Comments on 90mm f2 and f2.8

[navarch]

Hello, I'm new to forum (although have been lurking for a while) and new to Leica rangefinder. I want to get a 'portrait' lens, can't afford ASPH or the Summilux 1.4 so I am looking at pre-ASPH 90mm f2 summicron and f2.8 elmarit.

Extra stop to f2 is appealing to me for low light work, however, reading between the lines of various articles seems to indicate the f2 not a great performer (although I no idea what is meant by "... indicate that the design is a bit overcharged").

My SLR lens is a CONTAX 85mm f1.4 and I like it very much, I guess I would like to get a similar feel from my rangefinder lens.

I would appreciate any comments from those out there with experience / insight into these two leica 90mm's (f2 summicron and f2.8 elmarit). Many Thanks.

 

[laptoprob]

Welcome to the forum!

I posted a for sale ad a little while ago for three 90's:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15492

the Summicron is a very fine lens, but its sharpness is less compared to the very expensive later ASPH version. That just may be a positive point because the ASPH is also rated as painfully sharp.

Rob.

 

[jaapv]

You might want the more shallow DOF of the F2 or the faster speed. The 2.8 is slightly sharper and a lot handier, but the 2.0 has better colour differentiation and microcontrast. Your choice. Neither is better than the other, they are simply different.For portraits you might consider getting a very old version of a 90 mm, as the results of the older lenses are often far more pleasing. Added bonus: you would save money towards another lens.

 

[Ben Z]

I originally had a type-1 Tele-Elmarit ("fat") and the current Elmarit-M. I happened accross a late E55-filter "compact" pre-APO 90 Summicron and the store let me try it out. I ended up buying it, keeping the T-E and selling the Elmarit-M. Performance-wise the Cron and Elmarit-M were identical at all common apertures, plus the Cron gave me f/2 with slightly softer corners and slightly less contrast, perfect for wide-open low-light shots of people, which is what I got it for. Since most reports have the Elmarit-M and 90 APO-Cron running nearly neck-and-neck at their common apertures, I can extrapolate that from f/2.8 the pre-APO Cron would be very hard to tell from the APO. I kept the old T-E because of the 39mm filter, which cuts down on how much I need to carry when I go away with a full set.

 

[awilder]

I've used both and currently use the 90/2 pre-asph version. Both are very sharp at similar apertures. The current 90/2.8 is just a tad sharper across the frame but like the apo-asph, is bittingly sharp with a harsher bokeh than the 90/2. For portrait work, the 90/2 will give a more pleasing rendition to facial features and has a reputation of beautiful bokeh.

 

[dadsm3]

I have to agree with jaapv, the older Elmar F4's are excellent lenses, although maybe not fast enough for you. But they're so much smaller and lighter than the 'crons, easily pocketable when you just want to walk around with a 35 or 50 on your M. The 'crons are so big you're certain to draw more attention to yourself, and so heavy you'd probably want a handgrip.
The best thing about the older Elmars is that they're undervalued for the quality...you can easily pick up a decent one for $200 on ebay.

 

[Nick R.]

Although I have a summicron and summilux, the CV 90 is one lens I've never thought to improve upon. It's that good. However, if you're going to go for speed, you might as well go all the way for the f2.

 

[JoeFriday]

I agree that the 90/2 isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I love the bokeh and color rendering.. here are a couple samples from mine

 

[Treb]

I rarely shoot wide open, the extra stop doesn't do much for me. The Cron is heavy, I'd much rather own the Elmarit-M. Not that I use 90mm much, it rarely comes out of the bag. The small viewfinder frame is cumbersome IMO.

 

[Nick R.]

Here's a scan from a print:

 

[navarch]

Many thanks to all for your time, comments and beautiful pictures.
I think I'll go for the Pre ASPH Summicron 90mm f2 (speed). I would have likely changed my mind if there was a consensus here that this lens a 'dog'; which happily seems not to be the case. Best regards and thanks you so much again for your posts.

 

[Ben Z]

Just be cautious to look for the immediate pre-ASPH, the ~500g one with 55mm filter size. There were 2 versions prior to it, neither are dogs (in fact the performance is quite similar) but they are elephants, in terms of size and weight 😀

 

[JoeFriday]

mine is the larger of the two.. yes, it's hefty and I probably wouldn't want to walk around with it hanging from my neck all day.. but it balances very well in the hand and isn't a hardship to hold for an hour at a time

 

[Alec]

Navarch, are you sure your budget will not allow for a Summilux 75 ? 😉
I certainly didn't mind the switch from a Summicron 90 E55... 😀

Don't forget to practice using the tiny 90 (or 75) frame in your finder - it takes some time to be ready to compose properly (at least for slow learners like me).

 

[dreamsandart]

Sorry this is long, but gives a Summicron view...

The original M-series trio of Summicrons were a good match for each other and all have become 'classic' Leica glass. In the 60s if you wanted that fast 90 the original version Summicron's size was exceptable,- and the early chrome version is extremely well built and a gorgeous lens. Instead of holding the camera with a lens on as is usual with a compact Leica, with the 1st version the lens rests in my hand and the weight is an advantage to steady the exposure. Another advantage I liked was that with adapters you could use its lens-head on a Leicaflex/visoflex. A 'bargain lens' these days because of its size and people think its old design. If you don't mind carrying it around its a great lens.

When the more compact 80s version came out I bought one. I thought of getting a slightly smaller Elmarit but if there is one lens that needs speed for hand-holding it is the longer focal length. Like the earlier version, the 80s Summicron is very well corrected by f4 and still more than fine at f2.8 and really 'beautiful' wide open. With color film this lens is special, and the out of focus bokeh is very smooth, one of the lenses like the 1st version that for me defines 'Leica glass'.

The only 'negative' I have with the 80s version is the focus is characteristically smooth but very 'stiff'. Its can be a workout on the fingers if you really use it over a day, and after 20+ years mine has not loosened up. And for that reason - and the size/adaptor advantages mentioned above - I still like my 1st version best, that is unless I'm on a long haul 'light-weight' travels.

Both pre-ASPH versions are under appreciated and great deals these days. Very good 'portrait lenses' if that's your thinking for a 90, but then my 90 has always been a lens to just concentrate of details - a great 'walk around' lens to see the smaller picture.

 

[regit]

...
My SLR lens is a CONTAX 85mm f1.4 and I like it very much, I guess I would like to get a similar feel from my rangefinder lens.
...

Not quite sure what you meant when you said "get a similar feel from my rangefinder lens"...

If it encompasses weigth, size, framing, focus accuracy, etc, getting a 90 'cron or EM may not quite satisfy the "feel". While not SLR-big-heavy, neither the Summicrons nor Elmarit-Ms are consider small and lightweight, with the exception of the thin Tele-Elmarit. Framing may be difficult (small) and focusing may suffers (long throw and may be stiff in some) ... in a way, using a 90 'cron or 90 EM will deviate from the RF feel ever so slightly.

If it is a portrait lens you're aftering, I don't think you will gain (or even lose) much from not using the Contax instead... A 75 'lux will fit the bill, then again, it is equally big and heavy...

I would suggest playing around with the framing first, see if working with the 90 frameline is what you want with a RF. If you're happy with it, try to get a lens with a good return policy and see if the size and weight (amongst other things) fits you.

 

[Huck Finn]

The reputation of the Contax 85/1.4 is that it is a superb lens - except perhaps at f/1.4 - and that it is probably better than any Leica portrait lens. Given that you are happy with it & have a camera to mount it on, why would you be considering a Leica lens & tiny frame lines at this focal length?

 

[pvenables]

Hi Navarch

I have just bought an M6 and 35mm Summicron. Having used the camera in a darkish room on Saturday night [at about f2/2.8 at 1/50 sec] with Neopan 1600 I would come to the [probably somewhat premature] conclusion that unless you a] use faster film that 1600 in lowish light or b] use some sort of support you are MIGHT struggle with camera shake with a 90 f2 or f2.8.

Additionally judging by the difficulty I had in focusing to my satisfaction I would suggest it would be better to take your SLR to situations where you needed a low-light option, but then I have no actual experience of using a 90mm on the Leica, so I might be talking cobblers.

I will consider a 90mm at some point but because I bought the Leica to travel with as my Nikon is too heavy I'd probably look at the 90 f4 Elmar. If my camera's too heavy, I don't carry it with me - it's as simple as that. If I miss out on night/inside shots with the handicap of f4, so be it.

Paul

 

[laptoprob]

A Leica with a relatively heavy lens like the 90mm Summicron is much steadier than any SLR in low light. IF you use a fast film like 1600 there should be no problem.
I used a 400 pushed to 800, at 1/30 to 1/15 it is still possible to handhold without camera shake. That is why I am still not sure if I really should sell the Summicron!

Rob

 

[FPjohn]

M3 then M6

M3 then M6

Hello:

Which M do you have? A 90mm on a M3 is a joy, on a M6 less so as the framelines are small. The .85x finder models are close to M3 dimensions.

yours
Frank