Freakscene
Obscure member
Apart from the first version with 58mm filter, which focuses to 1m, the 75 Summilux focuses to 0.7m. About the same as other 75-85 mm f 1.4 lenses, including those for SLRs.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/freakscene/75+Summilux/
I have plenty of shots with the Summicron too, but they're not posted. Both very nice, but quite different.
Marty
P. Lynn Miller
Well-known
Marty,
Thanks!
I have used a Summicron 90 APO and found it great on the M5. How much bigger is the Summilux 75 than the Summicron 90? A photo of the two along with the Summicron 75 would be great. Anybody have all three for a family portrait?
Thanks!
I have used a Summicron 90 APO and found it great on the M5. How much bigger is the Summilux 75 than the Summicron 90? A photo of the two along with the Summicron 75 would be great. Anybody have all three for a family portrait?
ferider
Veteran
I've never shot the 75 Summicron.
While the cron might be Puts' favorite, the Lux was Mandler's
. People usually only comment on its OOF performance. However, on a well-adjusted Leica it is amazingly sharp at infinity, even wide open, making it a great general purpose lens. If you check what Puts writes on the Lux perfomance at f2, you'll notice that you don't loose a lot, compared to the Summicron. It doesn't get much better than this at f2 and f2.8, unless you use a tripod:
For Lynn (size comp. with 90 pre-asph):
I find the Lux' size very manageable with a grip. It's a very cool lens, clearly my favorite. I do recommend (as TomA has also said in the past), that if you buy it, you dedicate a camera body to it.
Roland.
While the cron might be Puts' favorite, the Lux was Mandler's
. People usually only comment on its OOF performance. However, on a well-adjusted Leica it is amazingly sharp at infinity, even wide open, making it a great general purpose lens. If you check what Puts writes on the Lux perfomance at f2, you'll notice that you don't loose a lot, compared to the Summicron. It doesn't get much better than this at f2 and f2.8, unless you use a tripod:Puts said:
For Lynn (size comp. with 90 pre-asph):
I find the Lux' size very manageable with a grip. It's a very cool lens, clearly my favorite. I do recommend (as TomA has also said in the past), that if you buy it, you dedicate a camera body to it.
Roland.
Last edited:
P. Lynn Miller
Well-known
So good reason to buy another M5!
ferider
Veteran
Don't hesitate to ask me if you need advice on how to spend more money
Seriously though, the Summilux is a sharp lens. Beats most anything I have used at f2, and is very good at f1.4. I suspect, whoever reports softness used it on a mis-adjusted camera.
The only thing you might not like is some veiling flare ("Leica glow"?) at closest focus, wide open. It does that as does its little sister, the 50/1.4 pre-asph v2. Kind of funny, since, in a world of flickr bokeh shots, it seems that this is what it's mostly used for these days. I'm convinced it was optimized for long focus distances. For example (on Arista 100):
This veiling flare disappears if you close down half stop, or at 1.5m focus distance and more. The picture also shows you how thin the DOF can be.
I found mine for US 1800 and bought it for re-sale. After some photos taken with it, I couldn't.
Roland.
Seriously though, the Summilux is a sharp lens. Beats most anything I have used at f2, and is very good at f1.4. I suspect, whoever reports softness used it on a mis-adjusted camera.
The only thing you might not like is some veiling flare ("Leica glow"?) at closest focus, wide open. It does that as does its little sister, the 50/1.4 pre-asph v2. Kind of funny, since, in a world of flickr bokeh shots, it seems that this is what it's mostly used for these days. I'm convinced it was optimized for long focus distances. For example (on Arista 100):
This veiling flare disappears if you close down half stop, or at 1.5m focus distance and more. The picture also shows you how thin the DOF can be.
I found mine for US 1800 and bought it for re-sale. After some photos taken with it, I couldn't.
Roland.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
Roland,
It is a "sacrifice" to dedicate one excellent camera to the excellent Lux.
I can see the need to do so.
When so much money is spent on such a lens, you should get your money's worth by having a careful calibration of all factors that could affect ultimate performance.
I may dedicate the M6 to the Lux. Did you send your set to DAG for matching?
It is a "sacrifice" to dedicate one excellent camera to the excellent Lux.
I can see the need to do so.
When so much money is spent on such a lens, you should get your money's worth by having a careful calibration of all factors that could affect ultimate performance.
I may dedicate the M6 to the Lux. Did you send your set to DAG for matching?
ferider
Veteran
Hi Raid, I have a late M3 adjusted by Sherry that I use and that is spot on with the Lux.
ampguy
Veteran
I haven't noticed veiling flare with mine wide open and love using it close up.
I do notice the lower contrast wide open though, so if the subject is sleeping, I will usually bracket 1.4 and 1.7 or 2 if close up and subject isn't moving.
Digital is probably better with this lens close up and wide open. Film curls too much
I do notice the lower contrast wide open though, so if the subject is sleeping, I will usually bracket 1.4 and 1.7 or 2 if close up and subject isn't moving.
Digital is probably better with this lens close up and wide open. Film curls too much
ampguy
Veteran
With a good sample, and I've been fortunate to have 2, you can use them on any properly adjusted M body accurately, wide open, and at min. distance.
The adjustment of these is very tricky, Solms has a special device specifically for adjusting these. If your Canadian unit hasn't gone to Solms at some point, and is tricky to focus, you might want to have it sent there, if you know your bodies are in perfect alignment. Not just my opinion, you can read about others experiences, on other forums ...
The adjustment of these is very tricky, Solms has a special device specifically for adjusting these. If your Canadian unit hasn't gone to Solms at some point, and is tricky to focus, you might want to have it sent there, if you know your bodies are in perfect alignment. Not just my opinion, you can read about others experiences, on other forums ...
raid
Dad Photographer
So you use an external meter. I like such an option too.
The Lux appears to do well on the M6, but I may want to get professional checking for the Lux with the M3. This way, the M6 can be used with other lenses.
ferider
Veteran
Totally makes sense to me, Raid. The M3 90mm framelines work well with the Lux, in particular at close distance, and when you want to crop to 8x10 later. And when it's dark and for portraits, I prefer external meters anyways. My M6 is my travel camera and gets banged around a lot.
raid
Dad Photographer
We have the same basic M cameras, Roland.
Even though my M6 is more recently bought "newer" than my M3, the M3 looks still mintish and shiny chrome.
Even though my M6 is more recently bought "newer" than my M3, the M3 looks still mintish and shiny chrome.