90mm vs. 75mm APO-Summicron ASPH

90mm vs. 75mm APO-Summicron ASPH

  • I prefer the 75mm APO-Summicron

    Votes: 25 59.5%

  • I prefer the 90mm APO-Summicron

    Votes: 17 40.5%
  • Total voters
    42
I've owned both the 90 AA and the current Elmarit-M at different times, it's highly unlikely you'd see any IQ difference at f/2.8 for landscape work between the two, certainly not enough to justify the price difference. I thoroughly tested resolution and contrast on each and found them both to be state of the art. Unless shooting live view digital where focus can be precisely nailed, any difference in sharpness will depend much more on how well the lens' rf cam and the camera's rf adjustment match up to allow perfect focus at the image plane. IQ performance is extremely high for both lenses to the point it will exceed your shooting ability unless comparing on a sturdy tripod and you are examining the image at well over 25x. The older 1959 Elmarit just can't cut as razor sharp an image compared to the later optics so slight focusing or shooting errors will be masked the lens' inherent aberrations.
 
Having both a 90 f2.8 and a 75 f1.4 (Canada). I've used the 75 for walking around. Its perspective is fine for me. The 90 is when I need reach and framing. My 75 is heavy but fast and super sharp.
 
Yes I had the 75 1.4 for a while. And yes, heavy! And sharp. I now have the 75 f/2: even sharper, and not too heavy.

I've had my 90 Elmarit, 1959 original chrome version, since about 1961 or so. I'm feeling very bonded to it. Do I really need the current Elmarit? Or the APO-Summicron? Is there a picture I can't take with what I have?
 
One thing that was holding me back from the APO-Summicron was that have only .58 and .72 Leicas, whereas the .85 or .93 is best for a 90mm f/2. But I'm realizing I could add the 1.25 magnifier to my .72 body! I could use it on my M5. That brings me closer to the 90 APO.
 
I’ve got a 90 R APO used with an EVF and a 75 Summilux, the latter easier to focus accurately on an M that the 75 APO. Just my anecdotal experience and cannot explain why even through the APO was adjusted and the Summilux shot as-is after purchase.
 
I try to buy a lens when the cost is attractive. Several years ago I got a 75mm 1.4 Summilux. This was years after buying a Summicron 90/2. The Cron is the old and heavy version which I like using for portraits. Both lenses are heavy. Neither one is ASPH.
 
james.liam said:
I’ve got a 90 R APO used with an EVF and a 75 Summilux, the latter easier to focus accurately on an M that the 75 APO. Just my anecdotal experience and cannot explain why even through the APO was adjusted and the Summilux shot as-is after purchase.
Click to expand...

That does seem strange. The Summilux ought to be more critical to focus! Maybe the greater resolution of the APO makes focusing errors more obvious?
 
raid said:
I try to buy a lens when the cost is attractive. Several years ago I got a 75mm 1.4 Summilux. This was years after buying a Summicron 90/2. The Cron is the old and heavy version which I like using for portraits. Both lenses are heavy. Neither one is ASPH.
Click to expand...

Yes, and when it's a Leica lens, the need for the cost to be attractive goes double! I really avoid paying more than I should be able to sell an item for later.
 
Emotion wins out. I have an APO 90mm on order, $2250. My wife chipped in for a birthday present. I'm sure I'll cherish it!
 
Depends on the other lenses you carry. 75 fits with 21, 35, and 135. 90 with 28 and 50. I would not take a 75 if I was bringing a 50 or a 90.
 
The 90/2 AA is a truly great lens but make sure the your camera's RF cam roller calibration is absolutely spot on perfect at infinity especially for your 50 mm lens (the only lens which requires no cam movement compensation due to focal length). The RF cam on your acquired 90/2 AA may wind up being slightly "long" causing a properly calibrated camera's rangefinder to focus past infinity at the lens' hard stop. This was the case on my mint copy and I came to the conclusion that it's much simpler for a Leica service person to polish off some excess microns from the 90/2 AA flat brass cam (if too long) than replace the entire cam member if not long enough. I mistakenly assumed that all of Leica's RF cams at infinity were honed to extremely tight tolerances considering their costs. This might have been true decades ago back in the 50's 60's or 70's, but more modern lenses seemed lacking this tight tolerance requiring either adjusting the camera's RF roller position for perfect focus (which unfortunately affects your other lens' infinity focus) or send the lens back to Leica to have the lens cam adjusted for exact infinity focus. If the infinity RF focus is slightly off for 35 mm and wider, it's much less of an issue because even wide open as those lenses typically have ample DOF to cover minor infinity RF errors. However, if infinity focus was a little off on 50 mm lens or longer at apertures of f/2 or larger, DOF was not enough to fully compensate.
 
Another thing I might do is to get a magnifier to make my effective base length longer. I think there is a fairly economical alternative to the Leica one, but I don't know how good it is. Probably worth it to get the real one.
 
I strongly agree with both statements, RF focus should be spot on accurate when using this lens to exploit it's truly stellar performance and an auxiliary 1.25x magnifier on all but possibly the M3 or M with an 0.85x finder would be highly beneficial. The only lens whose performance is nearly identical is the current 90/2.8 Elmarit-M lens. Because that lens has a circular cam design like a 50 mm lens rather than the flat cam that moves longitudinally on the 90 AA, I found the infinity focus accuracy of the Elmarit-M to be a nearly identical match to the 50. The main advantage of the flat cam is that it can easily be trimmed to perfection but the drawback is that some may initially arrive slightly long when leaving the factory requiring final trimming by a qualified technician. Interestingly, the non-APO 90/2 (E55) I owned for years also had a circular cam which matched my 50's infinity focus. As I recall various versions of the large 90/2 (E48) also had a flat cam but infinity focus was also a spot on match to my 50s as I suspect back in those days Leica was more finicky on consistency of matching infinity focus throughout their lens line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top