4 also has a slight weight issue vs the summicrons.

So I’d vote for the 75 as all around favorite… maybe favorite lens of all that I have and all time.

Robb

[SiggiGun]

For Studio or indoor, my favorite is 75

[hoolyproductions]

Quite rare for me to do portraits as such (would like more experience of that) but I do a lot of head and head/shoulders shots in my music photography.

My favourite: Summicron SL 75mm

My most used: Summicron SL 50mm (typically cropped to about 75 or 90 for closer portraits. I usually only take this one lens to music events unless its a special occasion or I am being paid, and it also allows me to get wider shots more than one person). I'm sure I could get by with only the 50mm but I doubt I could bring myself to sell the 75mm unless in 'dire straits'. Plus it gives me a longer lens for occasions when I am a bit further from the stage.

Also I happily use the 24-90mm SL if shooting in better light (outdoor venues/professional lighting), otherwise I use that lens more for landscape.

[BernardC]

4 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

My reason for not choosing a 50 for headshot and upper body portraits has nothing to do with how a lens renders and all to do with standing closer in order to frame just the head and shoulders - a matter of perspective, not lens optics. The closer I am, the more nearer elements (perhaps noses, shoulders, hands) show up as disproportionately larger than I like. Faces appear fatter as well. It's just geometry.

The standard portrait lens has become shorter in the past decade. Most of us will remember the 1980s fashion look which used the 180/2.8 or even 300/2.8. You needed a model that was seriously malnourished to pull-off that look, and there's been a huge backlash against that.

One benefit of the selfie generation is that people now realize that faces can look right when shot with a much shorter lens, and that these lenses are much more forgiving for people who don't have "skin and bone" faces.

I leave ultra-wides to actual selfies, but using a 50 or wider lens is no longer unheard-of for portraits. Overall it's a good thing.

[LocalHero1953]

I'm certainly not going to tell other people what lens to use for portraits - I've tried to be careful to explain what I choose and why. I'm well aware that 50 (and wider) is used for portraits, and will use it myself in the right circumstances - but I certainly notice distorting effects with a short lens close up.

[BernardC]

I didn't mean to imply that photographers "should" use a shorter lens for portraits, just that the range of lenses used has changed over the years, moving toward wider lenses. Very few mainstream photographers use a 300 anymore, and using something as wide as a 28 is not unusual. As you mentioned earlier, they key thing is perspective, which is determined by lens-to-subject distance. Focal length is just a cropping tool once you've decided how far you need to stand from your subject.

[Sohail]

The 75/2 Summicron is a great lens but if you want tighter headshots, distortion kicks in. Here's an example of where I found it excels:

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!

[tom0511]

I own and use 50/2.0, 50/1.4 and 75/2.0 as primes on the SL (as well as Sigma 135/1.8).

IMO the 50/1.4SL renders beautifully , even if the focal lengths is somewhat short for portrait, I find it is the most special SL lens for such subjects.

It reminds me of the rendering of S lenses on the S.

 

[trickness]

This is not an SL shot, although I mostly use the SL2 and have the 35 & 75 APO lenses. This is a cropped Q2M shot, just to point out that a portrait lens is whatever you take a portrait with.

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!

[LocalHero1953]

Not much comment here about other short tele L-mount primes:

• Sigma 65 f/2, 85 f/1.4 DG DN, 85 f/1.4 DG HSM, 90 f/2.8, 105 f/1.4
• Panasonic 85 f/1.8

Any experience out there?

 

 

[wizard]

vor 16 Stunden schrieb Sohail:

Here's an example of where I found it excels:

That's a wonderful shoot indeed!

[Doug Trabaris]

I own a Leica 90-280 zoom. I took this portrait at 90mm. I could have cropped it, but the subject didn’t want it.

 

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!

Edited October 4, 2022 by Doug Trabaris

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Torpille]

The VE 24-90 mm is always a very good choice for the SL601. 

If i need to be light and want a modern look, the Apo summicron-M 75mm and eventually the jewel Elmarit-m 90mm for a more classic look. 

Still light but with autofocus, the Summilux TL 35mm. A great lens. 
 

[Virob]

On 10/3/2022 at 5:53 AM, BernardC said:

I didn't mean to imply that photographers "should" use a shorter lens for portraits, just that the range of lenses used has changed over the years, moving toward wider lenses. Very few mainstream photographers use a 300 anymore, and using something as wide as a 28 is not unusual. As you mentioned earlier, they key thing is perspective, which is determined by lens-to-subject distance. Focal length is just a cropping tool once you've decided how far you need to stand from your subject.

Part of the trend to a shorter focal length for portraits may also be more portrait photographers working solo with a camera in one hand and a reflector in the other. You need to get close to your subject with that reflector.