Portrait lens for my bessa r, any ideas?

[Gaspar]

Hi have just bought a bessa r with a 50mm f1.5 Nokton. I am quite keen on portrait and use 85mm on my OM slr. Can you give me any advise on a good but economical lenses within 85-105 mm and a low f number (f2-2.8) preferably.
Would appreciate any suggestions.

 

[ferider]

Welcome !

The best fitting your specs is probably the Heliar 75/2.5.
Excellent performer.

The Nokton isn't so bad for portraits, either ....

Best,

Roland.

 

[brachal]

I use the Soviet 85mm Jupiter-9. It's a f/2 Sonnar copy. If you buy from a reputable seller, like fedka.com, you'll get a very good lens for a great price. Accurately focusing a fast lens of this length can be a challenge due to the short rangefinder baselenght of the R.

And welcome to the forum.

 

[back alley]

i'm with ferider, the cv 75 is a gem and the r has fl for it.

 

[DeeCee3]

There are a couple of Steinheil Culminars floating around the used sections of one or two of the major vendors...good lens, 85mm F/L, f2.8, LTM plus at least one Schacht-Ulm Travenar 85...also a decent performer. Both are German from the 50's and hard to beat for the money. The Steinheil was the portrait lens on my Bessa-R.

dc3

 

[peterm1]

Have you considered the Voigtlander 75mm or 90mm? I am partial to the idea of the 75 myself. I would think that it may be one of your better option if you are looking for something economical and guaranteed to be problem free - older lenses usually come wiht soome baggage. Canon 100mm lenses are popular and well regarded but are f3.5. There is one here for sale right now. I own a lat(ish) Elmar 90mm. which I kinda regard as good for portrait work as its a little softer wide open and produces a nice 1930s look in black and white and a nice pastel look in color. These can be had cheaply and despite their reputation are actually quite nice lenses if you recognise their limitations and are very small and compact to boot. If you were willing to go longer, the Canon black and chrome 135mm is a superb lens. The Canon 85mm lens is a bit harder to find and usually more expensive. (The chrome one labelled eitehr Serenar or Canon is more readily available but very heavy. I used to own one but did not use it enough for this reason. The black and chrome Canon 85 costs - I mean lots.) And finally if you can find one and do not mind the expense, the Canon 100mm f2 is said to be superb. I have not tried it but it certainly looks the part. A lovely lens.

Edit. I nearly forgot..... the Russian 85mm Sonnar copy - the Jupiter 9. I have one and love it. But they have a reputataion for being quirky. Quality control was always an issue and you cannot guarantee that you are not buying a pup. I was lucky and like I say, I think mine is just superb.

 

[nrb]

I use a 90 elmar from the 50's.

 

[Gaspar]

Thanks

Thanks

Thanks a lot I will note down you suggestions and start searching the market place

 

[photobizzz]

Yea I have the CV 75, very nice lens.

 

[Sparrow]

another for the cv75, on good skin it's great

 

[lZr]

I am next to the Heliar 75/2.5

 

[rumbliegeos]

I also like the late 90mm Elmar lens, but it is slower than you want. They are really tiny lenses. For portraits, I like the effect given by lenses longer than 75. Now, I use a Barnack Leica, not an M.

 

[dryice66]

90 elmar - bit slow but great in natural light.
have 75 but not tested it yet

 

[Roger Hicks]

Do you want sharp or soft?

Sharp: 75 Voigtlander, 90 Voigtlander, LATE 90 Summicron, new f/2.5 Summarits (75 or 90 -- I've only tried the 90), money-no-object 75 Summicron.

'Glow': 85/2 Jupiter. I've had half a dozen or more over the years and almost all have been good. Until recently they were silly-cheap and tended to come with outfits. Money-REALLY-no-object, Thambar.

Really soft (but not like a Thambar), yeah, maybe a Steinheil. I've not seen a sharp one yet, but I've only owned one and tried a couple of others.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Tom A]

An odd ball in this line up is the Trionar 105 (i think it was f3.5). It had a rather nice glow wide open and I liked the fact that it was made in Stewartry Scotland! I had one for many years but it fell into the rule book "I haven't used it for a year - thus to be disposed off" some years back.
The Jupiter 85mm f2.0 is most likely your best bet for the least amount of money. Only thing to watch for, apart from slight variations in optical quality, is the threads at the back. The barrell is soft alloy and occasionally you find them with "buggered up" threads, which can make putting a screw to M-adapter tricky (OK, they usually go on - it is the removal that can be hazardeous to your mental state!). The focus on these lenses can be a bit stiff, but some back and forth twisting usually limbers it up for a session.
The small screw-mount Elmar is good, but a bit slow for portraits and the f4 maximum aperture will give more Depth of Field than needed or desired for portraits!