Problems with 90 APO on BW Film

[2wenty]

Does not make much sense to me.

I could be totally wrong but from what I've noticed..

I guess I'm referring to my own terms. Its hard to explain. I need to post photos. But shooting this lens side by side to the 50mm, faces that are in shadows are really dark. Like theres too much contrast for their to be shadow detail the way my 50mm or 24mm would have. I haven't noticed any of these issues with the 50mm or 24mm, only the 90mm. The only way to show this is to shoot a test roll. Still need to. Currently my schedule is to sleep during the day which isn't helping.

Also as a side note, I don't have a hand held meter and don't plan on getting one. I don't have time to use a hand held meter in my type of photos. Most of my stuff with the M6 are life style and its already hard enough to take candid photos of people that are always moving with a fully manual camera. My M6 meters fine with either the 50mm or 24mm. Im don't want to buy a meter for a lens that already costs a ton of money. If this lens wont meter the same as the others Im just going to get rid of it.

 

[benmacphoto]

How about posting some examples taken with the lens where it seems like you're having a problem?

 

[Livesteamer]

Curious problem. I keep my old 90 Summicron becouse it's quite good and it has a tripod socket, sometimes useful. Otherwise I consider my 90 Summicron ASPH. a much better lens. Smaller, lighter and optically better. I only shoot film, mostly color negative and it has always been wonderful. Joe

 

[Hatchetman]

Could aperture be not working correctly? Mysterious...

 

[maddoc]

I used to have the 90mm Summicron pre-ASPH (that I just sold here recently because I almost never use 90mm) and results were consistent with my other lenses (35mm Summilux pre-ASPH, Noctilux, Super-Angulon-M) on BW and slide film with my former M6TTL 0.85x and M7.

Does the APO version of the 90mm Summicron have a special rear-block, moving slightly different when focusing and thus changing the amount of light that hits the reflective white spot on the curtain of the camera?

 

[sepiareverb]

?..
Does the APO version of the 90mm Summicron have a special rear-block, moving slightly different when focusing and thus changing the amount of light that hits the reflective white spot on the curtain of the camera?

I don’t see that the 90 has any floating elements or groups in a quick search. Perhaps it is some metering area confusion tho, the metering area with the 90 is a circle at best as tall as the rangefinder patch or thereabouts.

 

[michaelwj]

The 90mm doesn't have a floating element like the 1.4/50 and 2/75, and even if it did, how could it influence the meter? The meter on the M6 is essentially metering off the film plane, so it "should" be reliable.

This is an intriguing thread, I would have thought that the 90mm APO would render the same as the 1.4/50 ASPH using the meter on the M6. I think the only way to check is some standardised tests, but in the end (regardless of what the test show), if it doesn't work for you, move it on. And it seems this lens isn't working for you (although it 'should' work for you).

I enjoy the OPs photography when they've shared it, it would be a shame to have their vision squandered with issues like this.

 

[2wenty]

This isn't a good example but will maybe hold this thread over till I can get a test roll. Hopefully today.

This is straight off my Noritsu scanner. No adjustments. I never get colors this rich or contrasty with the 50mm (summilux asph). This one isn't really even meter related because of it being long exposure.


running out of time (film) by 2wenty, on Flickr


This could be me just being crazy, but whenever I've shot the 90mm Ive noticed it looking darker or a lot more contrast. I also wanted to post to see if this was a known thing.

Thank you Michael.

 

[Rob-F]

When I tried a version 3 50mm Summicron, I saw that shadow areas were darker than with my collapsible Summicron. It was because it had lower internal reflections. The collapsible scatters more stray light into those shadow areas. There may or may not be any more detail in them; in some cases there can be, because the stray light is like pre-flashing the film--it boosts the exposure a little and lets us see into the shadow.

I could easily see how the 90AA has more contrast and darker shadows than, say, the earlier non-ASPH 90, or the 50 collapsible Summicron. I've used it, and it does. But your comparison has been with the 50 ASPH. Although I've never used it, I'd have assumed it to be a high-contrast lens like your 90AA. But maybe not! Maybe there is a significant difference. People say, from time to time, they prefer a lower contrast lens for B&W, higher contrast for color. And you noticed more intense color with the 90AA. Well, high contrast and stronger color do seem to go together.

I think you might be happier, at least for B&W, with the earlier chrome Summicron! Let's see what others say about that.

 

[Rob-F]

Is it a possibility that the lens is just too contrasty for film? When I look at other people photos with it I see the same signature. Actually when I look for results from that lens I hardly find any that look good to my tastes.

It maybe indeed too contrasty for what you're looking after. Try a non asph 90/2 summicron or even better, an elmarit 90/2.8. their signature is a little gentler on contrast than the newer apo-asph

My remarks above are pretty much consistent with these ideas, already stated. But before doing anything more drastic, I believe I would review the suggestions above to increase exposure and reduce development time. If that doesn't work, I think I see a non-ASPH Summicron or Elmarit in your future. I have never had these problems with my chrome Elmarit.

 

[2wenty]

Just as a side note. Im not trying to make any claims about the 90 apo. Im just trying to figure out if it works for my tastes.

Heres another bad example in the mean time while I can get a test roll done.

This was the first time I shot this lens on film so I wasn't really trying to make a comparison to the 50. After I scanned I was already feeling kinda bummed theres just something about it that doesn't look good to me.

Heres the 90, possibly missed focus a little.

test by 2wenty, on Flickr


and heres a shot from the 50mm lux asph


gregory siff (film) by 2wenty, on Flickr

 

[DominikDUK]

They look fine to me.

 

[Rob-F]

They look fine to me, too, and that makes me think the OP just simply doesn't like the signature of the 90AA. I suspect he is looking for more "atmosphere" and "character." I do see a modern look in his photos (which are very good) at the expense of atmosphere. It looks to me that he knows what he wants, and this isn't it.

 

[sepiareverb]

I think you may be having issues focusing the 90? I know I have to be super conscientious when using anything longer than the 75. There is maybe some minor loss of shadow detail in the 90 shot compared to the 50, but hardly anything (on the jpg at least).

And the depth of field is way less, which is the most glaring difference effecting crispness to my eye in those two.

 

[DominikDUK]

If anything the 50mm looks contrastier than the 90mm. Also the dark background with the 90mm is a result of perspective. It's the flowerbed and shadow on the opposite wall, the 50mm lens simply shows more greys because it has a wider angle. The highlights seem to me a bit blown but this is I believe more a scanning fault than a lens fault.

 

[Huss]

Just as a side note. Im not trying to make any claims about the 90 apo. Im just trying to figure out if it works for my tastes.

Heres another bad example in the mean time while I can get a test roll done.

This was the first time I shot this lens on film so I wasn't really trying to make a comparison to the 50. After I scanned I was already feeling kinda bummed theres just something about it that doesn't look good to me.

Heres the 90, possibly missed focus a little.

test by 2wenty, on Flickr


and heres a shot from the 50mm lux asph


gregory siff (film) by 2wenty, on Flickr

The lighting is not the same due to the angle and the focus is off.
That makes a huge difference.

 

[Rob-F]

So it looks like maybe you need to take a variety of shots with it over a period of time before making any decisions.

 

[2wenty]

Thanks guys. Didn't get a test roll done today. It could also be that most of my stuff is already in high contrast situations and the extra contrast is just too much for my taste on film.

Just for fun heres one on digital. Again it does looks amazing on digital. The detail is just insane.

90 apo on the Sony A7R.


truck by 2wenty, on Flickr

Very 3d to my eyes. I love the way it goes from smooth to sharp. Wish it worked like this on BW film. At least that way I would feel like Im getting my money worth.
From what Im getting on film its seems I could just use a cheap lens and get the same if not better for my tastes.

 

[Huss]

Thanks guys. Didn't get a test roll done today. It could also be that most of my stuff is already in high contrast situations and the extra contrast is just too much for my taste on film.

Just for fun here's one on digital. Again it does looks amazing on digital. The detail is just insane.

90 apo on the Sony A7R.
truck by 2wenty, on Flickr

Very 3d to my eyes. I love the way it goes from smooth to sharp. Wish it worked like this on BW film. At least that way I would feel like I'm getting my money's worth.
From what I'm getting on film its seems I could just use a cheap lens and get the same if not better for my tastes.

Your problem stems from missing focus on film. The pic above from your Sony is in focus, which is one reason why it pops. If it was slightly out of focus, like your B&W shot, there would be no pop.

 

[2wenty]

Your problem stems from missing focus on film. The pic above from your Sony is in focus, which is one reason why it pops. If it was slightly out of focus, like your B&W shot, there would be no pop.

I have a a few other photos with this lens. Whether its in focus or not really not much pop. Its hard to base it off these. I really need to do a test roll. My schedule sucks right now.