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 50/1.2 for LTM: worth having?

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
A note on Canon 50/1.2 lens hoods: I found the 500+ price for originals too much and found an excellent screw-in from HeavyStar for 20 dollars.

On filters: Get a cheap Tiffen UV filter remove the filter and use it as and extender for the required IR/UV Cut filter on the M8.
 

Hacker

New member
On filters: Get a cheap Tiffen UV filter remove the filter and use it as and extender for the required IR/UV Cut filter on the M8.
I tried both the B+W and Leica filters, and they both fit the lens without any issues without any need for extenders. You can see the Leica UV/IR filter on it in the picture. The copy of the lens in the picture is my 6th and final copy which is the best of all.
 

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
I tried both the B+W and Leica filters, and they both fit the lens without any issues without any need for extenders. You can see the Leica UV/IR filter on it in the picture. The copy of the lens in the picture is my 6th and final copy which is the best of all.
I was using a Heliopan.
 

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
A note on Canon 50/1.2 lens hoods: I found the 500+ price for originals too much and found an excellent screw-in from HeavyStar for 20 dollars.

On filters: Get a cheap Tiffen UV filter remove the filter and use it as and extender for the required IR/UV Cut filter on the M8.
Correction: The 500+ dollar price was for the original Canon 50/0.95 hood.

Have no idea what the 1.2 original is. I use HeavyStar hood on both my 0.96 and 1.2.
 

monza

Active member
Is anyone here familiar with the Canon 55/1.2 FL lens? Is it optically the similar to the 50/1.2 LTM lens?

 

woodyspedden

New member
I have never shot with the Canon but I just found a mint 50 1.2 Konica Hexanon which, while expensive, seems to be a fine performer. I'll take some shots and post for all to see.

Woody
 
K

kiloran

Guest
Is anyone here familiar with the Canon 55/1.2 FL lens? Is it optically the similar to the 50/1.2 LTM lens?
I think it is - it was a very early Canon SLR lens so its likely to be, same as the early Nikkor SLR lenses were rehashes of the Nikon rangefinder lenses.
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
I think it is - it was a very early Canon SLR lens so its likely to be, same as the early Nikkor SLR lenses were rehashes of the Nikon rangefinder lenses.
They're both 7-element, 5-group lenses of Gauss type... but the same can be said of almost all 50-ish f/1.2 and f/1.4 lenses. The RF lens was introduced in 1956 and the FL lens in 1968, so there was a lot of time lapse between them; in the meantime, Canon had introduced a 58mm f/1.2 for its early R-mount SLRs, followed by two revisions of the 58/1.2 in the FL mount. The 55/1.2 carried over to the FD mount (in several versions) and in 1971 was joined by a version with an aspheric element, which was quite an exotic feature back then as the aspheric surfaces had to be individually ground and polished.

So I'd call the 55/1.2 a relative of the original 50/1.2, but a fairly distant relative.

Lots of fun Canon lens lore can be found in Canon's online museum.
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
It retains its signature on the G1. Took this this afternoon - a non-shot but it does illustrate all the attributes of this lens:
Wow, that's a great illustration of the lens' "signature." If anything, the effect looks stronger than I remember when I used to use one on an R-D 1.

You can see how with the wrong subject, this lens would be disgustingly mushy -- but with the right subject, it gives a very aesthetic effect.
 
K

kiloran

Guest
Wow, that's a great illustration of the lens' "signature." If anything, the effect looks stronger than I remember when I used to use one on an R-D 1.

You can see how with the wrong subject, this lens would be disgustingly mushy -- but with the right subject, it gives a very aesthetic effect.
Definitely a stronger effect than it was on the R-D1. Given that this lens was notorious/notable for its poor edge performance I'm surprised and pleased it still performs in the same way on a 2x crop. I think I'm addicted to this lens - if I was forced to just choose one from my arsenal it would be this one.
 
R

Ranger 9

Guest
Definitely a stronger effect than it was on the R-D1. Given that this lens was notorious/notable for its poor edge performance I'm surprised and pleased it still performs in the same way on a 2x crop. I think I'm addicted to this lens - if I was forced to just choose one from my arsenal it would be this one.
Now you need to go shopping for a Canon 35mm f/1.5 so you can get the same look when you need a slightly wider focal length.

Sigh... once people start seeing all these G1 pictures, I guess the prices of Canon RF lenses are going to take another jump...
 

monza

Active member
Can someone go into further detail as to how this is a 'stronger effect' on the G1 than the Rd1?
 
K

kiloran

Guest
I guess its just down to the different sensor but the bokeh seems edgier and more defined than it does on the R-D1. Out of the camera to me the images look like they have more contrast. I'm sure you could get the same effect in post-processing.
 
K

kiloran

Guest
Now you need to go shopping for a Canon 35mm f/1.5 so you can get the same look when you need a slightly wider focal length.

Sigh... once people start seeing all these G1 pictures, I guess the prices of Canon RF lenses are going to take another jump...
Well the 50/1.2 has gone up considerably in value since the R-D1 and M8 arrived. Mine is absolutely mint condition with original caps and leather case. I bought it in 2006 for about a third of what they fetch now :D

I've been avoiding thinking about the 35/1.5 but may have to give in to temptation at some point. I had the big Voigtlander Nokton for a while and like most Voigtlanders I just didn't like the bokeh (have the 40/1.4 as well) so maybe the Canon is the fast 35 solution. Would make a hell of a portrait lens on a G1!
 
Top