50/1.2 Canon LTM: another capsule

[kuuan]

I like the first one Charlie. The subtle light is nicely moody.
Too bad for the Budwieser truck (?) far in the background..

the shallow dof works so well here, and the framed, meandering snow sure leads the eye to the truck, but actually I really liked it, thought that it makes it very 'American' 😉

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

On cleaning a 1.2/50mm... still here... 😀

http://johanniels.com/index.php/cam...anon-diy-cleaning-a-1-2-50mm-rangefinder-lens

😀

Thank you! I'm very envious that you have one with a black aperture ring.

 

[uhoh7]

TY for kind words, guys. Really another great thread by Dante with interesting insight from jonmanjiro and mackinaw 🙂 Blog on Cleaning is wonderful.

I would never have taken this walk yesterday without the inspiration:

No PP:

Big Block by unoh7, f/4 +


Here I have added my personal seasoning:


Hemi by unoh7, around 1.4

Strong light here at F/4 and the center is quite good:

November Yard by unoh7, Minor PP

Wide open with the secret sauce 😉 :

Dead Beds by unoh7, on Flickr

I will see if I can do some similar stuff with the 50/1.4 to compare 🙂

 

[raid]

An older image with the 1.2

 

[johannielscom]

On cleaning a 1.2/50mm... still here... 😀

http://johanniels.com/index.php/cam...anon-diy-cleaning-a-1-2-50mm-rangefinder-lens

😀

Thank you! I'm very envious that you have one with a black aperture ring.

Used to have one, John. Sold it quite some time ago...

But, yesterday evening this thread inspired me to have a look on eBay and lo and behold, a good specimen that needed the haze cleaned out and as a result was pretty darn cheap! 😀

I'm expecting to receive it in a fortnight and will have cleaned it in a jiffy 😉

 

[raid]

Good for you, Johan, and "bad for us" ... who may be tempted to get more stuff.

 

[uhoh7]

Very interesting to shoot the 1.2 and the 1.4 almost side by side. Here is the 1.4:


L1042036 by unoh7, f/4 Pretty impressive across the frame.


L1042010 by unoh7, F/4

At f/4 the big difference, in my copies on the M9, is the edges and the centers. I think the 1.2 is very likely better in the center, but the 1.4 is way better on the edges, as my first shot clearly shows. But there seems to be some wavyness.

I'd even suspect the 1.2 is better in the center at 1.4


L1042005 by unoh7, f/1.4 WO

now here again is the 1.2, unedited at about f/2:


L1041894 by unoh7, f/2ish

Looks like I hit her just on the lips, and it's quite alot of detail.

For landscape or architecture, it's no contest, my 1.4 is way better, but for portraits I say my 1.2 may be well ahead.

Would love to see Roger at lensrentals, who has a real bench setup, make some charts on these classics 🙂

Back to the 1.4, now around 5.6, and I'd wager few SLR 50s would do better here:

L1041991 by unoh7, on Flickr

And the f/1.4 wide open, even here it tries very hard to be even, note the wheel barrow tire:

L1041985 by unoh7, No PP

 

[Mackinaw]

From July. Canon 50/1.2 on a Leica M-240. Shot at F2.0 if I remember correctly.

Jim B.

 

[pepeguitarra]

Here are couple of examples using the 50/1.2 wide open at f1.2 (despite what the exif says):

Estribo-CanonLTM50mmf1.2-LeicaM9 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr



Ella2-CanonLTM50mmf1.2-LeicaM9 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr


Canon LTM 50mm f1.2 RF @ f1.2 on a Leica M8 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr
(This last one was taken also wide open at Steve Choi's shop after he cleaned from mild haze. My sample has no cleaning marks or other anomalies, it is perfectly clean).

 

[pepeguitarra]

more samples wide open

more samples wide open

Here are some more samples taken wide open with the 50/1.2 ltm:

This one testing for front and post focussing (I did get the focus on the label of the red cap marker spot on):

Canon LTM 50mm f1.2 @ f1.2 on a Leica M8 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr

Canon LTM 50mm f1.2 @ f1.2 on a Leica M8 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr

 

[pepeguitarra]

It seems that I have more keepers with the M8.2:

It seems that I have more keepers with the M8.2:

Wide open again:

Canon LTM 50mm f1.2 @ f1.2 on a Leica M8 by Palenquero Photography, on Flickr

 

[Fraser]

On cleaning a 1.2/50mm... still here... 😀

http://johanniels.com/index.php/cam...anon-diy-cleaning-a-1-2-50mm-rangefinder-lens

😀

Just used all your great info to clean my lens, thanks again.

 

[kermaier]

Here's an older one I've posted before, using an example of the lens with the coating on the lens surface just behind the diaphragm half eaten-away by fungus, and hazy from the typical affliction.

Canon LTM 50/1.2 @ f/1.2 on Epson R-D1 @ ISO 400

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

This isn't a great picture (though I do think my cat looks awfully cute there, behind the recycling bin) but it really accentuates the weird glow of this lens at f/1.2. I bought this copy on eBay as "mint" and took that with a grain of salt, but it indeed turned out to be one of the best-condition vintage lenses I've ever seen, with no haze, and is incredibly smooth to focus. After trying out the Sonnetar for a month, this is why I came back: handling. Anyway, I took this with an M9.

 

[bmattock]

Thanks, all! Anyone know if there is any design similarity between the Canon 50mm 1.2 LTM and the later 55mm 1.2 and 58mm 1.2 in FL SLR mount?

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I had the FL 58/1.2 for a while, and it seemed to me similar to the rangefinder 50. But I never owned both at once and so never compared them directly. The design and build quality are very close.

 

[bmattock]

I had the FL 58/1.2 for a while, and it seemed to me similar to the rangefinder 50. But I never owned both at once and so never compared them directly. The design and build quality are very close.

Good to hear, thanks! I have one of each of the FL lenses, but my LTM stable is just 50mm 1.4.

 

[Mackinaw]

Thanks, all! Anyone know if there is any design similarity between the Canon 50mm 1.2 LTM and the later 55mm 1.2 and 58mm 1.2 in FL SLR mount?

I guess they’re all Gauss-type lenses, but the optical formula for the LTM 50/1.2 looks to be quite different from the FL 58/1.2 and FL 55/1.2. Interestingly, the optical formula for the 55/1.2 and 58/1.2 look to be nearly identical.

Jim B.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I guess they’re all Gauss-type lenses, but the optical formula for the LTM 50/1.2 looks to be quite different from the FL 58/1.2 and FL 55/1.2. Interestingly, the optical formula for the 55/1.2 and 58/1.2 look to be nearly identical.

Jim B.

I'm surprised! Quite curious about this now...

 

[uhoh7]

I had the FL 58/1.2 for a while, and it seemed to me similar to the rangefinder 50. But I never owned both at once and so never compared them directly. The design and build quality are very close.

The FL 55/1.2 was a major redesign of that lens:


Willie by unoh7, 55/1.2 on A7.mod


Rich by unoh7, on Flickr

This was my first superspeed lens, and it's pretty impressive. Only a little over a 100 bucks 🙂

It's a heavy lens, so I rarely use it. But technically seems very good. It's as sharp in the center at 1.2 as the LTM is at f/2. I've never really tested it across the frame but I suspect it's very strong, like the LTM 1.4

The later FD 55/1.2 was aspherical and Puts called it the best normal lens in the world, at the time 🙂