Leica LTM Fastest LTM lens made?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
Luddite Frank said:
Okay - that sounds reasonable...


At what aperture does the Canon 0.95 achieve maximum definition ?


And back to your original question - it would appear that f: 1.1 is the fastest LTM 50mm ? (Nikon and Russian?)


Regards,

Luddite Frank
Click to expand...

Really never cared since I almost always shoot the 0.95 wide open at night. If I want sharp in the daylight I'll pop on a 'Cron.
 
johnastovall said:
Really never cared since I almost always shoot the 0.95 wide open at night. If I want sharp in the daylight I'll pop on a 'Cron.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with you (except of course I have no 'cron). I have a 55mm f/1.2 for my Canon FX slr, and it in no way compares to my 50mm f/1.4 in terms of image quality. But the 1.2 is what you need if you have a need for speed. I would not worry about it's stopped-down characteristics, because I'd never use it like that on purpose.
 
Everybody has the Canon 50/1.2. John, you should get the Hexanon 60/1.2. Then you could go fast and be different all at the same time. 78mm effective FOV and f=1.2 on the M8. Yummy! Take that, 75mm Summilux owners! 60mm/1.2 on your M3 or M4 wouldn't be half shabby either.
 
"At what aperture does the Canon 0.95 achieve maximum definition ?"

I guess at this point, it's a matter of academic curiosity on my part...

Most of my detailed knowledge of Leitz's thread-mount lenses comes from the Morgan & Lester Leica Manuals.

According to that source, most pre-1955 Leitz lenses do not achieve maximum definition until they are stopped-down 1/3 to 1/2 way. (Which may be true for the majority of lenses that we will encounter ?)


Personally, I think I will hunt for a 1.1 or 1.4 Nikkor in LTM.

I really liked thre results my dad got with the 1.4 Nikkor SC on his Nikon S. Maybe not the fastest gun in town, but pretty sharp.

LF
 
Luddite Frank said:
Personally, I think I will hunt for a 1.1 or 1.4 Nikkor in LTM.
Click to expand...

Good Luck on the f1.1 they are rarer than Eva Braun`s panties :D
.... and expect to pay like over $3,000 easy

f1.4 is very nice, (I bought a mint minus one with caps and a hood last year for $350) - it`s hard to find clean examples and they have even reached the $1,000 mark lately - *krazy*

Tom
 
Last edited:
Luddite Frank said:
"At what aperture does the Canon 0.95 achieve maximum definition ?"

I guess at this point, it's a matter of academic curiosity on my part...
Click to expand...

Yeah, but to me it's like wanting to know the maximum speed of a dump truck. It's a dump truck. It does one thing well, the other not so well.

Most of my detailed knowledge of Leitz's thread-mount lenses comes from the Morgan & Lester Leica Manuals.

According to that source, most pre-1955 Leitz lenses do not achieve maximum definition until they are stopped-down 1/3 to 1/2 way. (Which may be true for the majority of lenses that we will encounter ?)
Click to expand...

I would guess that to be probably true. Not for all, but for most.

Personally, I think I will hunt for a 1.1 or 1.4 Nikkor in LTM.

I really liked thre results my dad got with the 1.4 Nikkor SC on his Nikon S. Maybe not the fastest gun in town, but pretty sharp.
Click to expand...

I guess that's the point. Fast, sharp, cheap. Pick any two.

I never quite got the point of people who complained that ultra-fast lenses were not sharp. That's not what they're for. It's like complaining that a hammer does not make a very good screwdriver.
 
Luddite Frank said:
"Pick any two"...

Words to live by, I guess.

Or, to paraphrase Pilate: "What is sharp?"


LF
Click to expand...

It's a hold-over from my misspent youth, racing cars in the streets. They used to say "good, fast, and cheap. Pick any two." Another way of saying you can't have your cake and eat it too. If it is a sharp lens and a fast lens, it won't be cheap. If it is fast and cheap, it won't be sharp. That's life.
 
You could do worse

You could do worse

Luddite Frank said:
I really liked thre results my dad got with the 1.4 Nikkor SC on his Nikon S. Maybe not the fastest gun in town, but pretty sharp.

LF
Click to expand...

You could do worse and pay more. I really like mine. In fact, I really like my Dynamic Duo for rangefinder bodies: 50/1.4 Nikkor and 51.9mm Dual Range Summicron.
 
My nomination for fast, sharp and cheap:

Canon 50mm 1:1.4 S.S.C. for $50.

bmattock: I bought it after reading your words on this forum: "One of the 10 best lenses ever made." Thanks!
 
Since I pared down my LTM kit the Nikkor SC is one of two lenses that reside on my IIIf - where it is right now. Doesn't make any pretense to being "sharp" wide open - in fact it is more "dreamy" than the oft-derided dream lens (Canon 0.95) IMO. And it front-focuses like a Sonnar should. Even stopped-down it is not particularly sharp - lots of uncorrected SA. And I wouldn't trade it for anything.
 
venchka said:
My nomination for fast, sharp and cheap:

Canon 50mm 1:1.4 S.S.C. for $50.

bmattock: I bought it after reading your words on this forum: "One of the 10 best lenses ever made." Thanks!
Click to expand...

I'm glad that there are exceptions, but do you have to keep telling everyone? ;)

I have slowly, very slowly, built up my Canon FD primes. I now have the 50mm f/1.4 FDn and the 28mm f/2.8 FDn, and one of my favorites, the 100mm FDn f/2.8.

Congrats on your S.S.C.! They are exquisitely made and very sharp. Bargains only because the FD mount is an orphan now...
 
There is someone on ebay who modifies the Canon FD 55mm/1.2 to M mount. Supposedly, this lens is a better lens optically than the RF Canon 50mm/1.2. I have used the Noctilux 50mm/1.0, the Canon 50mm/0.95, the Nikkor 50mm/1.1 and the Canon 50mm/1.2. The first three lenses were loaners from RFF members.

I am very happy with my Canon 50mm/1.2.
 
raid said:
There is someone on ebay who modifies the Canon FD 55mm/1.2 to M mount. Supposedly, this lens is a better lens optically than the RF Canon 50mm/1.2. I have used the Noctilux 50mm/1.0, the Canon 50mm/0.95, the Nikkor 50mm/1.1 and the Canon 50mm/1.2. The first three lenses were loaners from RFF members.

I am very happy with my Canon 50mm/1.2.
Click to expand...

I believe it is the FL mount he's modifying. Interesting hack, I'll say that.

I hate to see FL lenses chopped up, but on the other hand, they're being put to good use, and it's not like there aren't a lot of them about. Besides, I have my Canon FL 55mm f/1.2 and 58mm f/1.2... The only f/1.2 lenses I could possibly afford...
 
bmattock said:
I believe it is the FL mount he's modifying. Interesting hack, I'll say that.

I hate to see FL lenses chopped up, but on the other hand, they're being put to good use, and it's not like there aren't a lot of them about. Besides, I have my Canon FL 55mm f/1.2 and 58mm f/1.2... The only f/1.2 lenses I could possibly afford...
Click to expand...

Hi Bill,
You are right; I meant the FL mount and not the FD mount.
 
Actually there's one Canon FD mount which might be interesting on an M Body the 14/2.8 and there is an adapter for it. It's so wide there would be no need for a rangefinder coupling. Use it like the CV 12 and 15.
 
johnastovall said:
Actually there's one Canon FD mount which might be interesting on an M Body the 14/2.8 and there is an adapter for it. It's so wide there would be no need for a rangefinder coupling. Use it like the CV 12 and 15.
Click to expand...

John,
You are referring to Canon Adapter B. I use it on Leica bodies with various Canon FD wide angle lenses, including a 7.5mm lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom