Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Canon Leica Screw Mount lenses.

vieri

vieri

Well-known member
Good topic John! I have been using a 50 mm f1.4 LTM lately with my MP and it is very good indeed; I will post some pics as soon as they will be ready. Plus, I got it for a bargain price - I am a very happy camper! :D
 
helenhill

helenhill

Senior Member
I am getting a 50 /1.4 next week ...can't wait
love way its draws .... Crisp & Creamy

How about the 'serenar' lenses / perhaps more Contrast Looks Lovely
Whats are your thoughts John, Vieri & Volkerhopf

Thanx!
:) Helen
 
V

volkerhopf

New member
helenhill said:
I am getting a 50 /1.4 next week ...can't wait
love way its draws .... Crisp & Creamy

How about the 'serenar' lenses / perhaps more Contrast Looks Lovely
Whats are your thoughts John, Vieri & Volkerhopf

Thanx!
:) Helen
Click to expand...
Cindy Flood said:
Has anyone tried a Serenar 85mm (f/1.9 or f/2)?
Click to expand...
Hi Helen, I never had a Serenar lens myself but I was told that there is not really optically a difference to the "Canon" lenses.
 
C

Chris C

Member
I trawled a lot of threads to get to this one and thought it better to resurrect this thread than start a new one.

I need a 50 mm lens but finances are against me so I'm thinking of getting an old Canon LTM for [filtered] colour and B&W. I wonder if any more can be added to this thread about the usability of Canon 50s on an M8? I'd like an f 1.2 but it's a stretch to the prices I'm seeing for decent spec's, but I'd be really interested in how decent the open aperture performance is on M8.

Alternatively, how does the f1.4 perform at open apertures? I am far more interested in definition than out-of-focus performance - maybe I'd be better of with a new CV Nokton f1.5? Lots of variables here I know but I'd appreciate feedback.

I've trawled some noted American dealers sites and it's apparent that there are a lot of old Nikon RF, and old Contax RF [not 'G'] lenses sitting on shelves. As I haven't seen an adapter to LTM or 'M' for these lenses am I right to assume there's a technical issue restricting their use on Leica cameras? I hope I'm not flogging a dead thread as I note others are interested in the performance of old lenses.

........... Chris
 
johnastovall

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
I got a 50/1.2 for my IIIG and also use it on my M8. I like the way it draws. Both wide open on an M8.



 
C

Chris C

Member
John - Thank you for posting, and the links. I greatly respect David Douglas Duncan's work, I saw his Korean War images when studying photography many years ago and it made a lasting impression; I'll read the article you linked when I have time to savour it. Thanks also for the explanation about early Contax and Nikon RF fits; though I can't help thinking what a shame it is that good glass collects dust on shelves because it can't be levered onto the M8.

Your image posts are useful so thank you, but I don't trust myself to judge a lens from J-pegs shoe-horned onto the internet so I wonder if you could comment more about the wide open performance of the f1.2 and the lens's characteristics on stopping down. I'm usually an f8 and be there guy, but on a 50 mm I'll be interested in more-open aperture work.

Anybody got anything to add on the Canon f1.4?. I know that there is interest in these lenses for M8 use but written comment seems sparse on the forum. All input gratefully received.

............. Chris
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
Chris C said:
I wonder if you could comment more about the wide open performance of the f1.2 and the lens's characteristics on stopping down. I'm usually an f8 and be there guy, but on a 50 mm I'll be interested in more-open aperture work.

Anybody got anything to add on the Canon f1.4?. I know that there is interest in these lenses for M8 use but written comment seems sparse on the forum. All input gratefully received.
Click to expand...
The Canon 50/1.2 was considered a special-purpose lens in its day and has a very distinct "look": full-aperture imaging is characterized by a fairly sharp central core surrounded by a rather large, less-sharp halo; this gives a merely mushy, low-contrast look to unsuitable subjects, but a nice "glow" to suitable ones. It cleans up considerably as you stop it down, but in my experience it's still less sharp at, say, f/5.6 than either the 50/1.4 or the 50/0.95 (!)

The 50/1.2 also is very susceptible to flare from light sources just outside (or in) the picture area, so a lens hood is a must-have investment. Fortunately it takes standard 55mm accessories, although be careful if you use filters -- the front element is more convex than most, and some thick filters may rub on it when screwed in. (Canon made a special series of filters mounted flush to the front of the retaining ring, as well as a vented lens hood of impressive size that's now rather expensive)

The Canon 50/1.4 is a different breed of cat altogether -- its performance is very, very close to current designs such as the 50/1.5 Voigtlander Nokton Aspherical, and you can pretty much use it the same way you'd use a modern all-purpose 50mm lens. Its contrast is lower, but many people like that for digital use.

Another thing that makes it appealing is its very compact size, made possible by the fact that it's one of the few 50mm f/1.4 lenses for 24x36mm that used only 6 elements! Canon was able to do this without compromising performance by two things: using then-new types of high index optical glass, and by using thick, radically-curved inner elements. My take: Most manufacturers then and now probably would have chosen more but shallower elements with easier-to-make curves, for the sake of more consistent manufacturability, but I suspect Canon was in show-off mode here and did it this way not only for compactness, but just "because we can!" (The same philosophy is on view inside the 50/0.95, which provided surprisingly usable performance with only seven elements and no aspherics.)
 
C

Chris C

Member
Ranger - Many thanks for your reply which is very useful feedback, and it's good to see this stuff in print in an easy to find thread in the archive.

........ Chris
 
johnastovall

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
Chris C said:
John - Thank you for posting, and the links. I greatly respect David Douglas Duncan's work, I saw his Korean War images when studying photography many years ago and it made a lasting impression; I'll read the article you linked when I have time to savour it. Thanks also for the explanation about early Contax and Nikon RF fits; though I can't help thinking what a shame it is that good glass collects dust on shelves because it can't be levered onto the M8.

Your image posts are useful so thank you, but I don't trust myself to judge a lens from J-pegs shoe-horned onto the internet so I wonder if you could comment more about the wide open performance of the f1.2 and the lens's characteristics on stopping down. I'm usually an f8 and be there guy, but on a 50 mm I'll be interested in more-open aperture work.

Anybody got anything to add on the Canon f1.4?. I know that there is interest in these lenses for M8 use but written comment seems sparse on the forum. All input gratefully received.

............. Chris
Click to expand...
Wish I could help but I've never shot it other than wide open. Go check the Canon Rangefinder Forum for their observation.

You might find this list handy for LTM Sonnar type lenses.
 
D

doubledan

Guest
Can't comment on the other rf Canons, but I have a beautiful example of the 50 1.4. I use it wide open almost all the time, as the fast lens in my 3-lens film rangefinder kit, and also as an amazing 100mm-equivalent portrait lens (via adapter) on the Panasonic G1.

I think it's true that it's less contrasty than modern lenses, but that can actually be an advantage in portraiture -- and also in bright outdoor light, as sean reid has noted in comparison tests that included this lens.

The one drawback is that it doesn't focus quite as closely as newer Leica and ZM (and I presume CV) lenses. But for my purposes that hasn't been a problem.

For its compactness, performance and price, I believe it can't be beat. The esthetic payoff is that several people who've seen my photos with this lens, including those whose portraits I've made, have said without prompting that there's something "special" about the quality of the pictures.
 
C

Chris C

Member
doubledan said:
....... I have a beautiful example of the 50 1.4. I use it wide open almost all the time........... it's true that it's less contrasty than modern lenses.....
Click to expand...
Doubledan - I think the case for the f1.4 is a good one and I'm being persuaded, however :

Hacker said:
The Canon 50mm f/1.5 LTM is my favourite
Click to expand...
Hacker you are a tease. I'm not sure if it's your favourite in appearance, or it's 'drawing'.

With the M8, the likely use of fast lenses is in light conditions liable to give IR problems. Given the odd filter sizes of the Canon RF lenses [eg 48 for the f1.4, and 40 for the f1.5] how do you manage IR filter/lens hood combinations? Or is the answer to live with the consequences and best efforts in PP? [Not a wedding tux' solution with colour though].

................ Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top