2.5/75 or 3.5/90 Apo - which is best?

[Sonnar]

When walking or riding I like to have a very small bag containing my Bessa-R with the CV 25/4, a Canon 2/35 and a short tele-lens which is now a Canon 3.5/100 -- which is some big step from 35mm. My 1.8/85 is too valuable and Canon black color on lenses isn't enough abrasion-resistant for rough usage...

So I'm looking for a SMALL lens. Speed isn't an issue, enough fast lenses sitting here around... consequently -since I have a bunch of 50's, several 85's, some 100's, one 105 - I meditate about the CV 75mm now... 🙂

People telling this is a very sharp lens (even a bit too sharp for portraits..?). Knowing which lens to use when avoiding harsh details, I intend this as a landscape-lens, so excellent sharpness and contrast are essential -- otherwise the CV 3.5/90, though similar to my Canon 100, has the "Apo" label, suggesting performance should be even better... not another boring Planar-type.. does anybody have compared these two?

Which to buy (or to keep)? Help, my shelf starts sagging..! 🙂

cheers, Frank

 

[JohnM]

They're both very good lenses - it really depends on what your needs are. I have had both - I've owned (and sold/traded) two 75's and I still have a 90/3.5.

75/2.5 - Considerably more compact than the 90, especially when the lens hoods are attached. I found it to be a sharp lens and the 75mm focal length was more to my liking than the 90 - faster and more versatile. Very nice lens, but I was trying to keep my total investment in this hobby down as much as possible, so I traded them off.

90/3.5 - First, the cons - it's a tad slow and it is not that compact. The pros - it's the best lens I've ever owned. It's sharp and brilliant. I have some examples of photos I've taken with it and can send them to you if you're interested. (Me and the gallery here do not get along and I've never successfully uploaded anything.)

Summary - I liked the 75, but love the 90. I don't think you can go wrong either way.

 

[GeneW]

Re: 2.5/75 or 3.5/90 Apo - which is best?

So I'm looking for a SMALL lens. Speed isn't an issue, enough fast lenses sitting here around... consequently -since I have a bunch of 50's, several 85's, some 100's, one 105 - I meditate about the CV 75mm now... 🙂

People telling this is a very sharp lens (even a bit too sharp for portraits..?). Knowing which lens to use when avoiding harsh details

Frank, I own both of them. I first purchased the 90 APO because my (then) Leica CL had framelines for 90 and because in SLR my fav lens is 100mm. It's a truly fine optic, but, as John mentioned, a tad slow and a tad long. I really like this lens.

If SMALL is what you want, then the 75 is much smaller. It's sharp but I wouldn't call it harsh. In fact it has outstanding bokeh. And using sharp lenses is fine for portraits. There are many ways to soften the image in post-processing. I find I'm using the 75 more than the 90 most of the time even though I like both. The 75 is very comfortable to carry around on the cam (a Bessa R2).

Gene

 

[back alley]

i don't have and never used the 90/3.5.

i do have the 75/2.5 and it is lovely.
very compact & easy to handhold in dimmer light, especially with a faster film.
for travel it would be excellent.

joe

 

[doubs43]

If small is your goal, have you considered the 90mm Elmar f/4? You say speed isn't a consideration and the difference between 3.5 & 4 isn't a lot. I don't own either of the lens you mention so I can't directly compare them to my Elmars but I doubt that either is "smaller". Whether you'd be satisfied with the results of the older Elmar is another question and only you can answer that.

Walker

 

[Sonnar]

Thank you so far for all your feedback.
I ordered a 2.5/75 now... main reason I exspect the 3.5/90 will be too similar to my Canon 3.5/100 (which is very compact and lightweight but also a tad long)...

I'm mostly satisfied with my 50 year old Canon... except flare in difficult light conditions whithout hood. For me this sets a standard in terms of performance and price (sorry Leica Elmar 4/90) as well as weight (184g are hard to beat)

So if the CV 2.5/75 weights more it has at least to be sharper to give me an advantage. I expect that because it's a new lens... But I have to say I was somewhat dissapointed that the "sister" of the Color Heliar, the 1.7/35 brings no advantage to my 2/35 Canon both in terms of handling/weight and sharpness/contrast (at least not at f5.6-8)

What I've heard far or less is the Apo- 3.5/90 is the successor "Japanese mountain-Elmar" and outperforms the 50 year old small Canon Telephoto... About the CV 2.5/75 I'm not assured. Will do some tests then... 🙂

 

[rover]

Do share your opinions of the 75 when you get it. I find mine to be a super lens.