Leica 90/2 APO

[matt_veld]

I am about to splash out some big bucks on a Leica 90/2 APO Summicron M Asph lens or less bucks on an Elmarit M 90/2.8. Has anyone had extensive use with the APO version?

I have heard good reports about the Elmarit 90/2.8 M lens, however I kind of like the idea of an f2 to blurr the background even more in portraits. I read Erwin Putts review of both lenses but what I need to know is how do they compare as far as pictures are concerned?

 

<p>

 

There's a regular on the LUG named Mark Rabiner who rates the APO version extremely highly. Any comments from you guys would be welcome thanks.

[albert_smith]

Matt,

 

<p>

 

Check out this thread from the old questions. There are a lot of

fans of the Elmarit M on this forum... Me included. I saw the

postings on the LUG where the person had scanned a small portion of

the negative from the APO Summicron, and it was indeed sharp, but I

won't concead anything about the quality of the Elmarit M.

 

<p>

 

While there might be a bit of a difference between f/2.0 and f/2.8 as

far as the background, I don't believe it will jump off of the

picture. I personally find f/2.8 just about right for enough DOF for

the face at the 6-8 foot range anyway.

 

<p>

 

<a href="http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=004HNd">http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=004HNd</a>

[kenny_chiu8]

Elmarit M 90/2.8 is better choice if you travel or carry it around.

The reduced weight makes difference.

 

<p>

 

Leica 90/2 APO Summicron M Asph is better chioce if you like to

photograph people on stages like dance rehearsals. The extra stop

makes difference.

[rob - atlanta, ga usa]

I hesitate to mention this, but it seems like I read somewhere

that there is a rumor floating around regarding an APO 90 Elmarit to

be released in the near future. Anyone else heard anything about

this or am I dreaming?

[john_collier]

The Elmarit-M is an astonishing lens but if you need f2 and

sharp as a tack wide open, then the 90/2AA is the only way to go.

The performance of the 90/2AA is equal to, maybe even slightly

better, the Elmarit-M at f2.8; but, unless you are clamped to a

tripod, it would be hard to notice a difference between the two. So

it comes down to what you want, f2 or f2.8 and money for film.

 

<p>

 

Cheers

[tom_bryant]

There's more to lens sharpness than just optical bench performance.

 

<p>

 

My old (and I mean 25 years old) long focus Summicron 90 is wonderfuly

sharp wide open when shooting hand held, which is where we do most of

our shooting. This is because it's got lots more rotational intertia

than any of it's more recent telephoto cousins. In other words, once

it's pointed in a given direction, it takes more of a bump (read hand

shake here) to make it move, and thus blur the image. The long focus

also did not need to incorporate a true telephoto design to make it

smaller. It's thus sharper, heavier, and larger than any subsequent

lens, HAND HELD, IMHO.

 

<p>

 

If you want sharp in this focal length, get the 90mm f/2.5 Vivitar

90mm Series I macro (yes, VIVITAR, whoda thunk it?) or the 100 mm

f/2.8 Macro Elmarit for the Leicaflex, the current MTF champiion of

both Pot Phot and Photodo.com. Mind that here I'm talking about

tripod mounted photos of flat field subjects. (What! you mean you

don't always mount your Leica M on a tripod before exposure? <Well, if

you must know, most of the time, neither do I!>)

 

<p>

 

The 90mm Summicron ASPH is a lovely lens, much smaller than my old 90.

And 3 times as expensive.

 

<p>

 

Ya pays yer money, and ya takes yer choice.

 

<p>

 

Enjoy.

[andrew_schank]

The f2.0 may be more useful in blurring the backround for a full body

shot than the 2.8, but you'll be hard pressed to get both eyes in

focus at f2.0 on a tight shot. I use my Elmarit at 2.8 and 4.0 for

tight shots, and the backround is still reduced to soft abstract

shapes. Both these lenses are too sharp for portraits of anyone over

12 years old! The 2.8 90 Elmarit is the sharpest short tele I've ever

used.

[bob_mac]

Good Morning,

90 f/2.8 is the way to go. It is a tight little lens that will amaze

you each time you get your film back from the lab. I had a similar

thought of buying a 90 f/2, but after a long hard thought went w/ the

90 f2.8. It is nicely balanced on my M6 (.72) and the built in hood

has been a delight. Don't get caught up in all the hoop-la about fast

lens. They are great for those who are using the M's under poor light

all the time. I do shoot it at f/2.8 all the time, because you can.

It is Very sharp lens that will never let you down.

If you are the type of person who is sitting in the dark 75% of the

time shooting saying to yourself "gee I wish I had an extra stop"

the go for the F/2 apo. If you want to be seen with a F/2 strapped

around your neck simply to impress youself or others the go for the

F/2. If you want to take amazingly crisp photos with and extra grand

in youe pocket and some dough to take the 'lil lady out to dinner,

then go for the 90 F/2.8. You cannot loose.

 

<p>

 

Looks like you are going to have to sweat this one out yourself.

Good Luck.

Bob

[john_chan2]

It really depends on your priorities. Personally, if I had to choose

one I would go for the 90/ 2.8 but that is because I don't feel

comfortable going beyond 75 mm for rangefinder accuracy and any

difference between the two 90s would be masked by operator error (the

shakes). I have the 75 mm and it is a spectacular lens (crisp, perhaps

the sharpest in Leica-land) but don't ask me for a hyperfocal plane at

1.4.... just doesn't exist so most of my 1.4 shots are done at

infinity. For most everything else its 2.8-5.6. I have tried the 90/

2.8 on the M6 and I think the balance is better than the 90/2 ASPH.

But its your call. BTW: the hyperfocal range of the 90/2 at F2 is

about equal to my 75/1.4 at 1.4.

[robert_appleby]

I believe that if you have the other aspheric lenses you might find

the 90 apo asph a better match than the older 90 or even the newer

90/2.8. I recall Mark Rabiner saying that when he lines up his slides

on the lightbox they all look like they came out of the same lens

with diffrent magnifications, or words to that effect. I use the

24/2.8 and 35/1.4 asph and found the summicron 50 a bit disappointing

in comparison, it doesn't have the same punch. If I were about to get

a 90 this would be a consideration for me.

 

<p>

 

I also believe there's little difference in weight between the

elmarit and the summicron, or little enough to make it moot. When

you've already got a couple of bodies and lenses in the bag, 100

grams more or less doesn't make much difference.

 

<p>

 

Rob.

[jay_.]

A big consideration is your majority use. For me the availability of

f/22 with the Elmarit is important for maximizing DOF. I made an

adaptor to use the Universal Polarizer on E-55 lenses like the 90/2

but Leica only makes one for the Elmarit.

[minh_nguyen4]

Hi every one,

 

<p>

 

I also have a similar queston to Matt, I confusing between the two

Elmarit M 90mm f2.8 and Summicron M 90mm F2(non APO).

 

<p>

 

Any one know where can i get more information on this two lens, like

the cpmparision etc,

 

<p>

 

Thanks