Advice needed on choice between 75 & 90

[wooferdog]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi to all , I would apreciate some advice on choosing between the 75 cron & 90 cron. I do notice that the 75 allows you to get a little closer ... I think deep down , I'm concerned about not having a long tele for the M8 , and that may be clouding my judgement (against the 75)

 

any comments especially from those with experience with both would be welcome.

[Advertisement]

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

[giordano]

Hi to all , I would apreciate some advice on choosing between the 75 cron & 90 cron. I do notice that the 75 allows you to get a little closer ... I think deep down , I'm concerned about not having a long tele for the M8 , and that may be clouding my judgement (against the 75)

 

any comments especially from those with experience with both would be welcome.

 

Go with the field of view you prefer. Any other differences between the lenses are insignificant in comparison.

[j. borger]

Downside of the 75 are the inaccurate frame-lines .... which are above that coupled to the 50mm framelines ..... a confusing combination!!

[zapp]

Hi to all , I would apreciate some advice on choosing between the 75 cron & 90 cron. I do notice that the 75 allows you to get a little closer ... I think deep down , I'm concerned about not having a long tele for the M8 , and that may be clouding my judgement (against the 75)

 

any comments especially from those with experience with both would be welcome.

 

There have been 1 or 2 discussion lately on the same topic. As the field of view is narrower on the M8 than we are used to, the 75 resembles a 90 protrait lens. This is the longer end for portraits for me. For portraits most people owning an M8 may choose between 50 and 75. Trouble starts when assuming that one day a full frame Mx will show up. In such case the 75/90 are again portrait lenses while the 50 is not really. It is tricky.

[luigi bertolotti]

George, are you sure you want to go with the Summicrons ? Do not forget that in next weeks you can buy 75+90 Summarits for the price of one Summicron or so...

[digibob]

Hi, a couple of days ago i furthered my lens mania with a 90/2 appo sumicron (uncoded) nice reduction in price from the dealer ! A very pleasing lens which is pushing me further in opening possible uses.

i also have a CV75 / 50 1.4 lux and of the three this seems to be my choice,currently.

My preference's tends towards wide with the wate or long with the 90. The CV 75 doesn't have the punch of the 90 and the foreshortening which i appreciate ; but probably not a fair comparison to the 75 cron.

Horses for courses - good luck with the choosing rf.

A couple of jpg's from the 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!

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I like the combination I have: Summilux 75 and Summicron AA 90. The focal lengths may be close, but the character is widely apart. A bargain-used 90 mm lens of very high quality to consider is of course the 2.8/90 in its later configuration.

[Woofer]

Thank you all for the imput .... I'l think about those new lens about to be releaed ... I've very good things about the 75 lux ... but a little on the large size for me.

 

Does anyone use both the 90 & 75 Cron ? or is it a case of one or the other

 

Regards

 

George

[dspeltz]

I do use both (cron). I use the 75 in combination with the 28 or 35. I take the 90 when I am doing landscape and rarely use it for people. They are very different uses. Weight is an issue, btw. The lux is too heavy for me.

 

90 for landscape stuff, 75 for people stuff.

[usefeet]

Consider the current 90/f2.8 lens. This lens is small, light, cheaper than the summicron, and performs beautifully.

 

I traded in my large & heavy 90 Summicron for this small performance lens because of its size, ..makes it attractive to carry and not leave at home.

(I also have the 75/f2.0 asph, but find both focal lengths useable)

 

Whatever you choose, consider getting the 1.25 magnifier (eyepiece) too!

[lars_bergquist]

I noticed that you were interested in the fact that you could get "a little closer" with the 75. But consider that because of the wider field of view, you MUST actually come a little closer in order to have the same reproduction ratio.

 

Your choice must I think be based on what other lenses you have. The maximum practical difference, I think, is that between 35 and 90mm (1:2.6) or 28 and 75mm (1:2.7). But 35 and 75mm (1:2.14) is also a viable combination, as is 28 and 50 (1:1.82).

 

I agree that the new 90 and 75mm Summarit lenses are worth investigating when they become available. Cosina/Voigtländer do however offer excellent 75 and 90mm lenses, and for the price of one Leica 90 or 75mm Summicron ASPH lens you can probably buy both a Summarit and a CV lens!

 

Any 135mm lens does of course become a moderately long tele on the M8. The lack of appropriate finder frame does mean however that the only viable alternative is the old 135mm Elmarit with the "goggles"; this uses the 90mm frame. This until Leica relent and bring out a goggled version of the Apo-Telyt.

 

The old man from the Age of Film

[sean_reid]

One of the best things about a 90, on the M8, vs. a 75, is that the 90 mm frame lines are more accurate. They're set at one meter instead of .7 meters and that makes a difference.

 

As for the CV 75 showing less "punch" that's just a contrast difference. Lower contrast can be seen as a con or a pro.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[carstenw]

Lars, due to the differing near focus limits, the 75 Cron gets 1:7 and the 90 Cron 1:9, IIRC.

 

The 90 Cron/Apo-Cron are very close to the 75 Lux in size. If size is important, the 75 Cron is the best.

[jaapv]

Any 135mm lens does of course become a moderately long tele on the M8. The lack of appropriate finder frame does mean however that the only viable alternative is the old 135mm Elmarit with the "goggles"; this uses the 90mm frame. This until Leica relent and bring out a goggled version of the Apo-Telyt.

 

The old man from the Age of Film

I've posted before: the 135/4.0 can be made to bring up the 90 mm frames on the M8 - which turn out to be surprisingly usable

[Joe Mondello]

A radical suggestion . . .

 

For $300USD you can buy either the CV 75 or 90 -- $600 for the pair!

 

I have the CV 75 and it is a spectacular bargain IMO.

 

Try these 2 and you may find that you will like one FL better than the other and save a ton on the 'Crons by buying one instead of two!

 

Here's one from the 75 Heliar 2.5

 

[Guest tummydoc]

One of the best things about a 90, on the M8, vs. a 75, is that the 90 mm frame lines are more accurate. They're set at one meter instead of .7 meters and that makes a difference.

 

A very small one. A 90 has an angle of coverage on the M8 of 20 degrees vs a 75 whose angle on an M8 is 25 degrees. Meaning, for the same composition with the 75 you would need to move in 25% closer than the 90. The 75's frame-lines are 'set' at 30% closer than the 90's, so the discrepancy is a mere 5%. If the 75 frame-lines show significantly less of the actual capture @ infinity than is the case with the 90, it is not due to the lines being 'set' for each lens' respective close-focus limit, but more likely that the 75 frame-lines are simply more under-sized, period. Perhaps (my theory, completely un-substantiated) this was a result of trying to visually separate the 75 brackets from the 50 frame-lines. In that case, I believe it would've been better all-round had they instead enlarged the 50 frame a tad

[sean_reid]

A very small one. A 90 has an angle of coverage on the M8 of 20 degrees vs a 75 whose angle on an M8 is 25 degrees. Meaning, for the same composition with the 75 you would need to move in 25% closer than the 90. The 75's frame-lines are 'set' at 30% closer than the 90's, so the discrepancy is a mere 5%. If the 75 frame-lines show significantly less of the actual capture @ infinity than is the case with the 90, it is not due to the lines being 'set' for each lens' respective close-focus limit, but more likely that the 75 frame-lines are simply more under-sized, period. Perhaps (my theory, completely un-substantiated) this was a result of trying to visually separate the 75 brackets from the 50 frame-lines. In that case, I believe it would've been better all-round had they instead enlarged the 50 frame a tad

 

Actually, the difference is quite noticeable. But let me not interfere with the pleasure people take in their math work. I'm learning that some really do prefer math to what they can actually see. The 90 frame lines give one a fairly good sense of where the picture edges will fall, not perfect but useful, whereas the 75 lines are way off at most distances.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Eoin]

I would agree with Sean here, IMO based on my use of the 75 Summicron and 90 Summicron pre Asph the 75 frame lines are just not accurate in any way at any distance.

 

With regard to the 2 lenses, the 75 Summicron is a lovely compact & lighter lens when compared to the 90. However the image sharpness, contrast or saturation seems almost constant with the 75 no matter what aperture is used. It is a stellar performer of a lens, almost on the point of brutal clarity and sharpness in it's rendering. If that's what you want, it's the lens for you.

 

I've come to understand the 90 while also having excellent sharpness at f:/2 seems to have slightly less contrast or micro contrast giving a slightly softer yet still sharp image. This can be beneficial for portrait type photography and seems to be present in varying degrees up to f:/4.0. There after the 90 pre asph is on par with the 75 in terms of contrast and sharpness IMO. You get 2 lenses for the price of 1 and 2nd hand 90 pre Asph's last version can be found for $500 - $650 in good condition.

 

Without a doubt the 75 Summicron Asph is a stunning lens with a strong personality. Sharp, light, quick focus, lots of punch and eye splitting detail. I have a love hate relationship with this lens, I love the ease of use but find it to stark to create mood in portraits. The 90 pre asph however despite it's slightly larger size offers 2 lenses in 1, like the 75 Lux can give softer tones wide open and match the 75 Cron after f:/4 all for a fraction of the price.... as they say the choice is yours. Both will not disappoint.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[photolandscape]

Consider the current 90/f2.8 lens. This lens is small, light, cheaper than the summicron, and performs beautifully.

 

I traded in my large & heavy 90 Summicron for this small performance lens because of its size, ..makes it attractive to carry and not leave at home.

(I also have the 75/f2.0 asph, but find both focal lengths useable)

 

Whatever you choose, consider getting the 1.25 magnifier (eyepiece) too!

 

I'd second this. The magnifier eyepiece really comes in handy, and don't forget on the M8 due to sensor size, a 90 is the equivalent of 120mm, so it can pull in distant objects nicely.

[Guest tummydoc]

Clearly what I wrote did not dispute that the observed difference may be quite different. I merely proved that your stated reason for the observed difference is erroneous. But let me not interefere with the pleasure people take in asserting that math should be an elective