Canon LTM Are the lens markings for the vintage Canon/ modern CV in meters or in feet?

[wrs1145]

I'd like to know for the computation for hyper focal distances.

Many thanks,
Bill

 

[TenEleven]

I have to admit I am a bit confused by this question.
Almost all lenses I have seen (including vintage Canon LTM) indicate whether they use metric or imperial somewhere on the lens. Usually after the infinity symbol or somewhere else near the focus scale. More modern lenses usually have both (ft/m).

In the case of Canon LTM it seems that "feet" is more common, I only very rarely encountered Canon LTM lenses scaled in "m", again it will be indicated what it is on the lens.
Cosina usually has both scales, if the space is very small and they can do only one scale they seem to default to meters though.

 

[eckhardf]

Hi Bill,

I have about 5 Canon LTM lenses and about 5 CV mostly M-mount lenses. Every CV lens I own has a metric scale; most also have an imperial scale as well.

Regarding the Canon lenses; as a rough rule of thumb, chrome Canon lenses seem to have imperial scale only. The later black lenses have both metric and imperial as per the CV lenses. I have one "Zebra" lens (Black with chrome ribbing) it has imperial scale only.

I suggest it would not be difficult to find images of particular lenses you are interested in on-line and see what scale they use.

Hope this helps.

Eck.

 

[neal3k]

Perhaps it depends on where they were originally sold. I have 4 Canon chrome LTM lenses and all are marked in feet. I have a black one that is marked in both feet and meters.

After you have looked at a few lenses, it is usually easy enough to tell just by looking at the scale.

 

[WoodallP]

Agreed, the market matters. Many Canon lenses were made with sale to US troops in mind. I resuscitate a lot of folders (Agfa mostly) and those I see in the UK are mostly feet and those in Europe are mostly metres.

If it starts around 3, 3.5, 4 and goes past 25 it’s probably feet and if it starts around 1 and stops around 10 it is probably metres.

 

[aw614]

I have one a black Canon 35mm 2.8 with the distance markings in meters. The rest of the Canon lenses I have, chrome two 50mm F1.8, a foggy 1.5, and a 1.9 are in feet. I also have a chrome 35mm F2.8 and that one is in feet too.

The black 35mm 2.8 was an ebay find that came from Alabama a few years ago.

 

[dexdog]

I just looked at 15 lenses in Peter K's book of Canon RF lenses. The notes say that the lenses were marked in feet, meters or both. I agree with WoodallP that the markets the lenses were sold in would be a consideration

 

[TenEleven]

I just looked at 15 lenses in Peter K's book of Canon RF lenses. The notes say that the lenses were marked in feet, meters or both. I agree with WoodallP that the markets the lenses were sold in would be a consideration

That may have been true long ago - but now at least in Japan there's more "feet" denominated Canon lenses than meters despite meters being the native distance scale for Japan.

In a way this makes sense because when these got made most people in Japan would have been too poor to afford such a camera or lens.
Maybe one would have better luck from European sellers if one were after "metered" Japanese gear?