The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Let's talk 75 and 90mm
- Thread starter tom in mpls
- Start date
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
Tom
I use my M s extensively (15k images per year) and I find having the lens information in the EXIF useful . The firmware corrections at 90mm aren t important. I have coded almost every lens (including the zeiss zm s) .
But if you treat your M glass like a "portfolio" ,getting 6 bit adds more value than it costs(especially at $100) . Priced appropriately a coded, good condition M lens will sell with 48 hours. I was looking at the M lenses set to appreciate and the 90 2.8 elmarit-M is a sleeper. Too late for the used 35/50 etc. they are already way up. The 90 s are being snapped up by the dealers .
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
RobertThere are so many good 90mm options, it's really impossible to make a bad choice. I'm partial to the 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit, very small and pocketable.
Rockwell's site has quite a bit of good comparison data in his lens charts, regardless of whether his writing style is appreciated...or not.
My issue with KR tests are not with his writing style and I try to read most of his reports. My issue is he is not a dedicated M user ( like Sean Reid or Michael R) so his frame of reference doesn t compare with my experience or align with that of many on this and the LUF. I have the same issue with Diglloyd s evaluations of the M9 and I think his stuff overall is first rate.
I am not interested in KR comparing a CRF to a D90 or an M3 with slide film and I think this bias comes through in his opinions. You can certainly learn things from his reviews but its his conclusions(opinions) that I question.
innerimager
Member
Timely thread as I just purchased my second 90 APO. On the M8, I didn't favor the 90mm FL. I have a 90 elmarit, new version, and it is an excellent lens and very easy to handle in the field both size/weight and fast focus. Actually my 90 elmarit was leant to Sean when he did his 90 review. I added a 90 APO but never used it enough to get a sense of it, and sold it to raise funds for the M9. With the full frame M9, I wish to shoot 90mm more regularly, and while the elmarit is great, the extra stop is very important to me in my usage. I found a good deal on a used 90 APO, so I'll give it a careful look and see if I want two 90s, one, and which one. As for 75mm, I am a 75 lux lover, it's my favorite portrait lens, on film, and now on the M9. For a light fast focusing 75 I have a CV color skopar, and it's tack sharp and well, well worth having around at the price of $300 or so. So to the original 75 or 90 question, you can see how I answer it. Both, and maybe 2 samples of each, a fast, larger, heavier, slower focusing one and a light, fast focusing, slower one. I'm bad, I know.....Peter
tom in mpls
Active member
At f/2.8 and above, is the 90 AA still superior to the current version of the 90 elmarit?
glenerrolrd
Workshop Member
Puts will normally have the information on this comparison. A good rule of thumb (if you are basing IQ on MTF ) is that the newer optics will have a one to two stop advantage over the "classics..preasph" . So the 90/2 would perform as well at f2 as the 90/2.8 does at f2.8 and this difference would hold until the optimum f5.6 is reached ..here both will be so good that it doesn t matter. Once you reach f4 I doubt you would see material differences in MTF performance . But at f2 and f2.8 the 90AA would outperform the 90 E enough to notice.
The other side of this argument is that it can be useful to allow some softness etc at full aperture for portraits . The complaint on the 90AA is that it might be too well corrected to have the Leica glow. So some would like the softness/glow at f2.8 and the ability to dial in the level of contrast etc as you stop down.
The other side of this argument is that it can be useful to allow some softness etc at full aperture for portraits . The complaint on the 90AA is that it might be too well corrected to have the Leica glow. So some would like the softness/glow at f2.8 and the ability to dial in the level of contrast etc as you stop down.
Roger Wrote>>> "The other side of this argument is that it can be useful to allow some softness etc at full aperture for portraits . The complaint on the 90AA is that it might be too well corrected to have the Leica glow. So some would like the softness/glow at f2.8 and the ability to dial in the level of contrast etc as you stop down."<<<
....and that's exactly where the Summicron 90mm f2.0 pre ASPH come in (especially the last version right before the 90mm AA), in my opinion. After having used all three lenses (the 90mm AA, the last version of 90mm f2.8 Elmarit-M and the last version of the 90mm f2.0 Pre Asph, the 90mm f2.0 Pre ASPH has the best of both worlds if some Leica glow but also good sharpness, retention of detail and "contrast dialed down" a bit for portraits is desired. It virtually reaches sharpness levels equal to the other two lenses when stopped down a bit. The exceptional performing 90mm f2.8 Elmarit-M (last version) I felt was closer in performance f-stop for f-stop when compared to the 90mm AA..maybe just a smigen behind, but didn't quite have the softeness/leica glow that the 90mm f2.0 AA had. All superb lenses that's for sure and a case can be made for each regarding their use and performance levels.
One last thing....personaly both for handling purposes and I also believe for the best combination of character/glow & ultimate sharpness in a 90mm Pre Asph...the version I would go with (if the 90mm Pre ASPH was going to be your choice)....is with is the last version, that looks, feels and handles almost exactly like the current 90nmm AA.
Dave (D&A)
....and that's exactly where the Summicron 90mm f2.0 pre ASPH come in (especially the last version right before the 90mm AA), in my opinion. After having used all three lenses (the 90mm AA, the last version of 90mm f2.8 Elmarit-M and the last version of the 90mm f2.0 Pre Asph, the 90mm f2.0 Pre ASPH has the best of both worlds if some Leica glow but also good sharpness, retention of detail and "contrast dialed down" a bit for portraits is desired. It virtually reaches sharpness levels equal to the other two lenses when stopped down a bit. The exceptional performing 90mm f2.8 Elmarit-M (last version) I felt was closer in performance f-stop for f-stop when compared to the 90mm AA..maybe just a smigen behind, but didn't quite have the softeness/leica glow that the 90mm f2.0 AA had. All superb lenses that's for sure and a case can be made for each regarding their use and performance levels.
One last thing....personaly both for handling purposes and I also believe for the best combination of character/glow & ultimate sharpness in a 90mm Pre Asph...the version I would go with (if the 90mm Pre ASPH was going to be your choice)....is with is the last version, that looks, feels and handles almost exactly like the current 90nmm AA.
Dave (D&A)
Last edited:
jonoslack
Active member
Hi Tom
I haven't used all these lenses, but I'm still allergic to using great big lenses on my M cameras, however good they are.
The first M lens I ever bought was a 90 elmarit (together with a 50 'cron), to use on a film M6. I loved it. Then I bought an M8, and my 75 'cron Asph became the longer lens of choice. The only reason the 90 elmarit wasn't sold was that they weren't really fetching much money.
In the 6 months i've had the M9, the 90 elmarit has been one of the most used lenses, it's fairly small, fairly light, very sharp, has a lovely bokeh together with a built in lens hood. It's just a great lens, possibly the most reliably good lens I have for the M9.
If I didn't have one, then I'd be tempted by the 90 summarit, but I do have one, and it's great!
I haven't used all these lenses, but I'm still allergic to using great big lenses on my M cameras, however good they are.
The first M lens I ever bought was a 90 elmarit (together with a 50 'cron), to use on a film M6. I loved it. Then I bought an M8, and my 75 'cron Asph became the longer lens of choice. The only reason the 90 elmarit wasn't sold was that they weren't really fetching much money.
In the 6 months i've had the M9, the 90 elmarit has been one of the most used lenses, it's fairly small, fairly light, very sharp, has a lovely bokeh together with a built in lens hood. It's just a great lens, possibly the most reliably good lens I have for the M9.
If I didn't have one, then I'd be tempted by the 90 summarit, but I do have one, and it's great!
tom in mpls
Active member
Yes, I agree that small is one of the great appeals of the M.
innerimager
Member
Yes, small is good. I guess I put in enough hours lugging a 300/2.8 and 200-400 during my sports shooting years, that a 90AA, 74/1.4, etc. ARE small! best...Peter
I'll throw my words in for the 90 Elmarit. Fantastic lens, and out of the three 90's it's my fave on the M9. I am also finding the 50 summicron to be pretty special on the M9 BTW. I snagged a new old stock 90 Elmarit a couple of weeks back and was shooting it side by side with a 75 cron today. Oddly, I liked the 90 better even though the 75 is also fantastic.
Double Negative
Not Available
All the new M9 users that have previously dumped their 90mm lenses now want them back...
Of course, if you shot film with your 90 - you wouldn't be in this situation!
beamon
New member
I'm a fan of the 90 Elmarit pre AA Tom, maybe because it's the one I own.
Bought it about 9 years ago when it was current. It's the skinny one with integral slide out hood (Prod. No. 11807), 6-bit coded by DAG. Though coding is, IMO, not necessary for this FL, I did it so I would have all my M lenses coded and not have to change the setting on my M8.2
The pic below was done in bright sun, but the bougainvillea was blowing mightily in a strong wind necessitating a high shutter speed. ISO 1250 was the result, so the noise moved in, but it's not too bad.
Bought it about 9 years ago when it was current. It's the skinny one with integral slide out hood (Prod. No. 11807), 6-bit coded by DAG. Though coding is, IMO, not necessary for this FL, I did it so I would have all my M lenses coded and not have to change the setting on my M8.2
The pic below was done in bright sun, but the bougainvillea was blowing mightily in a strong wind necessitating a high shutter speed. ISO 1250 was the result, so the noise moved in, but it's not too bad.
innerimager
Member
Update on my 90 decision. I went out shooting with my elmarit and it really does sing on the M9, (it did on the M8 as well). I considered getting the 90 AA and seeing which I preferred, but there's no way I'd let the elmarit go. And...a 21 lux I've been dreaming about came my way so all the lens funds are long gone.
A big vote for the 90/2.8 ... fantastic on both M8 and M9 .... perhaps the most unsung lens in the M line-up. Sharp. but retains that beautiful Leica character that seemed missing from the 90AA that I once had and sold. I also tried a 90/2.5 and sent it back as I still preferred the 90/2.8.
Personally, over 50mm I prefer Old School non-ASPH ... so I now use a 75/1.4 and 90/2.8. Why both? It depends on which combo of 3 lenses based on the shooting conditions and subject: 28, 50, 90 or 24, 35, 75 are my most frequently used kits.
-Marc
Personally, over 50mm I prefer Old School non-ASPH ... so I now use a 75/1.4 and 90/2.8. Why both? It depends on which combo of 3 lenses based on the shooting conditions and subject: 28, 50, 90 or 24, 35, 75 are my most frequently used kits.
-Marc
jonoslack
Active member
I also have the 75 'cron. I think it was my favorite lens on the M8, less so on the M9 until I found it was front focusing quite badly. Right now it's in Germany being 'matched' to my M9 body - hopefully it'll be back by the end of the week.
Apart from being a great lens, I really like the close focusing ability (second only in magnification to the 90 elmar macro), it's startlingly sharp, but still manages a nice bokeh.
However, as others said, the slim 90 elmarit real sings on the M9 - mine was lying at the back of the cupboard until the M9 appeared. It's really a lovely lens. Grab one now before everyone else realises!
all the best
Apart from being a great lens, I really like the close focusing ability (second only in magnification to the 90 elmar macro), it's startlingly sharp, but still manages a nice bokeh.
However, as others said, the slim 90 elmarit real sings on the M9 - mine was lying at the back of the cupboard until the M9 appeared. It's really a lovely lens. Grab one now before everyone else realises!
all the best
Just some info, in case anyone is interested since we're on the topic of 90mm's, especially the extremely fine 90mm f2.8 (last version). I'm sure others who have used or tested the three lenses mentioned below, have experienced similar virtues and probably nothing that hasn't been mentioned or shown previously.
Yesterday I did another semi formal test (major f-stops and three different distances) between the 90mm f2.8 Elmarit (e-46) and the last 90mm f2.0 Pre Asph since I've long suspected these two lenses were extremely close, both optically and in character...and thats why Leica had to distinguish more between these two and updated the 90mm Pre Asph to the 90mm AA (which I had on hand too and included in these tests). I've often felt that the last of the 90mm f2.0 (both pre Apsh and AA) weren't significantly different in size or handling from the 90mm f2.8 (unlike the Lux 75mm is from other 75's)...in what was I gaining or loosing..so decision was based on optical characteristics.
Optically and in terms of sharpness, the 90mm Pre Asph and 90mm f2.8 were extremely close in almost all performance characteristics f-stop for f-stop...a bit more modern looking image and contrast would go to the 90mm f2.8 and a bit more "roundness" to the 90mm pre ASPH when both shot at f2.8 and f4 . Beyond those f-stops, not a lot to distinguish the two. These results could be seen at all subject to camera distances. Of course the 90mm pre ASPH gains a 1 stop advantage and the 90mm f2.8 gains a bit in compactness....both have built in sliding hoods.
The 90mm AA was a different beast altogether...and had more contrast than the other two in most lighting circumstances throughout most of it's f-stop range. In terms of sharpness, it achieved a measurable advantage over the other two as the camera to subject distance increased...but this advantage in sharpness over the other non ASPH lenses decreased as all lenses were shot beyond approx. f4.5. The 90AA was also a bit more brutal in sharpness than the other two lenses in close-up range from f2 to f4.5... so this lens may not be ideal for certain portrait work. It had the highest contrast of all three almost extending out to f8.
I think the 90mm f2.8, due to it's somewhat higher contrast (and apparent micro-contrast) than the 90mm Pre Asph at f2.8 and f4.. has it fitting optically in between the other two lenses (the 90mm Pre ASPH and 90mm AA)....so all three have enough to distinguish themselves to be put into slightly different categories, depending on desired use and application and also need for speed. I think the 90mm f2.8 currently is "all the rage" and for very good reason, but I wouldn't underestimate the last 90mm f2.0 Pre ASPH...as it may come as a surprise for those that haven't used it and the size difference (or disadvantage) is slight in my opinion...but then again I'm used to shooting with large or heavy lenses.
To sum up...and in my opinion..
1) The 90AA in some ways reminds me of current 75mm cron..when ultimate sharpness and contrast (and speed) is desired above all else and definitely a measure of superiority in both these attributes as when compared to the other two lenses.
2) The last 90mm f2.0 Pre Asph..a good choice with a slightly to slightly moderate lower contrast when compared to the other two lenses. Great for portraits, higher contrast lighting situations, speed and some reportage type situations and good all rounder with a stop advantage over the 90mm f2.8.
3) The last 90mm f2.8 when one of the best all around general use 90mm's is desired..good contrast (bit higher than the 90mm pre ASPH) smaller lighter weight package, excellent sharpness (a match for the 90mm pre Asph with a slight bump in contrast giving it a slight look of increased sharpness over the 90mm pre ASPH)..with a sacrifice of an f-stop compared to the other two in some low light situations.
Please keep mind that many of the individual differences between these three lenses decrease or are almost eliminated when the lenses are stopped down to f4.5, f5.6 and beyond.
Dave (D&A)
Yesterday I did another semi formal test (major f-stops and three different distances) between the 90mm f2.8 Elmarit (e-46) and the last 90mm f2.0 Pre Asph since I've long suspected these two lenses were extremely close, both optically and in character...and thats why Leica had to distinguish more between these two and updated the 90mm Pre Asph to the 90mm AA (which I had on hand too and included in these tests). I've often felt that the last of the 90mm f2.0 (both pre Apsh and AA) weren't significantly different in size or handling from the 90mm f2.8 (unlike the Lux 75mm is from other 75's)...in what was I gaining or loosing..so decision was based on optical characteristics.
Optically and in terms of sharpness, the 90mm Pre Asph and 90mm f2.8 were extremely close in almost all performance characteristics f-stop for f-stop...a bit more modern looking image and contrast would go to the 90mm f2.8 and a bit more "roundness" to the 90mm pre ASPH when both shot at f2.8 and f4 . Beyond those f-stops, not a lot to distinguish the two. These results could be seen at all subject to camera distances. Of course the 90mm pre ASPH gains a 1 stop advantage and the 90mm f2.8 gains a bit in compactness....both have built in sliding hoods.
The 90mm AA was a different beast altogether...and had more contrast than the other two in most lighting circumstances throughout most of it's f-stop range. In terms of sharpness, it achieved a measurable advantage over the other two as the camera to subject distance increased...but this advantage in sharpness over the other non ASPH lenses decreased as all lenses were shot beyond approx. f4.5. The 90AA was also a bit more brutal in sharpness than the other two lenses in close-up range from f2 to f4.5... so this lens may not be ideal for certain portrait work. It had the highest contrast of all three almost extending out to f8.
I think the 90mm f2.8, due to it's somewhat higher contrast (and apparent micro-contrast) than the 90mm Pre Asph at f2.8 and f4.. has it fitting optically in between the other two lenses (the 90mm Pre ASPH and 90mm AA)....so all three have enough to distinguish themselves to be put into slightly different categories, depending on desired use and application and also need for speed. I think the 90mm f2.8 currently is "all the rage" and for very good reason, but I wouldn't underestimate the last 90mm f2.0 Pre ASPH...as it may come as a surprise for those that haven't used it and the size difference (or disadvantage) is slight in my opinion...but then again I'm used to shooting with large or heavy lenses.
To sum up...and in my opinion..
1) The 90AA in some ways reminds me of current 75mm cron..when ultimate sharpness and contrast (and speed) is desired above all else and definitely a measure of superiority in both these attributes as when compared to the other two lenses.
2) The last 90mm f2.0 Pre Asph..a good choice with a slightly to slightly moderate lower contrast when compared to the other two lenses. Great for portraits, higher contrast lighting situations, speed and some reportage type situations and good all rounder with a stop advantage over the 90mm f2.8.
3) The last 90mm f2.8 when one of the best all around general use 90mm's is desired..good contrast (bit higher than the 90mm pre ASPH) smaller lighter weight package, excellent sharpness (a match for the 90mm pre Asph with a slight bump in contrast giving it a slight look of increased sharpness over the 90mm pre ASPH)..with a sacrifice of an f-stop compared to the other two in some low light situations.
Please keep mind that many of the individual differences between these three lenses decrease or are almost eliminated when the lenses are stopped down to f4.5, f5.6 and beyond.
Dave (D&A)
Last edited: