Summilux 80

[mauriziobozzi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello everyone. For a year (even more....) I've been thinking about getting a Summilux 80'mm, which will be my favorite lens for general use. I wanted to ask everyone what is the substantial difference between 11880 and 11881. I have the lux 50mm, from 1972. It's lovely. Between the authentic and the magical.... I believe all lux are done the same (the 50mm and 80mm). At f/1.4 (and, also, 1.6-1.8 up to 2...) it's a bit ... dreamy, then, it expresses its character. 

Here, is a photo with lux 50.

https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?l=it&t=4201792

 

I also have the Zeiss Milvus 85, very heavy !!! If you go out half a day with the Zeiss, you come home destroyed.

 

Thank you very much

 

 

[01af]

As far as I know, the Summilux-R 80 mm 11881 was introduced along with the Leica R4 which was Leica's first multi-mode SLR. The difference to the previous 11880 version is in the aperture control. In the 11881 version, the aperture is controllable by the camera, to enable shutter-priority automatic exposure.

The glass is the same in both versions.

[Advertisement]

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

[OR120]

Leica 80 R Lux - one of my most used lenses. I also have the 75 M Lux but use the 80 R Lux almost every time. Hope you enjoy it when you pull the plug. Here's a recent photo (80 R Lux) of mine on the SL2-S.

 

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!

[Essummi]

Hi Maurizio,

I think there is no difference, see e.g.

The 80 Lux is a nice portrait lens, already the first version 11880. I wouldn't worry about coatings, etc.. The Lux is wide open a bit soft unlike the Apo lenses.

[mauriziobozzi]

Thanks for the replies!! Really very useful... How does it behave at long distances?

Thank you all

[Essummi]

Stopped down probably not bad. The lens was designed for available light photography when normal color film had iso 50-100 and (grainy) top speed film iso 400. I would take the lens for what it was designed. In this area it is a very good performer.

[AZN]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own and use this lens (ROM version). Like many others have noted, it is really two-lenses-in-one:

• At ƒ1.4–2.0 it's a soft classic portrait lens with plenty of interesting bokeh and aberrations
• Stopped down beyond ƒ5.6 however and it turns into a razor sharp short tele lens

Issues:

1. It's big and heavy, especially if you also factor in a lens-mount adapter for digital use
2. Videographers are actively engaged in hand-to-hand combat to get their hands on clean copies (ditto with other R 'lux lenses).  So bring your money with you, and then go back and get some more =/

 

Edited July 15, 2023 by AZN

[mauriziobozzi]

Thanks for the replies. They have helped me a lot. The prices have risen enormously, thanks to the video photographers (damn them !!) I get busy looking for a Summilux 80 ..... 11880 or 11881 there is no difference. Just find it in excellent condition. Thank you again...

[dpitt]

On 7/17/2023 at 9:32 AM, mauriziobozzi said:

Thanks for the replies. They have helped me a lot. The prices have risen enormously, thanks to the video photographers (damn them !!) I get busy looking for a Summilux 80 ..... 11880 or 11881 there is no difference. Just find it in excellent condition. Thank you again...

That is why I recommend having a look at the Summicron 90 mm R lens. It does not have F1.4, and I do not have the 80luxR to compare, but I do like it very much. IMO it is more value for money.

Maybe others who have both lenses can share about the differences in performance.

[mauriziobozzi]

I sold it (the summicron 90mm f/2 ). A wonderful optic. It was from 1972..... Extremely fine detail, even too much to make portraits.

https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?l=it&t=4474628

Sadly, it went..... Your opinion on the Summicron 90 comforts me.

Thanks and greetings

[Stuart Richardson]

I can comment on the 75mm Summilux, which is more or less the same formula and vintage. It is still an excellent lens and very sharp when stopped down to f 5.6 or so. I agree with AZN's comments. For me it is 1.4 to 2.5 that is quite soft...it is less the detail being soft than there being spherical aberration. Highlights glow and the image is a bit fuzzy, but the detail is still rendered...it is not so much smudged, as it is glow-y. This can be a very beautiful look. The only downside I have found with these lenses on digital is that they can show a good amount of purple or red/green color fringing and longitudinal chromatic aberration in certain compositions. If you shoot black and white, this is of course irrelevant. On film of course it is also better behaved than on digital. What camera are you using it on?

[OR120]

Here's more food for thought - https://phillipreeve.net/blog/summiluxes-75-or-80/ - 

[fernando_b]

To Maurizio: there is the thread "Summilux-R 80mm image thread!" in this section. It contain some images got with this spectacular lens!

Fernando.

[mauriziobozzi]

x Stuart Richardson :    Look: I'm going to lose it tomorrow, the Summilux 80. With three cams. No. 3267230 . I use Nikon.

X   OR120  : Excellent test. I thank you !!

[mauriziobozzi]

I go to New Old Camera in Milan, for this: http://www.newoldcamera.com/Scheda.aspx?Codice=22C2123

 

[Stuart Richardson]

6 hours ago, OR120 said:

Here's more food for thought - https://phillipreeve.net/blog/summiluxes-75-or-80/ - 

That is interesting, particularly about the aperture blades, but I think the differences are so subtle that it is likely that any difference other than the bokeh is attributable to sample variation as much as any difference in formula. The shape of the aperture blades is relevant, however, and it appears to favor the 80mm, as does the slightly longer focal length, if you are concerned about maximum bokeh. I still think there is functionally very little difference in performance.

[John McMaster]

1 hour ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I still think there is functionally very little difference in performance.

I always preferred to 80R to the 75M despite them being so similar on paper...

john

[davidmknoble]

Having both, it depends on the body / sensor / film you are using.  Both of these lenses have a character that is not present in current day lenses.  From f/4.0 on up it is critically sharp throughout most of the frame and the contrast is really pleasing.  The low f/stops are clearly not for landscapes, but for portraits - street or studio - you can obtain some magical results.  I think this lens is very similar in drawing to the 50mm f/1.0 noctilux (same designer, Mr. Mandler).  

The key is that the 80 Summilux is less expensive because you either need an R film system or an SL with an adapter.  I have an M-R adapter, but I don’t know many that use one.  The 80 is larger but it’s still a great lens.  I have the 70 Summilux German version of which there are very few and use it mostly with film.

This is Kodak TriX 400 in Haiti, wide open on the 70 Summilux:  https://www.davidknoble.life/galleries/10-Mission-Photography/2017-Bayonnais-Haiti/09-Worship-and-Vote/#gallery-11

[John McMaster]

I shot both on my M(240) which is how I know I preferred the 80

john

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jaapv]

On 7/19/2023 at 1:04 PM, John McMaster said:

I always preferred to 80R to the 75M despite them being so similar on paper...

john

According to Erwin Puts the lenses are extremely similar in rendering, with the R80 having marginally higher performance in the corners.

Quote

"We should realise however that these differences, while measurable, will probably be lost in everyday picture taking"