35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Any strong opinions without sending me to to a paid review? Thanks -
Leica 75mm Cron Vs 75mm Cosina Voigtlander
- Thread starter 35mmdelux
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 24
- Views 11K
fbf
Well-known
My vote goes to cv 75. plenty sharp, small compact size, cost nothing.
My suggestion would be try them all (cv 75/1.8, 2.5; leica cron, summilux) yourself. I have had them all and ended up keeping the 75/1.8
My suggestion would be try them all (cv 75/1.8, 2.5; leica cron, summilux) yourself. I have had them all and ended up keeping the 75/1.8
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I have both. The Summicron 75f2 is outstanding - probably one of the best lenses Leica ever made. This statement is valid for it's close-up performance and @f2. the floating element is the key. At the closest focus it is tack sharp. high contrast though. It is also close to $3500!!!!
The Heliar 75f1.8 is a different lens. It is intentionally a low contrast lens @f1.8-f2 (think Noctiux contrast wide open). Once you stop it down to f2.8-f4 - the difference between the two lenses is insignificant. It is difficult to tell if it shot with one or the other.
The 75f1.8 is aimed at portrait @ f1.8-f2 - slightly lower contrast - flattening of the skin-tones and wrinkles are less pronounced (a lens for the baby Boomer's among us).
The 75f2 is just "brutal" as a portrait lens - every flaw in the skin is accentuated and magnified!!!!!
It all depends what you will be using it for too.
I tend to use the 75f1.8 more than the 75f2 - I like the rendering in black/white and it has a slight;y "pastel" hue in color.
Check on Flickr for samples of both. Not ideal as the files are smallish - but you get some idea about the rendering of either lens.
Oh, you also get a lot of money left over with the 75f1.8 - close to $2800 price difference (and you get a bright Line finder included too - works like a charm on a M2!).
The Heliar 75f1.8 is a different lens. It is intentionally a low contrast lens @f1.8-f2 (think Noctiux contrast wide open). Once you stop it down to f2.8-f4 - the difference between the two lenses is insignificant. It is difficult to tell if it shot with one or the other.
The 75f1.8 is aimed at portrait @ f1.8-f2 - slightly lower contrast - flattening of the skin-tones and wrinkles are less pronounced (a lens for the baby Boomer's among us).
The 75f2 is just "brutal" as a portrait lens - every flaw in the skin is accentuated and magnified!!!!!
It all depends what you will be using it for too.
I tend to use the 75f1.8 more than the 75f2 - I like the rendering in black/white and it has a slight;y "pastel" hue in color.
Check on Flickr for samples of both. Not ideal as the files are smallish - but you get some idea about the rendering of either lens.
Oh, you also get a lot of money left over with the 75f1.8 - close to $2800 price difference (and you get a bright Line finder included too - works like a charm on a M2!).
MCTuomey
Veteran
I know you don't want to hear this, but bear with me. A cron 75/2 is going to set you back some $3k+. Sean Reid's review cost is less than 1% (annual subscription). Now I have no connection to SR other than being a subscriber myself. His review of the 75s is quite good and will give you some insights that probably won't get expressed here in the usual 5-100 word postings.
Fwiw, I've owned the CV 75 and Cron 75. If I were going to be shooting the 75FL a lot and mostly wide open or close to it, and I intended to use the lens for detailed subjects like architecture too, I'd have the Cron. If not, or I'd be shooting mostly portraits, I'd take the CV 75. That said, I really want to try the CV 75/1.8 because it's almost two lenses in one. Glow-y and sonnar-like wide open and up close, then sharp and contrasty stopped down. More than a bit like your Lux, maybe.
Fwiw, I've owned the CV 75 and Cron 75. If I were going to be shooting the 75FL a lot and mostly wide open or close to it, and I intended to use the lens for detailed subjects like architecture too, I'd have the Cron. If not, or I'd be shooting mostly portraits, I'd take the CV 75. That said, I really want to try the CV 75/1.8 because it's almost two lenses in one. Glow-y and sonnar-like wide open and up close, then sharp and contrasty stopped down. More than a bit like your Lux, maybe.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Thank you gentlemen.
@Thomasw - I'm looking at mostly portraits. [90s are cheaper but I shoot with .58 magnification which has very small 90 FL.] A lens to compliment my pre-asph summilux 35 works for me.
Best -
@Thomasw - I'm looking at mostly portraits. [90s are cheaper but I shoot with .58 magnification which has very small 90 FL.] A lens to compliment my pre-asph summilux 35 works for me.
Best -
ferider
Veteran
Not an option in your question, Paul, but the 75 Lux will fit your 35 better. Big but unique. Not sure about use on .58 though.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
I'll have to think this one....Thanks much for your suggestions.
ferider
Veteran
This help ? 🙂
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Guess I'll speak up in support of the 75/1.8. I've been very happy with this lens, though I'll admit I never used the 75 cron.
Still, for my uses (primarily portrait) if I were going to Leica 75, it would be the Lux - which is obviously a wonderful lens. I could certainly see myself getting one again some day (I've owned one twice).
For now, though, I'm really enjoying the CV.
Still, for my uses (primarily portrait) if I were going to Leica 75, it would be the Lux - which is obviously a wonderful lens. I could certainly see myself getting one again some day (I've owned one twice).
For now, though, I'm really enjoying the CV.
Last edited:
jcrutcher
Veteran
I know it's not part of the original question but what about the summarit 75? I have one and like it but have considered a faster 75 like the lenses discussed here. I don't use it for portraits. Should I change?
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Not if it already does what you need it to do.
But if you find yourself needing more light, maybe so.
Of course you'll also get a little better isolation when shooting wide open - if that matters to you.
But if you find yourself needing more light, maybe so.
Of course you'll also get a little better isolation when shooting wide open - if that matters to you.
presspass
filmshooter
The 75 'cron and the Summilux are wonderful lenses - both focus at .7 meters. I tend to use them at that distance a lot. The lux and the pre-asph 35 lux make a wonderful pair, as mentioned above. Couple with a 21 Elmarit 2.8 and a 135 2.8 and you have a nice set of Mandler lenses that can do almost anything.
jcrutcher
Veteran
I purchased this lens last week. I'm very happy with it. It is softer than my 90mm Summicron however for what I do with it it's perfect. This shot was with a SF 58 flash set on TTL. F4.0 1/30 400 ISO. I highly recommend this lens.
back alley
IMAGES
which lens?
jcrutcher
Veteran
Sorry 75mm Cosina Voigtlander
venchka
Veteran
Which one? They make two. Sorry, but we're confused.
akiralx
Established
I have the 75 Summicron and 75 Summarit, and like the latter a lot - is there a reason that isn't in the running. I am tempted by the CV 75mm f/1.8...
Turtle
Veteran
Dont forget the Summarit, although this lens is more cron than CV in many respects. Guy Mancuso did some tests that showed it out resolving his Cron in almost all circumstances (near and far) and others have had the same experience regardless of MTFs published. I bought one not for that, but for its size and price (coded etc) compared to the Cron. While the lens was defective and had to be returned (focus issue), when it came back here are my thought FWIW:
Astonishingly sharp. Brutal. Not one for the ladies. Wide open it is sharper than you could ever really need, even at min focus. It gets a hair sharper at f4 and then nothing more. Contrast is medium high. Not crazy, but quite high, so bear that in mind. I do not find the min focus an issue, but I can see that some might. There is quite a difference too. With the cron you can crop down to a head, but with the rit, you get head and some neck! I dont generally photograph floating heads so it works for me.
I recently used the lens for some candids at a wedding and the shots were beautifully smooth, easily printable contrast and very sharp. Its a cracker.
The CV 75 1.8 looks lovely if you want more dreamy, soft portraits, but if you want a harder sharper lens and are considering the Cron, think real hard about the 75 Summarit. Unless you absolutely must have f2 and 0.7m focus, the Summarit seems a much better buy at half the price, lower weight, smaller filter etc
Astonishingly sharp. Brutal. Not one for the ladies. Wide open it is sharper than you could ever really need, even at min focus. It gets a hair sharper at f4 and then nothing more. Contrast is medium high. Not crazy, but quite high, so bear that in mind. I do not find the min focus an issue, but I can see that some might. There is quite a difference too. With the cron you can crop down to a head, but with the rit, you get head and some neck! I dont generally photograph floating heads so it works for me.
I recently used the lens for some candids at a wedding and the shots were beautifully smooth, easily printable contrast and very sharp. Its a cracker.
The CV 75 1.8 looks lovely if you want more dreamy, soft portraits, but if you want a harder sharper lens and are considering the Cron, think real hard about the 75 Summarit. Unless you absolutely must have f2 and 0.7m focus, the Summarit seems a much better buy at half the price, lower weight, smaller filter etc
jcrutcher
Veteran
Debusti Paolo
Well-known
if money is not an issue go for the summicron asph.75/2
