I'm in the market for a cheap, intro 50mm lens to put on a Leica M camera. I have the adaptors.

I see suggestions that the Canon f/1.8 LTM 50mm lenses are the best bet for price/performance at this end of the pool. I see some Canon lenses are referred to as "Seranar", and some aren't. What's the difference? Do I care at this price point? What should I pay for a good user?

Any other choices I don't know about?

-- Stewart Loving-Gibbard (sloving-gibbard@uswest.net), July 04, 2001

Answers

The Serenars were the older generation Canon lenses, and are heavier and may not be as good as the later black ones with "Canon" on them. You may want to also consider an inexpensive Russian made 50 in LTM. The glass can be excellent on these, although the feel is a notch below Leica standards for sure. They were copies of the Zeiss Sonnars in both f1.5 and f2.0 versions. Here's a f1.5 version currently on EBAY Russian 50mm f1.5 Sonnar copy LTM I've ben tempted to pick one up myself just to have a fast "disposable" lens.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 04, 2001.

Stewart, The Canon 50/1.8 are supposed to be good lenses. Of all of the screw Nikons and Canons they are the most plentiful and therefore the least expensive. However they are old and can have cleaning marks,haze etc. and will probably run about $200 for a good one. I think you need to think about the long term goal for lenses for your M. Most Leica users eventually will want more recent premium Leica Crons and Luxes. If that is the case then you might be better off as Andrew sugested going for a Jupiter-3 50/1.5 for around $70. I just picked one up about a week or so ago and from the first roll I am impressed. A little soft between 1.5-2.0 but very sharp beyond. The black versions are more recent better coated and less likely to have flaws.

-- Gerald Widen (gerald@sfa1.com), July 05, 2001.

A couple weeks ago I picked up a Ukranian-made FED5C (LTM, 1-1000, lever wind, single-window rangefinder/viewfinder w. parallax- corrected framelines for 50mm, un-coupled selenium meter) which I understand is still being manufactured, along with a 55/2.8 Industar lens. The camera works quite well, I checked the shutter on a tester and it's within 1/3 stop. I mounted the lens on my M6 with an adaptor and it couples fine and also produces some very nice results, at least as good as a collapsible Summicron I have. Cost: $15 for body and lens.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), July 05, 2001.

On the same subject, I saw in the archives of the LUG group that more than a few people are using the Russion 35 f2.8 "Biogon copy" and 85mm f2.0 "Sonnar" copy with good results. Both are readily available for about the cost of a few B&W skylight filters now that the Eastern Europe sellers are using e-bay. The 85 f2.0 is supposed to have relly nice bokeh and has a 15 blade aperture. The 35 is reputed to be better than any of the older 35mm screw mount formulas-if you get a good one.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 05, 2001.

Thanks guys for the answers. They've been very helpful.

> However they are old and can have cleaning marks,haze etc. > and will probably run about $200 for a good one. I think > you need to think about the long term goal for lenses for > your M. Most Leica users eventually will want more recent > premium Leica Crons and Luxes. If that is the case then > you might be better off as Andrew sugested going for a > Jupiter-3 50/1.5 for around $70.

Yes, I expect that if I like the Leica I'd get crons for it eventually. I also consider $200 too much for an experimental purchase like this. (Actually I think I'd have to be completely obsessed with the camera to spend $600+ on used prime lenses, but that's another topic entirely..)

Anyhow, I went ahead and bought a Jupiter-3 50/1.5 for $60 + shipping. It looks like it's an older silver one.

> On the same subject, I saw in the archives of the LUG group > that more than a few people are using the Russion 35 f2.8 > "Biogon copy" and 85mm f2.0 "Sonnar" copy with good results. > Both are readily available for about the cost of a few B&W > skylight filters now that the Eastern Europe sellers are > using e-bay. The 85 f2.0 is supposed to have relly nice > bokeh and has a 15 blade aperture. The 35 is reputed to be > better than any of the older 35mm screw mount formulas-if > you get a good one.

Right, I'd read that too. The choice seemed more obvious for the 35mm than the 50mm. I bought a Jupiter-12 (35mm f/2.8) for $70 shipped; it hasn't arrived yet as it is coming from Russia.

EBay for both items, of course. (I'm sure there are places that might be cheaper to buy these sorts of items - I'm sure people do pick up $15 Feds - but I never go to them.)

As for the 85mm, I don't think I'd want to go longer than 50mm on a rangefinder, but perhaps I'll change my mind, if I become obsessed.

-- Stewart Loving-Gibbard (sloving-gibbard@uswest.net), July 05, 2001.

Please let us know how it works out, and how your experience was dealing with the sellers as far as accuracy of description, shipping times, packaging, etc. By the way, the 85mm 90mm focal length can be a very useful one on a rangefinder. Besides the obvious close up portraits with nice perspective, I also enjoy using the 90 to "crop" the most interesting elements of landscapes.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), July 05, 2001.

I bougt a brand new Ukrainian made Fed5 last year fro ebay for USD45. It came with an Industar 55/2.8 LTM lens. There is no frame line in the window. Horizontal cloth travel shutter, built in selenium exposure meter, and built in self timer, a feature not even on M6. The camera is very solid, with many brass parts.

It makes quite good pictures.

I don't know why the counter knob is amde so thick. If this knob's profile is lower and made symmetrical to the dial on the left, the camera would look much nicer.

-- martin tai (martin.tai@capcanada.com), July 07, 2001.