[Leica] Summicrons 90 - opinions?

[leica at screengang.com (Didier Ludwig)]

Thanks to all those who contributed to my 90mm post. I haven't decided yet 
but the sample pictures do help me a lot.
Thanks again
Didier



>What Don said.  This is exactly how I would describe my 1980-ish 90 
>Summicron. It has the same optics as the last pre-Asph (E55) version, but a 
>transitional mount where the built-in lens hood retracts over the aperture 
>ring.
>
>If I recall correctly, this one was taken around f/3.5 (and some cropping) 
>on Neopan 1600:
>http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/musicians/SarahSrRecit01-35.htm
>
>And this one was probably at a similar aperture, and better light, on Tri-X:
>http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/musicians/SarahHaydn1480-04.htm
>
>In this stage situation, the 90/2 AA is sharper wide open.  Astoundingly 
>sharp, actually. You can't tell much if any difference between the lenses 
>from f/2.8 down (from a practical hand-held shooting standpoint).  But the 
>90/AA has a seemingly narrower depth of field, the focus is a sharp 
>peak--if you graphed sharpness relative to distance, it would be an 
>upside-down "V"  rather than a broader upside-down "U" of the older design.
>
>Here's what I mean.  This one was shot with a borrowed 90/AA, I think wide 
>open or nearly so:
>http://users.2alpha.com/~pklein/musicians/2-03LonyaMischaWeb.jpg
>
>The two violinists are almost in the same plane--the one on the right is 
>maybe a foot behind the one on the left.  He's distinctly less sharp.  The 
>guy on the left is very sharp.  If I'd taken this same shot with the 
>classic design, it's more likely that both would not quite as sharp as the 
>man on the left, but sharper than the man on the right.
>
>--Peter
>
>At 08:28 AM 7/15/2007 -0700, Don Dory wrote:
>>The later
>>Summicrons behaved much like a gen IV 50 Summicron; not tack sharp wide 
>>open
>>but certainly very good images and down even one stop really good.  Bokeh 
>>on
>>either is of the old creamy style for the older design.