wich to choose? CV 75 f/2.5 of New summarit 75 f/2.5?

M

monster

Established
Local time
10:26 AM
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
82
View My Gallery
wich be better? i want to compare about these two lens

the CV helier 75 mm f/2.5 is much cheaper but i like summarit because it's leica🙂



how about performance? did CV are much better than summarit?


Thanks
 
Erwin Puts likes the 75 Summarit. He says it's pretty close to the Summicron in performance. That would be fairly high praise. I doubt the Heliar is better than that, but for the price difference ...
 
The new VC lenses use new glass lacking in lead, and the optical rendition is less good, in respect to the old CV lenses with leaded glass.
Therefore, i suggest the new Summarit 75/2.5: Erwin Puts tell that is the best of the new Summarit series.
Ciao.
Vincenzo
 
I've owned two CV75s and they're nice lenses. Nice, but not *great*. I haven't tried the Summarit-M, but the 75 seems to be one of the pics of the range with performance that's almost on a par with the 'cron. Size, handling and build have won a good few positive comments as well. If it were me, I'd find the extra cash and go for the Summarit-M.
 
I have the Summarit 75mm. I use it on my RD-1. I really like it alot. Great quality lens, handles well, and I am very happy with the pix. Can't compare it to the CV lenses since I don't have them.

/T
 
Vincenzo Maielli said:
...
Therefore, i suggest the new Summarit 75/2.5: Erwin Puts tell that is the best of the new Summarit series.
Click to expand...

Not quite what he says (at least as I understand him, and I have had trouble following some of his stuff ...). As I read Mr. Puts, he claims that the 35mm is the best of the Summarit line, with the 75mm a close second. Here's what he actually says:

"The Summarit 35 and Summarit 75 emerge as the best lenses in the range, operating in close vicinity of the Summicron versions. I would even claim that the Summarit 35mm is better than the Summicron asph version. The Summarit 75 is not as highly color corrected as the Apo version, but in all other respects quite close. "
 
"the deep link leads to images by all the 75s if i remember correctly."

Sorry, don't mean to be troublesome here but: The most recent post in the mentioned thread is 2006-12-26. Leica announced the Summarit lens line on 2007-08-03. So if the deeplink shows Summarit images (it won't open on my machine), they'd be ex post facto changes at the linked site. Hence, not obvious to someone looking through the archives for a comparison of CV75 vs 75 Summarit that there's something to be found there.
 
I have the CV 75 and like it very much. It's a wonderful lens and I like the focal length on my M6. I'm sure the Leica lens is better but it is the law of diminishing returns, you pay a lot more to get a little more. If finances are no problem and you are looking for the very best, then go Leica. However, for the price of the Leica 75 you could buy any three CV lenses of your choice. My next lens will be the CV 15mm or 21mm. Good Luck deciding.
Joe
 
I tried the 75f2.5 Summitar and liked it. If it wasen't for the fact that I already have a 75f1.4, a 75f2 and a VC 75f2.5 I would have gotten one. Nice comfortable lens to use, good performance - a bit better at f2.5 than the VC 75 and similar in performance from 5.6 on.
It is a bit unfortunate for Leica that the raise in Euro has put the Summarit lens line a bit over the top in North America. A 35f2.5 and 75f2,5 package would be close to $3000 and that will get you some pretty spectacular lenses from Zeiss and CV and lots of change.
 
the 75 & 90 summarits might be in real trouble if Zeiss produce a 75/85/90 f2.8 at, say $800... I would be a potential customer if contrast matched the other ZMs as my 90 elmarit-M is wonderful but about a paper grade or more lower in contrast than my ZMs. I would like matched contrast across the range.

Can anyone confirm the change in CV glass type from leaded to lead free? Has there really been a reduction in performance as a result?
 
I like the CV 75/2.5

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • pinchas4-700.jpg
    pinchas4-700.jpg
    133.6 KB · Views: 0
considering the speed of the mentioned lenses I decided the best bang for the buck was the f/2.8 90 Elmarit-M.

I previously owned the 75VC and it was pretty good too. The hood was well integrated, compact, and very well priced for the buyer.

In actual practice I doubt there is much diff between the summarit and the VC. Your choice of film has probably more impact.
 
ask another question please

I try to focus 75 mm frameline (use 50 mm lens)

I think this too little change from 50 mm to 75 mm focal lenght, do you think i change to 90 mm instead?
 
I too thought the CV 75 was too close to being a 50mm but I took a deep breath and bought one from Stephen and found I love it. On the Leica I find the 90 a bit challenging to use for my available light photos. The 90 feels like a long lens and even though I have the 90 Summmicron ASPH I mostly use my old fat Summicron as it has a tripod socket. The 75 feels like the longest focal length that is really comfortable on my M6. Just my opinion and I'm sure others would feel differently. Joe
 
I love my VC 75. It goes really well on my .85 M7. Like Livesteamer I cannot justify the extra expense for the Summarit - the bang per buck ratio is not sufficiently compelling. I also have the 90mm Elmarit-M and find the two quite different. Although not that far apart on paper, I use the 75 as a "long standard" and the 90 as a "short tele", by which I mean I use the 75 as I would a 50, but one that trims out more extraneous detail. I use the 90 on the other hand, to "bring things closer".

Lazar, beautiful shot.

Regards,

Bill
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom