experience with canon screwmount 50/1.2 or 50/.95

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread

Hi Have any of you guys tried either of these two lenses ? If so , do you have any uploaded samples which were shot wide open ?

thanks leonid

-- leonid kotlyar (kotlyarl@mail.nih,gov), December 10, 2001

Answers

According to Camera Quest:

"50/1.2 Canon: black only. poor reputation, but some people really like it. often encountered with cleaning marks.

50/.95 Canon: The fastest production 50mm lens yet made. Reputation for poor sharpness, special bayonet mount to fit only the Canon 7 and 7s, included here as a footnote."

Apparently neither one seems to be any good, both are dogs according to Gandy.

Alfie

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 10, 2001.


I owned and used a 50mmf1.2 Canon lens for many years.I found the focus slightly out in very close up,3feet @ f1.2.Perhaps as little as 1 inch.It was VERY soft at full aperture.The smaller apertures it was great.Flare a major problem and the original lens hood almost impossible to obtain.I fitted a rectangular shaped hood from some Konica camera.I also cut out a window so that I could see better.The lens glass is very soft.My Summicron collapsible is sufficient for my needs.I believe the 0.95 requires being fitted to a camera and checked on a collimator.I knew a pro who had one on his M3 and the lens was permanently fitted by a screw to the adapter,screw to bayonet.The results were similar to my 1.2.Today with very fast films I think I would avoid these lenses unless very inexpensive.The lens elements used rare glass which may be radio-active ?.....My lens did fog some film and paper placed under it for a test period.

-- jason gold (leeu72@hotmail.com), December 10, 2001.

I would not construe either of Stephen Gandy's comments to mean that these lenses are necessarily "dogs." Jeffery Smith has recently been writing on the Topica RF list about buying and overhauling a Canon 50 f/1.2. His comments include, in part:

------------------- "For those of you who asked how the Canon 50/1.2 LTM functioned stopped down, and for those of you who are concerned that a major lens overhaul might ruin its optics, this week's for you. This weeks PAWs were taken with a Canon 50/1.2 that I got on Ebay in pathetic condition. Two elements needed to be separated and re-cemented, and the hazy glass required polishing and recoating. Focal Point returned it to me last week, and I shot some images at dusk in Audubon Park.

http://www.jeffery-nola.com/Week50a.html

http://www.jeffery-nola.com/Week50b.html

Comments and Criticisms always welcomed.

Jeffery Smith New Orleans, LA" --------------------

I believe that he also expected to post a sample shot wide open at http://www.jeffery-nola.com/Week50c.html.

-- John Morris (jtmorris@slb.com), December 10, 2001.


I've had two 50mm f/1.2 Canons (I still have and use one). The 1.2 is not a dog but usefull lense. I've never used the 0.95.

FWIW, the Leica f/1 failed Pop Photo tests when it was first introduced.

I use it at f/ 1.2, 1.4 or 2. If there's more light I swap to a slower lens. I've been satisfied with the images enlarged to 11x14.

You should use a lens shade with this lens.

-- Tony Oresteen (aoresteen@lsqgroup.com), December 10, 2001.


The results of the photos look rather nice albeit a little bit soft at the widest aperture. It's only when you start to enlarge the image then that I can see some diffusion headed in the image which shows the limitations of the Canon.

Alfie

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), December 10, 2001.



Leonid

There is a very nice article in a recent issue of Viewfinder (which you can find elsewhere on the LHSA website) that describe a whole series of superfast (f/1.3 and faster) 50 mm Japanese rangefinder lenses from the 1950s and 60s, including the Canon 50/0.95 and 1.2, Zunow 50/1.1 and 1.3, Fuji 50/1.2, Konica 60/1.2, and Nikon 50/1.1 (various versions).

None of these lenses are optically excellent wide open, although some of them improve when stopped down. Most of these lenses are very rare and expensive, except for the Canon 50/1.2 (and less so the Canon 50/0.95). These lenses are often problematic because in many cases, the optics are too heavy for the mount provided. This causes lens element separation (common), warping of the diaphragm, and distortion of the lensmount of the camera, leading to unsharpness.

The Canon 50/0.95 was only made with a breach/bayonet mount for the Canon 7/7S/7SZ or a TV camera. It has to be professionally custom adapted for use on a Leica rangefinder. I wouldn't bother with this one. The Canon 50/1.2 is available in Leica SM and is the most reasonable of all of these lenses (probably would cost $ 250-350 for a decent example). The lens hoods for these superfast lenses are rarer than the lenses and very very hard to obtain.

The only other superfast RF lenses (besides the two versions of the Leica Noctilux) are: 1) a modern version of the Konica 60/1.2 lens in Leica SM issued in very small numbers for the Japanese market in 1998; and 2) a 50/1.2 Konica in Leica BM for the Konica Hexar-RF. Unfortunately, that lens is only available with the special edition titanium Hexar RF for about $ 3500-4000. So far as I know, the lens is not available separately.

I think the only superfast 50 mm rangefinder lenses that give decent wide open performance are the Leica Noctiluxes (50/1.0 or 50/1.2)(and possibly the newer Konica lenses, I don't know how well they perform).

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), December 12, 2001.


Anyone ever convert the Canon 50mm 0.95 lens to EOS mount?

Email me at rolland_elliott@hotmail.com if you have any details.

-- rolland (rolland_elliott@hotmail.com), May 20, 2002.


Canon LSM 50mm F1.2 Shot wide open at F1.2 ; asa 800 Superia; Body Zorki 3C ; 1956 vintage

-- Kelly Flanigan (zorki3c@netscape.net), May 20, 2002.

old Greenspun thread last month

-- Kelly Flanigan (zorki3c@netscape.net), May 20, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ