35mm on a cl ?

Both the 40 and 50 framelines are up when a 35mm lens with proper 35 adaptor is used.


It was the other way around Frank, but that's okay.
 
Don't beat youself up for too long, Frank. I was jsut looking to upgrade to a pristine body and a functioning meter. I can live with my beater CL and I'm happy Joe's getting yours.
 
Last edited:
back alley said:
...and I'm happy Joe's getting yours...

and really, isn't this what's truly important here!!
Click to expand...

That, and showing each other the occasional picture.

Taken with a CL, through a 50:

U2394I1140278735.SEQ.0.jpg


I really like this stoopit little camera.
 
For its demonstrated quality, crispness, and sharkskin-tough coating, Mr. Amin.

I have a couple of modern Summicrae now, and I like them enormously. But I'd also like to try the other gold standard of lensdom- the Japanese one, that is.

I like 50s; I see and crop and think like a 50.

I enjoy contrasty, even slightly harsh glass. Relentless glass.

And I've been photographing for 25 years, and I've never owned a Nikon product. 'Bout time, eh?
 
"...sharkskin-tough coating..." Nope. The 50/2 nikkor I bought 37 years ago was, and is, badly scratched. During the intervening years, I have rarely seen one that wasn't scratched. The 50/1.4, on the other hand seems to have had much better coatings. Those lenses are easier to find with unmarked glass.
 
I stand corrected. Had understood the tough coating was common to all the 1950s and 60s Canon and Nikkor lenses; tough when compared to vintage Leitz Summicron coatings, at least.

Thank you for the nudge in the ribs. I shall look out for that. (Don't want a 1.4, though; not crazy about its bokeh wide-open.)


Ahem.

Thread drift is our business. Business is good.
 
Ok, kicking and screaming back onto topic then 😀

What is the absolute dirt cheap bottom feeder excuse for a lens that will work with either the 40 frame line or playing 35 full FOV on the CL? It really is annoying that the J-12 won't fit it as I have an excellent one, but such is life. So, what is hiding out there? Topcon? Steinheil?

I admit that I'll probably simply find the coin eventually for a new black 35/2.5 classic Skopar but I'd really love to find something significantly cheaper... :angel:

Thanks!

William
 
i've been reading up on the cl and it seems that the whole viewfinder can be used for a 28mm lens. if this turns out to be accurate then i could use the cl with 28 and the m3 with 50 (or the zi) and have a killer 2 camera kit and no need to change lenses.

the idea of the tiny canon 28/3.5 on the cl is exciting. such a small package and no need for an external finder.

gonna be fun.
 
back alley said:
i don't have one on hand but perhaps in the future.
of all my lenses i see the 35/2 as perfect for the cl, kinda made for each other.

😉
Click to expand...

KINDA made for each other, as opposed to the CL and the 40/f2 which WERE made for each other! Having said that, the photo of the CL with the Canon 35/f2 on photoethonography does look rather splendid:

http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?LeicaCL.html~mainFrame

Add a hood, however and I'm guessing the sleek profile may be spolit. As if there weren't enough things going for the 40 Summicron/Rokkor, the hood is very handy and very compact.
 
back alley said:
you sold yours, oscar, right?

what adapter did you use?
Click to expand...

Mine ? CL or 35 ?

None of them. I used a 35/135 adapter with the 35. The store guy got a CL out of the cabinet and checked which framelines it (de)activated, that is, none. That adapter acts as if no lens was mounted.

The 35/2 may look like made for it but trust me, the 40/2 IS made for it. That lens is even more compact than a collapsed Summitar 🙂 (well, this is just what Robin said above, hehe...)

BTW, TO CLARIFY, ON MY CL

No lens mounted -> 40 and 50 fl visible
40mm lens mounted -> 40 and 50 fl visible
35mm adapter mounted -> 40 and 50 fl visible

Until very short ago that was my only ltm adapter, so as you can imagine I learned to live with the 40 and 50 fls there... never been a problem though.
 
Last edited:
1) I have two Nikkor 50mm F2's with perfect glass. One is from 1948, and had internal haze when I bought it. The haze was adjacent to the aperture blades; on a Canon lens the glass would have been etched. It cleaned up perfectly, no damage to the coating. No filter, but had the original Nicca cap. The second is a later model chrome lens in S-Mount; original cap, perfect glass. The coating is the same as the 5cm/1.4 lenses of the same period. You can damage any coating with improper care. I also have a spare front module for the 5cm/2; the front 4 elements. Light cleaning marks. I have been looking for a 5cm/2 with a "destroyed" front element to buy cheap. Been looking for two years.

2) On Subject: I'm surprised no one has mentioned using the chrome 35/2.8 Canon lens with the CL. It's small enough to fit in the pouch case.
 
i have nothing against the 40 summicron/rokkor lens, other than i don't want to buy another lens at this time.
i like the 35/2 for a number a reasons, one of which, it's black and will match with the cl.

light, campact and somewhat fast...sounds good to me.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
2) On Subject: I'm surprised no one has mentioned using the chrome 35/2.8 Canon lens with the CL. It's small enough to fit in the pouch case.
Click to expand...

I'd love to. Gotta find one available and the money to pay for it... :bang: Unless someone wants to give me one :angel: I doubt it's going to happen soon. Heck, I still need to scrounge the $60 to get DAG to fix the meter.

William
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Voigtlander mini finder is perfect for the CL. You barely notice its on top and gives you both 28 and 35mm framlines all in a very compact and bright finder.
 
not to sound like a broken record (as i'm the one that has been espousing the entire field of view being 28mm)...but it is dead on for that (verified w/ an slr, and through a number of rolls). when i used to use a 35mm on the cl...it was hard to get a grip on what was going to show up. the 28 is just right. that said, i guess it would also matter how close someone sticks their eye into the viewfinder. if someone wore glasses, it might be just right for 35mm...i wouldn't know. but that tiny little nikkor is amazing on there (and i would assume the 28mm canon is the same size). way more "pocketable" than even the 40mm 'cron attached. have i mentioned how much i love this camera?! 😀 you're going to love it joe!!

i'm also glad frank is selling it, and letting go of the bitterness (and hopefully moving on).
 
i also thought i'd add a bit of heresey. i personally think the viewfinder/rangefinder is *better* than the M4 and M6 i used to have. smaller...so that is not good, but it really looks like a heads up display it is so crisp and clean (and no patch flare that i've ever encountered). granted...this is after a fresh cleaning, but even one that is not freshly cleaned is really nice. and the shutter speeds being visible is GREAT! the meter is quick and intuitive. i could go on and on and on... 😛
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Wide angle lens on M3?
Replies
19
Views
1K
ellisson
ellisson
M
Dim Rangefinder patch on CL
Replies
2
Views
562
rfaspen
rfaspen
8
Help me Choose a 35mm for an Canon RF Article
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
wlewisiii
W
N
Canon LTM 35mm f2, Canon 35mm f2.8, Jupiter 12 - opinions on these lenses?
2 3
Replies
45
Views
10K
titrisol
titrisol
Shab
A 35mm lens for a Nikon FM3A
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
Dogman
Dogman
Back
Top Bottom