Canon LTM Canon 85mm/1.5 LTM

[raid]

Does anyone here own a Canon 85mm/1.5 lens?
If so, is it worth the large amount of money that is being asked for such a lens?

 

[monochromejrnl]

I have the Canon 85/2 LTM (Chrome) and I can't imagine the 1.5 being that much better...to justify the much higher price... perhaps it's a function of rarity rather than just performance... ? btw - i'm planning to sell the Canon shortly... stay tuned...

 

[trittium]

I know they are extremely rare, and like the 35/1.5 concidered more a collectable than a user. I would still like to get my hands on one though.

heres a link to a shot at f1.5 with an m8
http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Jn2f

It would probably look way different using film. My guess is that the edges are wild

 

[raid]

If I had the cash right now and the will to break my No GAS wish, I would buy this lens.

 

[dexdog]

have you seen one for sale, Raid? I have never seen one in person, and have only spotted two or three on eBay in the last several years.

 

[raid]

There is one for sale right now. If interested, send me a pm.

 

[Mackinaw]

I used a Canon 85/1.5 many years back. A big, heavy lens that is pretty soft wide-open but sharpens up nicely at F2.8 or so. Not my cup of tea, just too soft wide-open for my taste.

Jim Bielecki

 

[ferider]

Not rare and not so expensive, $ 375 / $ 475 in Dan's price guide.
Which puts in in the same category as your 90/2, Raid.

Ritzcam has a Blk/Chrm one (vii, the lighter one) for $525, at the moment.

Roland.

 

[raid]

Not rare and not so expensive, $ 375 / $ 475 in Dan's price guide.
Which puts in in the same category as your 90/2, Raid.

Ritzcam has a Blk/Chrm one (vii, the lighter one) for $525, at the moment.

Roland.

Roland,

The seller wants around $700. What a rip-off if the lens is not rare.
My 90/2 is in true mint condition which makes it [in my opinion] worth more than $375. 😀

 

[ferider]

My 90/2 is in true mint condition which makes it [in my opinion] worth more than $375. 😀

I knew you would say that 😀

But you know I love my 90/2 as well.

The 85/1.5 must be incredibly hard to focus. I wouldn't dare .... (2cm DOF
at close focus).

Roland.

 

[raid]

I knew you would say that 😀

But you know I love my 90/2 as well.

The 85/1.5 must be incredibly hard to focus. I wouldn't dare .... (2cm DOF
at close focus).

Roland.

Would you say that using a 85/1.2 SLR lens wide open is easier beause of the SLR viewing?

As for my Summicron 90/2, I really love this lens. It screams LEICA. 😀

I am glad that you love your 90/2 too.

 

[ferider]

Would you say that using a 85/1.2 SLR lens wide open is easier beause of the SLR viewing?

Never done it, Raid. But when I see good photos I blame it on the Autofocus.

Roland.

 

[raid]

I have the Canon 85mm/1.2 in manual and not AF. It is a real challenge, but when I get a shot sharp, it is a pleasure for me to look at it.

 

[jlw]

Does anyone here own a Canon 85mm/1.5 lens?
If so, is it worth the large amount of money that is being asked for such a lens?

I've got one. It's heavy, and it isn't nearly as sharp aperture for aperture as the 100mm f/2... so I admit that I usually choose the 100/2. So, if you're looking for a Canon medium tele to use for photography, I think the 100 would be a better investment. I'd guess that the high prices for the 85/1.5 have more to do with rarity and "exoticness" than with any especially noteworthy performance characteristics.

My other issue about the 85/1.5 is that, while some lenses that aren't terribly sharp at full aperture at least have an unsharpness that's "pretty" or "interesting" (the Canon 50/1.2 and 50/0.95 are two examples that come to mind) the 85/1.5's lack of sharpness at f/1.5 isn't especially aesthetic -- it's just mushy. (If you're into "digital darkrooming," though, it's a kind of mushiness that does seem to clean up pretty well in software -- the new "Clarity" control in Lightroom 1.1 seems to help quite a bit.)

I'll attach a couple of recent pictures that I think were made with a Canon 85/1.5... I say think because my Epson R-D 1 doesn't record lens metadata and sometimes it's hard for me to remember which lens I had on the camera for what shot under fast-paced conditions! I'm inferring that these were made with the 85 (rather than the 50/0.95, which I also took to the same dimly-lit event) on the basis of framing, angle of view, etc.

As you can see, it does produce usable results (keeping in mind that these were really awful shooting conditions) and obviously there are situations in which the nearly 1 extra stop of maximum aperture vs. the 100/2 is useful. I still say, though, that if you're looking for fast Canon teles to buy, look for a 100/2 (or maybe an 85/1.8) first and then pursue an 85/1.5 if it appeals to you. In fact, if I had it to do over, I might be tempted to eat the 1/3 stop light loss and seek the 85/1.8 instead (also expensive and scarce, but reputed to be an excellent performer.)

85/1.5 pics, made with an R-D 1 at EI 1600 and full aperture:

Detail from above at original pixel resolution (enhanced with Lightroom's "Clarity" control):

Another from the same concert; at least the highlights don't flare out too badly (much better in this regard than the early-model 90/2 Summicron I owned years ago):

And an original-pixels detail from that one:

 

[Sonnar2]

My Canon 1.5/85 (series I marked as Canon not Serenar) is here: http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/Canon_Main.html
My belief there are just some hundreds made
You can see it's barely larger than a Canon 2/85, which isn't critized for size often, but is a 3/4 stop faster.
I've found a bit front-focussing at close distance (about 1-2 inches, but can be the difference between sharp and unsharp at f/1.5)
The 85/1.8 is much more pressed for contrast wide open than the 85/1.5, which has the nicer bokeh.
Maybe most people owning them are collectors but the lens is definitely usable, as Jlw's pictures shows as well.
But not as a "allrond telephoto" of course.

 

[sleepyhead]

Hello, I have the Canon 85mm f/1.8. I love the lens, it's heavy but quite compact. It's quite sharp wide-open with really nice bokeh (there's a colour picture of a suitcase in My Gallery - taken on RD-1 though).

Why am i telling you all this? Because the lens is difficult to focus accurately wide-open on a 0.72 finder Leica with a subject closer than arond 2 meters. I didn't use it much until I got the RD-1 about a month ago. Now I plan to use it alot. This is because with the RD-1 I can take a bunch of similar shots and just pick the sharp one later. With film it's too much of a waste. So the 85mm 1.5 would be even more difficult.

I think I would stick with the Summicron you already have.

I used to have the Nikkor-H 85mm 1.8 in Nikon F mount for my Nikkormat. It was less sharp than the Canon wide-open, but I found it easier to focus with the SLR.

 

[raid]

Thanks for the posted images and the useful information on the Canon 85mm/1.5. I have the Canon 85mm/1.9, the Summicron 90/2 (second version), and the Nikkor 85mm/2. These are also fine lenses. I tested them all against more expensive lenses.

 

[raid]

This is a revisit to this lens here!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I picked mine up for $450.

Wide-Open on the M9, Baby.

1/45th sec, ISO 2500.



Faster shutter speed, they turned the lights on.

 

[raid]

Did you have to do anything special to use ISO2500 and get good results with your M9?