Bingley
Veteran
I find my Canon 50/1.5 sharp enough:


AhShun
Member
The Canon 1.4 and 1.5 are diff animals.
If you're in for the Sonnar, the Nikkor 5cm/2 will be a good choice considered the CL's rangefinder.
For close-up portrait, my Nikkor indeed beat my Summicrons (both current and Rigid) (Of course, MY sample ^^).
If you're in for the Sonnar, the Nikkor 5cm/2 will be a good choice considered the CL's rangefinder.
For close-up portrait, my Nikkor indeed beat my Summicrons (both current and Rigid) (Of course, MY sample ^^).
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
raid
Dad Photographer
The CZO Sonnar 50/1.5 is my favorite lens. I use it with one of Amedeo Muscelli's adapters.
I rarely shoot it wide open, however; it's usually at f/2 if I'm looking for limited DOF. Click on this link and move the mouse over the image to compare f/1.5 to f/2.0.
Which image is at 1.5 and which at 2.0?
Do I go by bokeh?
Thanks.
raid
Dad Photographer
I survived well without a Canon 50/1.5 for many years, and only recently have I traded a lens for the Canon 50/1.5. I used to have a Canon 50/1.2 for quite a while, and then I got several J-3 50/1.5 lenses too. Then, Brian kindly supplied me with a Zeiss Sonnar 5cm 1.5 LTM, which is a killer lens. I was unable to use any other lens for several months after I got it. Then, I got a Canon 50/1.4. It is a very sharp lens that is really a super deal to get. Lastly, I got a Canon 50/1.5. It is a smaller lens than the 50/1.4. and both are equally good lenses.
Do not forget the slightly slower Canon 50/1.8. You cannot go wrong with this one.
Do not forget the slightly slower Canon 50/1.8. You cannot go wrong with this one.
chris00nj
Young Luddite
The lens we want is never for sale.
There was a nice-looking Canon 50/1.5 for sale a week ago and it ended at a reasonable $350. I hope y'all got it.
I think the Nikkor 50/2 may be a good alternative until the hype surrounding the Canon dies off a bit.
There was a nice-looking Canon 50/1.5 for sale a week ago and it ended at a reasonable $350. I hope y'all got it.
I think the Nikkor 50/2 may be a good alternative until the hype surrounding the Canon dies off a bit.
RF_newbie
RF_newbie John
Nope, they did not get it.The lens we want is never for sale.
There was a nice-looking Canon 50/1.5 for sale a week ago and it ended at a reasonable $350. I hope y'all got it.
Which image is at 1.5 and which at 2.0?
Do I go by bokeh?
Thanks.
The one with less contrast/flare is f/1.5.
ferider
Veteran
Nope, they did not get it.
Second Chris' recommendation for the Nikkor 50/2. Cute as a button, sharp, no veiling flare wide open, Sonnar signature, easy to get filters, and also modifyable to 0.7m min. focus.
Cheers,
Roland.
chris00nj
Young Luddite
Nope, they did not get it.
Ha! I love the brevity.
Congrats, it looked brilliant.
Erik L
Well-known
here is a photo from the 135/3.5 chrome (monster)
i was wondering if this has any of the sonnar look? sorry for the offtopic reply but i am not certain if this has the desireable boke?

i was wondering if this has any of the sonnar look? sorry for the offtopic reply but i am not certain if this has the desireable boke?
fbf
Well-known
i know who got it but im not tellin
newspaperguy
Well-known
Hey guys, You can't all date the prom queen...
besides
the best dancer may be the lowly Canon 50/1.8
and, no... you can't have mine.
besides
the best dancer may be the lowly Canon 50/1.8
and, no... you can't have mine.
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
Hey guys, You can't all date the prom queen...
besides
the best dancer may be the lowly Canon 50/1.8
and, no... you can't have mine.
You probably right about the 1.8 - I have to agree it is fantastic, but my Zeiss Jena 50/1.5 LTM conversion is a bit better; although you can't just buy one. You need a Brian Sweeney or such to put it together for you.
Last edited:
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.