Opinions on the 75 and the 90 cron or lux would be appreciated. Lens will be used on an M9--some day. Curious about your experiences using these lenses.
I've used the 90 cron, cron AA and should have my 90 elmarit shortly.
The 90mm APO-summicron is a stunning lens, has certain characteristics beyond pure sharpness which I really like, a smootheness of rendering and very nice colours. A master of all trades except resolution at MFD but not bad in this area either.
The standard summicron is also a good lens, definitely softer at large apertures with more purple fringing around high contrast transitions. Stopped down to around f/4 it's very very sharp. Great colours, a good portrait lens in favourable light.
Reviews/samples indicate the elmarit is similar to performance of the apo-summicron albeit a stop slower and a 9mm smaller filter thread as well as a slightly shorter barrel.
I have no experience with the 75's, I know the 75 summilux is huge, and judging by comparative reviews the summarit is sharper in the centre and especially corners if you don't need the speed of the summicron.
You should subscribe to Reid Reviews, if you haven't already.
Thanks Thrice. I do subscribe to Reid. However, I was curious about how shooters feel about these lenses in everyday use. Many of the differences are small and can be negated by other characteristics of a lens. My decision making process on this feels much like Brett Farve's retirement planning.
All the recent Leica 90s are pretty good. Pick your speed and size. The latest Elmarit is said to be as sharp as the 90 AA, as thrice said. The 90 Summarit looks pretty good in my book too. The 90 Macro is also great - very small, but slower. Older 90s are also pretty good deals, though some of the older designs are prone to flare.
The real caveats about the modern 90s is with the 90 AA. It is softer at minimum focus distance, and it is big.
As far as 75s go, the three choices are the Summilux, the Summicron, and the Summarit. The 75 Summarit is said to be the best of the 4 Summarit lenses, but they all are pretty good. The Summicron is like the 50/1.4 ASPH - very similar in design and performance, which is to say great. It's a good size, very sharp at all apertures, has a floating element for good minimum focal distance performance. In my mind, the best all-around Leica 75.
The 75/1.4 is big and softer wide open. You'll read people talk about loving it and thinking of it as 2 different lenses, one 'dreamy' for portraits wide open, and sharper stopped down, but whatever. It is what it is, which is softer wide open. And big. And big. Many people who get them seem to get tired of lugging it around after awhile. I don't particularly get anything from the examples I've seen from it, but that's just me.
Most Leica 90s only focus down to 1m, while the 75 Summicron goes down to .7m. So if you want close in performance and tight framing, the 75 actually lets you get tighter compositions AND sharper images than the 90 AA does. And it's smaller. So I'd go for that.
Unless you shoot a lot of 50mm - then the 75 is kind of close in terms of focal lengths, and you'll probably be happier with a 90 for more reach. The 90 of course will give you more reach than the 75 in situations where you can't get closer.
I personally have the 50/1.4 ASPH and the 90 Macro. I don't use 90 that much so I don't need the speed. The facts that it focuses closer than other 90s and is very compact were the traits that attracted me (as well as its relatively low price on the used market). It's a great travel lens for focussing in on details close and further away. The 75 Summicron, though attractive, was too similar to the 50/1.4 for me to use both. If I was a 35 shooter on the other hand, I'd be all over the 75 Summicron.
Okay, I feel a need for some facts here, since there are lots of opinions being thrown around. Here is a photo with the 90 Cron ASPH within a centimeter or two of the near limit, followed by a 100% crop. No fooling around in Lightroom, other than WB and raising the black level a bit. I wish I had a professional photo flood, but all I have is an incandescent light bulb with gold covering the end, so the WB is still not quite right. Anyway, the detail is as you can see. Look at the dust, as the red lettering is slightly overexposed.
And here is a photo to demonstrate the size of the 90 Cron ASPH, in comparison with some well-known objects. Maybe I should have put a rear cap on the shot glass to make it even more obvious. I call this one "Still life with kiwi and iPhone":
The Leica Summicron-M 90mm f/2 ASPH. is a *fantastic* lens, very sharp from the near limit to the far limit (infinity), while not being sterile or clinical, and it feels great in the hand. It is not the smallest lens in the Leica M lineup, but it is small compared to most other lenses in the world. The second-hand prices are very reasonable. I can only highly recommend it. I traded it with a 90/4 Macro, which I just couldn't warm up to, in spite of trying. The 90 Macro is okay, but the 90AA is stunning. The rendering of the 75AA is more clinical than the 90AA.
The 90AA weighs 500g, the 75AA 430. 70g difference. The 90AA is 78mm long, the 75AA 67, 11mm difference. You choose.
Personally I loved the 75 focal length on the M8, but on film or the M9 I much prefer 90mm. 75mm is not very long, and I own a 50 Lux ASPH, which is my favorite lens in the world.
Quite sharp indeed! How are used priced on the ASPH versus the 90/2 pre-asph III? And how do they perform compared to each other? I have seen the 90/2 pre-asph go for 800-1000 USD approx. used.
I didn't mean to imply that the 90 AA was soft wide open, just not amazingly, bitingly sharp like it is at further distances. As far as the size, it might not be big compared to other lenses in the world, but it's one of the bigger Leica lenses. Compared to the 90 Macro (collapsed) for example, it's twice as heavy and twice as long and larger in diameter. If you use 90 a lot, that's not a big deal, but if you use it for 2 shots a day while traveling, that's a big size difference.
It really depends on what you want. I wanted a 90 for tighter framing close up than I could achieve with my 50 AND I wanted a compact lens. In that sense, I find the 90 Macro stunning, and the 90 AA not at all. Though I've not tested it, I would imagine the 90 Macro is optimized for close focusing too. But even disregarding sharpness, the 90 AA is not necessarily the lens to go after if you are looking for a larger reproduction ratio, which was my point (and what I was looking for in a lens).
In what country? on eBay? The 90AA can generally be found for around €1600, with a bit of patience, possibly less. In the States it would be less (isn't it always), but import duties etc... The 90 Cron around here costs about €900-1100, and is also a good lens. It just isn't as sharp, and is perhaps a bit soft wide open, and has a little CA wide open. Stop it down a little and there is little difference between the two. The 90/2 pre-ASPH is a very good lens, and Canon or Nikon would be proud to have it in their current lineup
The 90AA is just really special. It has a little magic left in it, but is still *very* sharp. It is the M version of the 90AA-R, btw.
The prices are very much in flux right now, and on the rise, probably due to the M9. I would make up my mind quickly, go hunting and find one ASAP. Once more people start getting their M9s, the prices of M lenses will not come down for a long time. Getting the lens before the camera would make sense here. Just make sure it is the right lens
the main reason I didn't get along with the 90 Macro is that it was f/4. Even on sunny days, taking photos in the shade I found myself having trouble keeping good shutter speeds at base ISO, especially close up, so I never really found a proper use case with it. I also never really loved the collapsible format, and the very thin aperture ring. It just never clicked with me. The Macro adapter is also an awkward shape. It has great boke though, as good as the best.
However, in the end I would recommend the 90 Elmarit over the 90 Macro, unless someone needed to get really close (1:2.5 on the M8, IIRC).
I thought about getting a faster 90, then I realized I can live with f/4 outside, and indoors, 90 is WAY too long for me. I'd rather use 50 or 28 there, and 90/2 might be too slow anyway from a shutter speed/camera shake point of view. It also helped that I got one for a good price. I use it mainly for travel like I said - I see a detail in some woodwork, that kind of thing. I have time to pull it out and mount it, etc. I don't use it or expect it to do true macro, but the little bit of extra reach close in really helps it fill a gap for me. And it makes good portraits in good light. The ergonomics are obviously not as good as a rigid lens, but hey, I think it's smaller than my 50 collapsed, so it can easily sit in my pocket or the corner of a bag. Oh yeah, the 39mm filters are cool. Same size as my 28/3.5 and a lot of other M-mount lenses.
Here's another way to think about the 90 Macro - used, you can get it for about $100 more than a new Zeiss ZM 85/4. Not only is it smaller than that lens (and even smaller collapsed), it also focuses closer. Win-win.
I do think the 90 Elmarit is the most reasonably 90 to get for most uses. That or the 90 Summarit, though the Summarit is a bit more expensive usually.
Fair enough. It does focus *very* smoothly, and is really compact and light when collapsed. Oh, and the upside-down for macro is a stroke of genius
This lens will probably come into its own on the M9, needing a lower minimum shutter speed (smaller effective focal length), and given the M9's ~1-stop high ISO improvement.
I very seldom used the 90mm cron on the M8. The 75mm cron was one of my favorites with that camera. Maybe I will use the 90mm more with the M9. They are both good.
25/50/90 is my most likely trio, when I have drummed up funds for it, that is. 25/4 color skopar, 50 1.1 CV and a 90 2.0 pre-asph to soothe my depleted funds after an used M9 in august 2010 :P
Thanks for the info. My wait for the M9 has given me time to think this through. I'm leaning towards the 90 cron, since I just picked up the 50 lux asph.
ulrikft2 wrote:
25/50/90 is my most likely trio, when I have drummed up funds for it, that is. 25/4 color skopar, 50 1.1 CV and a 90 2.0 pre-asph to soothe my depleted funds after an used M9 in august 2010 :P
Pretty similar to where I'm going with RF kit, which is 28/50/90. I just need a 90 to round it out as I've already got a Ultron 28mm f1.9 and Nikkor 5cm f1.4. The 'Cron is my first choice but I'd need to get an M body then as I'm all LTM now.
ulrikft2 wrote:
25/50/90 is my most likely trio, when I have drummed up funds for it, that is. 25/4 color skopar, 50 1.1 CV and a 90 2.0 pre-asph to soothe my depleted funds after an used M9 in august 2010 :P
Yeah, and the 50 would be included with my M9 when I will be forced to sell it - after six months of starvation. You still have first dibs on it.
kosmoskatten wrote:
Yeah, and the 50 would be included with my M9 when I will be forced to sell it - after six months of starvation. You still have first dibs on it.
Sounds like a plan :P Have you gotten anything you've ordered yet? Can't wait to see your special brand of magic on a M9!
Though I've not tested it, I would imagine the 90 Macro is optimized for close focusing too. But even disregarding sharpness, the 90 AA is not necessarily the lens to go after if you are looking for a larger reproduction ratio, which was my point (and what I was looking for in a lens).
!