Early versus late 75mm Summilux

[j._mose]

Hello,

 

Do the earlier 75mm Summilux' focus as close as the later versions?

I have heard coatings have improved. Yet, when the 75mm Summilux was

introduced (around 1980?), multicoating was quite common.

 

I always hear people talk about wide open performance for portraits.

How would this lens be at infinity and f/1.4? Would it yield a soft

or special look for landscapes/city scapes?

 

Thanks for you advice.

 

Regards,

 

J. P. Mose

[Rob F.]

I waited for a 75 Lux expert to answer, but I can at least tell you what Erwin says in the Hove collector's pocket book. First version focuses to 100cm (1M); later versions to 75cm (.75M). He says," At maximum aperture overall contrast is medium and fine detail is clearly reproduced evenly over most of the picture area. There is a gradual improvement in crispness and clarity when stopping down a bit. Best aperture is f/5.6 . . ."

 

It doesn't sound like a soft portrait lens!

[stephen_w.]

Either are great lenses, just too bulky for me. I'm a 21/35/50 kind of guy.

[working camera]

I don't have my usual references at hand so, I stand to be corrected, by those more knowledgeable.

 

Off the top of my head I believe the 75 Lux.has not been changed optically since its introduction. The Close Focus should be the same. It's one of Leica's older designed lenses still in production, and shares many similarities with the R80 Summilux. It suffers from some softness at closer distances but is quite sharp at infinity even at f1.4. However, overall performance is best at f4 to 5.6. I think Erwin Puts' site has some detailed info on this side of things.

 

It is prized as a portrait lens, probably because the M APO 90mm Summicron is too damn sharp. At the time of introduction the 75 lux was highly regarded as an exceptional performer. For an older lens design the out-of-focus areas produce quite harsh bokeh (sp?) as opposed to that famed Leica creaminess.

 

A search through the archives here should turn up some more information. I remember some good threads.

[steve_unsworth1]

I had a play with the new ASPH 75mm Summicron today, now there is a _very_ nice handling lens! As is the New ASPH 50mm Summilux. Should have the films back tomorrow.

[stuart_richardson]

Craig wrote: "For an older lens design the out-of-focus areas produce quite harsh bokeh

(sp?) as opposed to that famed Leica creaminess." <P>I must completely disagree, I think

the 75 summilux has some of the creamiest out of focus areas of any lens Leica has made.

It is really a spectacular lens. The older version has a detachable hood and I believe it is a

bit heavier. I would go with the new version if I were you. The lens performs very well at all

distances, but at close range and 1.4, images appear a bit soft -- this is probably because

the plane of focus is so small. If you want to see someone who uses this lens masterfully,

check out Mike Dixon -- he has many fantastic shots with the lens. Here are two of mine

taken close up and wide open -- I don't think the out of focus areas are harsh at all.

<P><img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/sunflower-75lux.jpg"><P><img

src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/cannon-mouth.jpg">

[shoebox]

Nice pictures, Stuart. Can you post more? I am always interested in seeing how 75 lux

performs on different subjects.

[ramig]

harsh out of focus? I wouldn't describe it like that. In fact, I believe it is the softest out of

focus lens I own:<div></div>

[ramig]

sorry, another attempt<div></div>

[stuart_richardson]

Thanks Jeff -- I will poke around and see which ones I remember were the 75'lux. Here are

three more that I remember being the 75: <P>This one is a slight crop...<P><img

src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/dress-phone.jpg"><P><img src="http://

www.stuartrichardson.com/merry1.jpg"><P><img src="http://www.stuartrichardson.com/

75summilux-coffee.jpg"><P>Though it is a bit bulky (ok, not a bit), I think it is a great

general purpose lens if you are willing to carry it...

[shoebox]

How is the flare control of 75 lux without using the hood? The earlier version uses a hood

that is hard to find so I am interested in knowing how does it perform without using the

hood. The later version has a build-in hood but some people don't like it because it is rather

short.

[stuart_richardson]

Jeff -- I can't really help you there, I have the version with the built in hood and I never have

used it without extending it. I am just in the habit I guess. Though it is built in, it is not very

small! It extends out a pretty good bit. I don't think I would want it any longer, as it already

intrudes on a pretty good chunk of the viewfinder with the built in hood. As for flare, I cannot

recall a single instance where this was a problem for this lens, but then again, just because I

can't remember doesn't mean it doesn't happen. That said, I think all the modern summiluxes

control flare very well -- since they are designed for low light work, they are computed to

handle bright light sources inside or just outside the frame.

[shoebox]

Thanks again, stuart. I've never played with any version of the 75 lux so your information is

really helpful.

[stuart_richardson]

Here is the best illustration I can give you with a few seconds of work and my dinky digital

point and shoot. The first is the viewfinder occlusion with the hood extended and the lens

focused at infinity. The second is with the lens focused at .7m. You will see that it really

does obscure a great deal of the frame, and you need to be sure to be aware just what it is

hiding. I usually bring the lens to bear on the subject from the bottom right -- that way as

I am tuning in on the subject, I can see the area that is about to be obscured. It sounds

more complicated to explain than it is to actually do. Let me put it this way -- some

people are really bothered by the obstruction, I am not. <P><img src="http://

www.stuartrichardson.com/summilux-inf.jpg"><P><img src="http://

www.stuartrichardson.com/summilux-close.jpg">

[steve_hoffman]

It's a very nifty lens but very heavy; much more than the 90 ASPH. If you have a new MP or other brass made Leica it will begin to tire you after a full day of holding it.

[stuart_richardson]

I agree it is a rather heavy lens, but it is only 60 grams more than the 90/2 APO...is that

really that much of a difference? In any case, I think the lens is best used with a grip -- either

the M grip or a built in grip on a Luigi case or something like that. It really makes it much

nicer to carry. If I am going to be out for a whole day, I would probably make sure to bring a

shoulder bag to keep the camera and lens when I wasn't using that, but I would do that

anyway...

[j._mose]

Wow...what great responses and photos too! Seeing the images through the viewfinder is quite helpful. I don't know what bothers me more -- the obstruction or that the 75mm framelines are lacking and fairly close in size to the 50mm lines. I am sure with practice I would get use to it and overlook these disadvantages. The weight doesn't bother me for some reason. I used to carry around a Nikon F2 all day and started this practice when I was 15 years old (in 1972....I had a very nice dad!). I think I am conditioned to the weight.

 

Again, the shots are lovely. Dare I say they remind me of ones I have seen taken by a Noctilux? I must confess that I have owned a 90mm AA for around 3 years. I recently sold it on Ebay because I had to pay down my other Ebay purchases. I listed it with "buy it now" at $1540 and it sold within one hour to China. It was a bitter sweet feeling and I realized what I mistake I had made. I have been buying so much vintage camera stuff that I am at the point of selling items I actually use so I must stop! At the same time, I want to replace what I had and thought I would consider the 75mm as an alternate to the 90mm. My other lenses are the 24mm, 35mm lux, 50mm cron and 135mm Tele Elmar f/4. On the used market, the 75mm lux and 90mm cron AA are about the same. This is not a bad dilemma to be in -- they just both seem to have different fingerprints! I wouldn't even consider the new 75mm cron because I couldn't afford it. In fact, do you think Leica will drop the 75mm lux because of the new model?

 

Thanks again for all the information. Any more photos to share?

[mrivers]

Late Lux at Australia game park.<div></div>

[mike dixon]

I have many examples of photos shot with the 75 Summilux along with detailed descriptions of my impressions of using the camera if you go to the Leica forum archives and look in the "Leica Adventures" category for threads titled "75 'Lux Adventures." Some of the images in my "Models" portfolio here on photo.net were also shot with the 75 Summilux.<P>

While it's not blazingly sharp wide open, by f2.8 it's as sharp as just about any Leitz glass out there. Flare is well-controlled for such a fast lens, though it will flare if you have enough light pumping into it (one of my threads addresses this topic specifically).<P>

<center><img src="http://mikedixonphotography.com/livcol11.jpg"><br>

<i>face lit by light reflected from the book;<br>

daylight through a big window is lighting her back and sides</i></center><P>

The bokeh is as smooth or smoother than that of any other lens I have--not sure what inspired the comment about harsh bokeh.<P>

<center><img src="http://mikedixonphotography.com/sydneycol04.jpg"><P>

<img src="http://mikedixonphotography.com/rachelbw03.jpg"></center>

[duane_kucheran]

I've had an early ('81) 75 for about a month now. The spec sheet says it focuses to about 1 M but I see it goes about 0.85 m on its scale. I understand the 2nd version goes to about 0.7 m.

 

Can't comment on the specifics of multicoating of various lens versions, but in any multistep process there can always be little changes and hopefully improvements over the lifetime of a product. Cars are a point in fact.

 

This lens does not do a soft focus effect - rather things just aren't quite as detailed or snappy at the larger apertures as they are at f/4 - f/8. The lens helps make stunning portraits where the subject does indeed pop out of the background. The Canon FD 85 f/1.2L does almost as well but with the 'Lux there is a more pronounced effect probably due to somewhat greater contrast. A filter could always do the soft focus effect.

 

I initially didn't think I'd get this lens and would probably get a 90 of some sort, but I'm pleased with how versatile it is and how well it performs. If memory serves, it cost close to what a Noctilux did so it's quite an expensive piece of optics.

 

Cheers,

[david11]

I own a late model 75 Summilux, and find it an extremely versatile optic. Some folks just don't like its size; I am not one of those. I find it very sharp - especially from F2 on. I shot this informal portrait of a friend recently on Kodak Portra - I think at F2.<div></div>

[peter_mcdonough3]

I have the second version of this lens and am very happy with its performance. Although

some of the above photos are quite nice, they don't do this lens justice. It is very sharp at

f/1.4, with creamy bokeh and it just gets better stopped down. The contrast/sharpness

combination is perfect. I recently spent a wekend shooting in Manhattan and the weight

was not a problem as the lens balances nicely in one's hand. One shot I took at 1/15@1.4

on tri-x, blew up razor sharp. You really have to see a print from a negative taken with

this lens to appreciate it. I'll never get rid of mine.

Peter

[lot_wxs]

A little late but just saw this thread, because I hesitated changing my Summilux 75 for a new S'cron 75. I decided not to do that, because of the photo's beneath for instance. No harsh bokeh in my version of this lens, it's from 1996. The portrait is shot at F2.8 (PlusXPan), the other one at F4.0 (FP4).

[lot_wxs]

I can't seem to send two pictures at once

[lot_wxs]

another try