80mm Summilux R compared to pre asph 90/2 R

[tony_salce]

Hello All,

 

I am wondering whether any users have used these two lenses side by

side and compared results ?

 

Much difference between the two ?

 

Is there room for both in the bag ? Or would that be extravagance in

the extreme ?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Tony

[Rob F.]

I'd say, carry one or the other, but not both. Too much functional overlap between them, and too much weight and bulk. 97% of shots could be taken with either one.

[brunom]

Tony

 

I had exactly the same dilema some time ago, and chose, because of the ease and precision of focussing and framing, the R lens.

 

I had the M one some years ago and got rid of it sharpish, as [for me ] it was too big and heavy for easy use on an M camera [ didn't balance well]. The R lens really fits well with an R8 or R9. I believe they are more or less identical in optical performance,and from memory the R seemed shorter but wider in physical size.

 

Bruno

[guy bennett]

Bruno,

 

Tony is referring to the R version of the 90...

[michael_b._elmer]

I also had both, but never in the same bag. I found out that I much preferred the 80/1.4 R over the 90/2.0 R, so I sold the 90/2.0 R.

 

That being said, I am considering to buy a 100/2.8 Apo-R at a later stage for use mainly as a macro lens but also as a short, ultra sharp tele.

 

Perhaps the 90 /2.0 apo-m apo-asph could serve as a versatile, handy and light weight compromise between all these lenses and save space in the photo-bag (and, on the long run, money as well).

[michael_b._elmer]

sorry, there's a misprint in the last line - read: the 90 Apo-Asph R

[guy_mancuso]

Micheal , I agree . I have gone back and forth twice on the 80 and the 90 apo . my conclusion is if you want one lens that is sharp easy to carry and focus get the 90 apo but it is very sertile or clinical in look. I went with the 80 for the look and bokeh and just about to hit the button for the 100 macro for the sharp sterile look . So this way i have 2 different looks . The older 90 f2 , is good but the 80 summi is better in my mind. This area has been a issue because it really depends on what you are after in your images

[Robin Smith]

I had the 90/2 and sold it for a late 90/2.8. Then missed the old Summicron so...I got an 80/1.4 instead. The 90/2 and 80/1.4 are very fine lenses, but given the choice I would go for the 80mm, better performing at f2, but also of course much more expensive. The 90mm focusses closer. The 80mm I do believe is special and is a stop faster for great dof effects. I still keep the 90/2.8 when I want ultimate performance for landscapes etc. The 4 element 90/2.8 is almost up there with the 90/2 apo and the 100/2.8 apo.

 

I don't think there is any point in having both the 90/2 non-apo and the 80/1.4. Better to get the small 90mm/2.8 or an apo lens as a companion. If you can stretch to the current APO 90 then of course you can combine ulitmate performance with speed. Even so, the 80mm is still my favourite R lens.

[tom_duffy1]

I own both. My 90 Summicron has been used quite extensively since purchased in 1976. It's a great portrait lens at f2 and is very sharp around f5.6 or f8. A nice combination in a single lens. It focuses to about 28 inches and allows you to get pretty tight. It was my default lens on my Leicaflex SL.

 

About a year ago I got a good price on a used 80 Summilux and use it on an R8. I prefer the 80mm. The extra speed is helpful and easier to focus, as well. The lens is entirely usable at f1.4, is much sharper (without being too sharp) than the 90 at f2 and is great for portraits down to about f4. Big difference for me is that it's an 80 not a 90. Doesn't sound like much of a difference but the focal length difference makes it much more of a universal lens, whereas the 90 was sometimes a bit long.

 

Take care,

 

Tom

[brunom]

Guy

 

Thanks for the gently reminder - don't know why I thought he was referring to 75M and 80 R !

 

Bruno