Steve Spencer Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
uhoh7 wrote:
The Crons are all very nice lenses, with various personalities, but what they have in common is very high weight and footprint, hence a tendency to gather dust in many collections.
The 90 Summarit is hard to notice in your pocket and handles like a 50 Lux on the camera.
If one really will use a big heavy lens, the older crons are a steal
I guess we all have different ideas of what a big and a small lens entails. The 90 Summarit is definitely small, IMO, but I don't consider the 90 cron Pre-AA big. I would call it medium size. The diameter is still only 63mm, which is less than the Sony/Zeiss 55 f/1.8 and still not very fat at all. It is also about 10mm longer than the 90 Summarit (but almost the same length as the 90 Elmarit-M), but the 90 Summarit is 15mm longer than the 50 lux ASPH, so in terms of length the 90 Summarit and 90 cron Pre-AA are closer in length than the 90 Summarit and 50 lux.
On a rangefinder I can see why the 90 cron Pre-AA would seem big. It would block the finder to a fair degree, but on something like the Sony mirrorless cameras that isn't an issue and the cron Pre-AA is still smaller than almost all the SLR lens alternatives such as the Olympus 90 f/2 macro, the Minolta Rokkor 85 f/1.7, the Pentax plain-K 85 f/1.8 (but not the M series 85 f/2), the Contax/Zeiss 85 f/1.4 (but not the 85 f/2.8), the Canon FD 85 f/1.8, the Nikon 85 f/2, and even the Zeiss ZM 85 f/2 Sonnar, the m4/3rds Panny Leica 42.5 f/1.2, and the APS-C Fuji 56 f/1.2. So there are a few lenses that are smaller (e.g., the Contax Zeiss 85 f/2.8, the Contax G 90 f/2.8, and the Pentax M series 85 f/2) but not many and the one's that are tend to be either a stop slower or to be a little shorter (i.e., an 85mm) or both.
|