Last weekend the light was perfect, so on our way to dinner we stopped at Highland Park for some quick snaps. Christina asked, “Why are you carrying the Leica in such a big bag?” Muhahaha! Little did she know she was the unwitting accomplice in a “portrait lens shoot-out”. The set up was simple - one spot with Christina facing north, same spot with her facing south and the sun was to the west, just settling into the tree line. The sequence was taken quickly to ensure the light was reasonably similar across the series. All shots were handheld, no fill-flash and wide open at F2. The RAW files were edited in C1 Pro and then worked on in Photoshop for the localized edits (smoothing skin, amping the saturation, etc.) My goal was to see how the finished images from the Zeiss 100mm ZE compared to the Leica 75mm Summicron-M APO.

1. •ZEISS:  The Carl Zeiss 100mm F2 Makro Planar ZE is a large, substantial lens. The Zeiss 100mm ZE is larger than the Contax 100mm F2 Planar; I prefer the Contax’s size. But, the 100 ZE has auto aperture which can make shooting easier and quicker, though, in this case all the shots were F2, so the aperture advantage was not relevant.
   

2. The Zeiss has excellent build quality, so the shooting experience is very enjoyable - though the total kit with the Canon 1Ds Mark III is large, especially compared to the M package. Focusing the lens is fairly easy and the keeper rate was ~7 or 8 shots out of 10. Christina loves to do hair flips - just as I dial in focus - BAM! - hair flip. I miss a good number of shots because of her moving, or sometimes focus is “close enough” and I just hope for the best and let it rip.
   

3. Over the years my keeper rate for portraits with auto-focus lenses and manual focus lenses has been about the same. When using auto-focus I lose time selecting the right auto-focus point. I think manual focusing is faster and compositions are easier because there is not an active focus point governing the framing.
   

4. Sometimes I use the 100ZE like a spy glass, looking through viewfinder to check out different angles or views. Chimping is a big part of experience - mostly making sure the 1Ds3 did not clip a critical highlight. Overall, the 100 ZE experience feels somewhat “technical”. With years of experience with the Contax 100mm Planar - framing, focusing, metering, etc., feels systemic with a somewhat regimented process.
   

1. •LEICA:  The build quality of the Leica 75mm Summicron-M APO is superb. As nice as the Zeiss 100mm feels, each time I switch back to the 75mm APO, the difference in build quality is obvious. The Leica M9 / 75 APO is half the size of the 1Ds3 set-up, making the M9 feel more nimble. In terms of the hand holding experience, I do prefer the Leica 75 APO over the Zeiss - at least for these casual candid shots.
   

2. To fill the frame, I moved two or three steps closer. That led to a different shooting experience. And being able to see beyond the frame lines made finding alternative compositions easier. Focusing on the Zeiss is easier, while composing on the Leica is easier. The 75 APO’s focus action is very light and quicker than the 100 ZE’s. But, the 100 ZE is much better for seeing focus since there is a TTL viewfinder, whereas the rangefinder has no TTL mechanism.
   

3. Compared to the 1Ds3, the Leica M9 is a very different experience. With the Leica M9 it was easier to move around and flow with the light and changing conditions (it was very windy). Whereas with the 1Ds3 I tended to direct Christina, having her move while I remained more stationary. I am not sure why I behaved differently with each camera, but that is how things played out.
   

Both lenses are very sharp and render lush backgrounds. The Zeiss 100mm ZE is amazingly sharp wide-open. At F2 the Leica 75mm is a tiny bit softer than the Zeiss, but the difference is very slight. The Leica 75mm might have a slight edge with its bokeh being slightly smoother, slightly more abstracted. In turn, the Zeiss 100mm has more of a 3D feel. In these images the Zeiss 100mm 3D feel is subtle. To be honest, I expected more more 3D pop from the Zeiss. Both lenses have colored fringing in the bokeh; the Zeiss’ is more noticeable. Overall, this comparison is too close to call one lens a winner. The look and performance is much closer than expected. Picking between these two lenses would depend on one’s preferences - such as being a rangefinder vs a SLR shooter. If it came down price, the Zeiss would win because it costs 50% less than the APO. If it came down to size and weight, the Leica wins.