Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/07/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The 75 is neither a 50 nor a 90, but it is one of the best lenses made for the M. Fast, sharp. Great low-light lens. Depth of field wide open is close to nonexistent, however. If you want to get an excellent inexpensive 50, get the Cosina/Voigtlander Nokton f 1.5. Rated by Erwin as a bit sharper than the Summilux 50 - which it should be given that it is a modern aspheric design and the Summilux is a, what, 40-year-old design. Anyway, you can get one for about $450, and then figure out whether you want a 75 or a 90. The Cosina/Voigtlander 75 f 2.5, by the way, is also a good, inexpensive, small - not much bigger than a 50 - alternative to the Summilux or a 90. It isn't incredibly fast, but it produces good results and it is an easy lens to toss in your pocket. B. D. A Leica Shooter wrote: > > It seems that most folks opt to shoot with the 28,35,50, and 90. There does not seem to be much mention of the 75 Summilux on the list. For those of you shooting with the 75, why? Why did you opt to buy the lens? Has it replaced either or both the 50 and 90? > > My main interested is in a replacement for the 50. Currently I have both the 35 and 90 Summicron. I am considering either the 75 or 50. What are your thoughts and why? > > A Lecia Shooter