Re: 50mm focal length / M 1:1,4/75 mm

[KEVIN BURKE <KBURKE@iterated.com>]

>From: Hubert Nowotny

[...]
>I had this Summilux M 75 mm lens and sold it again(for me it had
>too low contrast, it was too heavy; well, I was disappointed and
>didn't like it). But, however, if you need the focal length and the
>aperture, it's the only lens available for M in this class.

Interesting to read your observations Hubert.  I picked up a fairly recent
example (by serial number) of this lens and had a different experience.
I also have the 90/2  (approx. 8 years old) and have written to the group
about quick comparisons between them.  I re-examined the Kodachrome
200 I shot with both lenses just last night and again found the contrast of 
the
90/2 to be a little lower in the near focus range near max aperture.  This
75/1.4 has noticably higher contrast in the same range - so much so
that people's eyelashes sometimes look like they're wearing mascara
at first glance.  This may be a calibration issue on my part.  I've shot
with the 90/2 for a long time and like it's character.

Prior to picking up the 75/1.4 I now have, I tried an older one from my
local dealer.  I was able to shoot the two lenses (older 75 & newer 75)
side by side for a short time.  Unfortunately, my film choice was not a
good one for critical judgement but both lenses displayed a similar
high contrast performance in the near focusing range, at or near
maximum aperture.  On occasion, the older one seemed to resolve
fine lines (eyelashes) near the center of the field slightly better than
the newer one.  However, I didn't shoot in a very controlled situation with
a film good for making firm judgements.  Overall, the two lenses
were very, very similar.  Contrast, color and field flatness seemed
the same to me.

Both lenses I compared were the version with the integrated hoods.
I didn't try the earlier version with detachable hood.  The local dealer
tells me the optical formula is the same, but who knows if they don't
tinker with the coatings over time?

>I now have 50 mm and 90 mm (1:2.0 or so) and I'm happy with it,
>there's nothing missing.

I sold my 50/2 a while ago and thought that the 75/1.4 might work as
a substitute.  I was wrong.  I definately miss having a 50mm.  I'm now
trying to decide which one to get.

Regards, Kevin

kburke@iterated.com