RdEoSg
Well-known
I tried to do a search but didn't find anything obvious. Can anyone post some shots taken with the Canon 85mm f1.9 thread mount lens. It's silver in color. That's about all I can tell you.
I use a CV 90mm 3.5 Nokton on my M6 but have the opportunity to buy this one and was wondering what it looks like. I really need the lower f-stop and am willing to give up a bit of sharpness but not much. It has a few internal scratches oddly enough and a few dust specks, but no haze and no major cleaning marks. I don't think any of it will affect the quality.
I went on flickr to check some shots and only found a little bit. I found some shots that showed a picture of this lens, but it stated it was an 85mm f1.9 II . The shots looked really sharp and contrasty and looked great, but I am unsure what the II designation means!
Any examples or links would be very appreciative!
Thanks
I use a CV 90mm 3.5 Nokton on my M6 but have the opportunity to buy this one and was wondering what it looks like. I really need the lower f-stop and am willing to give up a bit of sharpness but not much. It has a few internal scratches oddly enough and a few dust specks, but no haze and no major cleaning marks. I don't think any of it will affect the quality.
I went on flickr to check some shots and only found a little bit. I found some shots that showed a picture of this lens, but it stated it was an 85mm f1.9 II . The shots looked really sharp and contrasty and looked great, but I am unsure what the II designation means!
Any examples or links would be very appreciative!
Thanks
ferider
Veteran
The Canon Camera Museum mentions two versions, see here:
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/s/50-85.html
Peter mentions 5:
http://www.canonrangefinder.servehttp.com/index.php?page=lenses&type=telephoto_lenses&id=22
The lens was designed by Hiroshi ItohSan (http://www.auspiciousdragon.net/photowords/?p=1060).
Tom posted some photos on the flickr M-Mount forum:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/86731438@N00/pool/tags/Canon85mmf1.9LTM
I have owned chrome 85/2 and 85/1.9. Both feel similar and produce very similar results, IMO. The lens is rather heavy and long, lower on the contrast side, but sharp. Depending on condition, should cost between US 150 and 200, I believe. Very late, the 85/1.9 was made in black, which is a lighter lens, and costs more.
The newer 85/1.8 and 100/2 lenses are more modern, but more expensive.
Best,
Roland.
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/s/50-85.html
Peter mentions 5:
http://www.canonrangefinder.servehttp.com/index.php?page=lenses&type=telephoto_lenses&id=22
The lens was designed by Hiroshi ItohSan (http://www.auspiciousdragon.net/photowords/?p=1060).
Tom posted some photos on the flickr M-Mount forum:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/86731438@N00/pool/tags/Canon85mmf1.9LTM
I have owned chrome 85/2 and 85/1.9. Both feel similar and produce very similar results, IMO. The lens is rather heavy and long, lower on the contrast side, but sharp. Depending on condition, should cost between US 150 and 200, I believe. Very late, the 85/1.9 was made in black, which is a lighter lens, and costs more.
The newer 85/1.8 and 100/2 lenses are more modern, but more expensive.
Best,
Roland.
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
I took those a couple of years back on 160VC and a cheap scanner, when testing the chrome 85/2 (again, IMO behaving very similarly to the 1.9), so you see what you can expect at f2. Just boring test shots:
At about 1.5m distance:
Crop:
Best,
Roland.
At about 1.5m distance:
Crop:
Best,
Roland.
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
And at 3.5m distance:
Crop:
[ / PIXEL PEEPING OFF]
What more to say: 48mm filter (or Series VII in hood), get a good adapter, check for RF alignment.
Roland.
Crop:
[ / PIXEL PEEPING OFF]
What more to say: 48mm filter (or Series VII in hood), get a good adapter, check for RF alignment.
Roland.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I have the Chrome Canon 85mm f1.9 lens and the rarer Black version.
Both are the same optically, but the Black version is so much nicer to carry around weight wise.
RdEoSg
Well-known
Thanks for the replies! I really like the look of this one so I think I am going to take it home tonight and do some direct tests against my CV90.... I think I just might sell my 90!
raid
Dad Photographer
This lens is excellent overall. Yes, it is heavy, and its bokeh may look different, but it is a bargain.
RdEoSg
Well-known
Thanks Raid. I was hoping you would post! I always value your opinion.
Erik L
Well-known
how well does this lens handle highlights? since its a fast lens how about some low light shots.
Roland, that sure is a strange subject. yet again your images suprise me.
Roland, that sure is a strange subject. yet again your images suprise me.
raid
Dad Photographer
raid
Dad Photographer
raid
Dad Photographer
RdEoSg
Well-known
Well I did a test against my 90 CV. I recommend two things..
1: pay more attention to your meter when shooting. It really sucks going back and forth from Av mode on a digital Canon to full manual on a Leica... I sorta forgot to change my shutter speed some of the time
2: when sending in your film to be processed, CVS is a bad place to do it. Even if they are cheaper, they have issues with clean machines, correct color, and correct density.. I may have missed my metering a few times, but when you take two photos with the same setting subject, and focus with in seconds of each other, you should NOT have prints that are different colors and densities.
Well, I did notice that the lens is much heavier to use, not as quick to focus (though a good CLA would sort that), and that I had a hard time distinguishing which shot was done with which lens.. I guess that means something!! I couldn't tell the sharpness issues though as the printing was so crappy. I think I may have to scan a neg or two tomorrow with my Nikon Scanner.
All in all though, I think this lens might be a winner for me! I did love the shallow dof it gave!
1: pay more attention to your meter when shooting. It really sucks going back and forth from Av mode on a digital Canon to full manual on a Leica... I sorta forgot to change my shutter speed some of the time
2: when sending in your film to be processed, CVS is a bad place to do it. Even if they are cheaper, they have issues with clean machines, correct color, and correct density.. I may have missed my metering a few times, but when you take two photos with the same setting subject, and focus with in seconds of each other, you should NOT have prints that are different colors and densities.
Well, I did notice that the lens is much heavier to use, not as quick to focus (though a good CLA would sort that), and that I had a hard time distinguishing which shot was done with which lens.. I guess that means something!! I couldn't tell the sharpness issues though as the printing was so crappy. I think I may have to scan a neg or two tomorrow with my Nikon Scanner.
All in all though, I think this lens might be a winner for me! I did love the shallow dof it gave!