whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
Can anyone comment on the 85mm vs. the 75mm Summilux? How about the 90 Summicron thrown in for good measure.
Last edited:
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
I just ordered a 90 summicon (last version before the asph) to compare it to my 75 lux.
Giving strong thought to selling the 75 lux and getting a 50 lux (pre-asph) and the 90 summicron.
Giving strong thought to selling the 75 lux and getting a 50 lux (pre-asph) and the 90 summicron.
waileong
Well-known
1. There'll be opinions all over the place, that's the nature of opinions. You could look at the MTF curves if you want more "objective" data.
2. One would expect the Zeiss to be "better" than the 75 Summilux or 90 Cron pre-asph. As for the 90 AA, I don't know-- haven't checked the MTF's myself.
3. Have you got a source of the 85 Zeiss? It seems in short supply at many dealers.
2. One would expect the Zeiss to be "better" than the 75 Summilux or 90 Cron pre-asph. As for the 90 AA, I don't know-- haven't checked the MTF's myself.
3. Have you got a source of the 85 Zeiss? It seems in short supply at many dealers.
larmarv916
Well-known
tbarker13 said:
"tbarker13"....could you please. Expand on your reasons for opting to go for lenses that the almighty Leica folks tell us are no longer the best. So much praise has been lavished on the 75 Cron and 50 ASPH...the lengendary 90ASPH
I am interested to know as it sounds as if you have some serious reasoning. I am a guy who uses lense that many people either do not like or have lost favor for the lastest and greatest. Leica "vonder" lens.
Also you propbably have but may want to include the 75 Voigtlander, just for kicks.
Best Regards.....Laurance
venchka
Veteran
2 more inclusions: Nikkor 85/2.0 and Canon 85/1.8, last black model.
vol72
Established
Having never tried the Zeiss 85, I can only go by reports I have read. Apparently the Zeiss lens with its moving element is better corrected for close-up photography than the M mount lenses you have mentioned.
I have both 75 Summilux and 90 Summicron Apo ASPH. I like them both for different reasons, although neither have moving elements for close focus correction (the 75 Summicron does have a moving element). The 90 is a lens with great brilliance, and is better corrected for mid and long distances. The 90 pre-ASPH lens is a very fine lens without some of the snap or contrast of its ASPH stable mate. The Summilux, a 25+ year old Mandler design is a different animal: a fast, short "portrait" lens that is sharp wide open, although has less contrast at 1.4. Stopped down one stop, the Summilux gains contrast; to my eyes by f4 the Summilux is as brilliant as the 'cron ASPH 90. The Summilux, even moreso than other mid-teles, does take some practice focusing wide open in the near range.
One thing to note: the 75 Summilux is shorter than the 85/90 focal length. I really like the 75 focal length, while others feel it to be a stepchild, betwixt and between 50 - 90 lengths. Some do not like the 50/75 combination frame lines, although they do not bother me.
Although I use my 28 Summicron and my 50 Summilux ASPH lenses more often, the 75 Summilux might be the last Leica lens I would consider selling. The 75 'lux is so unique: sharp, smooth, beautiful OOF. The 75 'cron is a newer design and an incredible performer, but if I ever purchase one, I seriously doubt I would sell the Summilux.
I have both 75 Summilux and 90 Summicron Apo ASPH. I like them both for different reasons, although neither have moving elements for close focus correction (the 75 Summicron does have a moving element). The 90 is a lens with great brilliance, and is better corrected for mid and long distances. The 90 pre-ASPH lens is a very fine lens without some of the snap or contrast of its ASPH stable mate. The Summilux, a 25+ year old Mandler design is a different animal: a fast, short "portrait" lens that is sharp wide open, although has less contrast at 1.4. Stopped down one stop, the Summilux gains contrast; to my eyes by f4 the Summilux is as brilliant as the 'cron ASPH 90. The Summilux, even moreso than other mid-teles, does take some practice focusing wide open in the near range.
One thing to note: the 75 Summilux is shorter than the 85/90 focal length. I really like the 75 focal length, while others feel it to be a stepchild, betwixt and between 50 - 90 lengths. Some do not like the 50/75 combination frame lines, although they do not bother me.
Although I use my 28 Summicron and my 50 Summilux ASPH lenses more often, the 75 Summilux might be the last Leica lens I would consider selling. The 75 'lux is so unique: sharp, smooth, beautiful OOF. The 75 'cron is a newer design and an incredible performer, but if I ever purchase one, I seriously doubt I would sell the Summilux.
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
I've actually got a CV75 that I use when I am traveling light. hikes, that sort of thing.
For the most part, I just don't find myself needing the asph lenses. I've owned a few, including the 35 asph lux. Great lenses. So sharp. I can certainly see the appeal.
But I just find that I really like the images created by some of the older lenses. Some photogs may find this to be heresy, but I think corner-to-corner sharpness is often overrated. There are times when it is critical (landscapes, illustrations, etc.). But for a documentary-style of photography, I can do without it and be quite happy.
For the most part, I just don't find myself needing the asph lenses. I've owned a few, including the 35 asph lux. Great lenses. So sharp. I can certainly see the appeal.
But I just find that I really like the images created by some of the older lenses. Some photogs may find this to be heresy, but I think corner-to-corner sharpness is often overrated. There are times when it is critical (landscapes, illustrations, etc.). But for a documentary-style of photography, I can do without it and be quite happy.
foto_fool
Well-known
I'm not a big fan of the 90mm (and longer) lenses for RF. The ZM 85 is close enough to 90mm that my interest is already damped. Plus I have the length covered with the vastly under-appreciated Zeiss 90mm Sonnar T* for the Contax G.
The MTF charts sure indicate that the ZM 85 is a great performer, but I have not seen any real-world images. Has anyone posted anything? Flikr has a lot of ZF shots but I find none from the ZM. I recall that FanMan has a ZM 85 - he's posted two shots to the Gallery but it would be great to see more.
But the real bottom line for me is that the performance of the ZM 85 would have to completely blow me away to get me to part with my 75mm Summilux. Aside from its size, this is my absolute favorite lens.
EDIT: I forgot to mention the 85mm/f2 Zuiko for my evil SLR, which is just a wonderful lens with a 5/4 design very similar to the 90mm Sonnar G.
The MTF charts sure indicate that the ZM 85 is a great performer, but I have not seen any real-world images. Has anyone posted anything? Flikr has a lot of ZF shots but I find none from the ZM. I recall that FanMan has a ZM 85 - he's posted two shots to the Gallery but it would be great to see more.
But the real bottom line for me is that the performance of the ZM 85 would have to completely blow me away to get me to part with my 75mm Summilux. Aside from its size, this is my absolute favorite lens.
EDIT: I forgot to mention the 85mm/f2 Zuiko for my evil SLR, which is just a wonderful lens with a 5/4 design very similar to the 90mm Sonnar G.
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
I very much like using short teles with RFs and in particular with the M3.
So I have a bunch of them, among others a black Nikkor 85/2, the Summicron 90/2 v3 (last pre-asph), and the 75 Summilux.
I use the Summilux and the Summicron for different purposes. If I don't want to carry 50 and 90, I carry 75. Like for John, the Summilux is my favorite lens.
But the Nikkor 85/2 and Summicron 90/2 perform so well, and cost so much less, that I cannt justify buying the new ZM lens, whatever the MTF charts say.
Comparing the Summilux to any {85/90}/2 is apples vs. oranges. The Summilux is twice as fast and has .7m min focus (makes a huge difference to the typical 1m of other lenses for portraits). Which puts it in a completely different league than the other lenses.
Roland.
So I have a bunch of them, among others a black Nikkor 85/2, the Summicron 90/2 v3 (last pre-asph), and the 75 Summilux.
I use the Summilux and the Summicron for different purposes. If I don't want to carry 50 and 90, I carry 75. Like for John, the Summilux is my favorite lens.
But the Nikkor 85/2 and Summicron 90/2 perform so well, and cost so much less, that I cannt justify buying the new ZM lens, whatever the MTF charts say.
Comparing the Summilux to any {85/90}/2 is apples vs. oranges. The Summilux is twice as fast and has .7m min focus (makes a huge difference to the typical 1m of other lenses for portraits). Which puts it in a completely different league than the other lenses.
Roland.
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
Sizes
Sizes
One more note: people often complain about tele sizes. I don't think the 3 lenses mentioned above are big:
The Summilux is fat but not long. And the photo shows you why I like the Nikkor.
Best,
Roland.
Sizes
One more note: people often complain about tele sizes. I don't think the 3 lenses mentioned above are big:
The Summilux is fat but not long. And the photo shows you why I like the Nikkor.
Best,
Roland.
findwolfhard
Established
85 Zeiss
85 Zeiss
Hello!
I had the chance to fondle a brand new 85 ZM straight out of the box in a shop.
An impressive piece of lense! BUT,- I was rather disappointed by the "raw" focusing "feel". I had expected somewhat different from a "Made in Germay" product. No comparison with the Leica smoothness.
Can`t say anything about optical performance, of course, but mechanics are important.
Best regards Wolfhard
85 Zeiss
Hello!
I had the chance to fondle a brand new 85 ZM straight out of the box in a shop.
An impressive piece of lense! BUT,- I was rather disappointed by the "raw" focusing "feel". I had expected somewhat different from a "Made in Germay" product. No comparison with the Leica smoothness.
Can`t say anything about optical performance, of course, but mechanics are important.
Best regards Wolfhard
Andrew3511
Established
The 75 lux is not a big lens but it is surprisingly heavy for the length if you are used to mass manufactured tele-zooms, a little heavier than the last pre-asph 90mm cron. It does what it does superbly, and is incredibly sharp from f2.8 on, the images I have with it wide open are in poor light hand-held at 1/60th or below (why else would you use it?) so you really can't comment on sharpness. My only criticism is the long focus throw that makes it a little slower to use.
Having said that I actually use the 90 much more as if the 50 isn't long enough the 75 usually isn't either.
And there aren't any 75mm frames in my M2.
I would sell it if I thought I could ever afford to buy it again if I regretted the sale, but I think I would! (if that makes any sense)
Having said that I actually use the 90 much more as if the 50 isn't long enough the 75 usually isn't either.
And there aren't any 75mm frames in my M2.
I would sell it if I thought I could ever afford to buy it again if I regretted the sale, but I think I would! (if that makes any sense)