Retro-Grouch
Veteran
You're right, xayra33, you said it first. See, we can agree on something!
Can We End the Term "Japanese Summilux?"
- Thread starter das
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 156
- Views 13K
I have about fifty different 5cm/50mm Sonnar type lenses. I don't like it when someone calls a Nikkor a "Copy". I have one 50/1.5 made from the front of a Canon 50/1.5 and rear triplet from a Nikkor 5cm F1.4. Spacing between the elements adjusted to be RF coupled across the focal range. It is one of kind.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Just remember to go out and takes photos every time you get the uncontrollable urge to post something SJWish force-fitted with something about photography or photo-gear as an excuse to wax lyrically about your Woke-ism. 😀
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
The Spastic Image
Established
Not even close. Volvo is distinctive up the 850/S70/V70. Can we all agree that RF Canon and their lenses are simply excellent to superb in their own Individual, distinctive way. As Hondas are among the finest small/medium size cars made in their own unique ways!
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
A great lens at a modest cost.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
This was shot with a -like new- uncoated prewar nickel/black Sonnar (I bought for EUR 300) with a Nikon s2.
gelatin silver print (sonnar 1:1,5 f=5 cm Nr. 1628901) nikon s2
K.N., Zwanenburg, 2023
Erik.
gelatin silver print (sonnar 1:1,5 f=5 cm Nr. 1628901) nikon s2
K.N., Zwanenburg, 2023
Erik.
Wow... buying a Canon 50mm 1.4 LTM makes someone a "cheap skate loser?"
This type of talk is why Leica is hated by so many people.
das
Well-known
I just wish the Canon had slightly better ergonomics and could focus down to 0.7m. Otherwise, it remains fantastic, especially for b&w.
The Spastic Image
Established
Finding undamaged Canon lenses that use the high index of refraction/ low dispersion glass that made their designs possible is difficult. This applies to the 50/1.8 v2, 50/1.4, and 50/1.2.
The 50/1.2 is not quite as sharp as the 50/1.4, even stopped down to F1.4. At one time, sold for less than the 50/1.4. Cost about 1/8th of the 50/0.95.
Get one.
The 50/1.2 is not quite as sharp as the 50/1.4, even stopped down to F1.4. At one time, sold for less than the 50/1.4. Cost about 1/8th of the 50/0.95.
Get one.
das
Well-known
In my opinion, Canon's lens coatings for color photography during the 50s and early 60s were just ok. Definitely not the best. I had a hard time correcting color scans shot with the 1.4. On the other hand, the contemporary 2.8 Summaron renders colors better than any Canon RF lens of the era I have shot with.
I had the 3.5cm F2.8 Summaron and the Canon 35/2.8. I did not like the Summaron, sold it. Preferred the Canon. In the end- kept the Nikkor 3.5cm F2.5. All three lenses use the same basic optical formula.
Mackinaw
Think Different
- Local time
- 6:05 AM
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 4,714
If you are so inclined, Kanto Camera has partnered with a Japanese optical company to produce replacement elements for the Canon 50/1.2.
A few years ago, they used to offer the same for the 50/1.8, but I believe that service is no longer offered.
Jim B.
das
Well-known
That's weird because I kept the 2.8 Summaron over the 2.5 Nikkor. I spent a whole weekend shooting them against each other on high rez full frame digital. The Summaron barely edged it out. The Summaron rendered color a bit better, could focus more closely, and had just slightly better corners. But it was also designed like 7 years later, so it was probably not a fair fight.
I can see that being cost-effective for the 50/1.2. The 50/1.8- Patience and $50 got me a perfect Black V2 50/1.8.
Patience and $400 got a perfect 50/1.2 and Canon V-T Deluxe. I had two tries before that, both later lenses.
Canon 50/1.4- perfect one now, and another several years ago. Picked up one with damaged glass for $50, was going to use for the focus mount. BUT- got some of the damage out, sold it.
Patience and $400 got a perfect 50/1.2 and Canon V-T Deluxe. I had two tries before that, both later lenses.
Canon 50/1.4- perfect one now, and another several years ago. Picked up one with damaged glass for $50, was going to use for the focus mount. BUT- got some of the damage out, sold it.
I found the Nikkor every bit as sharp as the Summaron. Maybe the individual copies, maybe the Nikkor being a Late version had the formula revised during the production run.
The rendering of various lenses is different, and like/dislikes is personal. One is not better than the other, just one person will like a particular lens more than someone else.
The Summaron is lower contrast, had more veiling flare then the Nikkor.
Last edited:
rich_
Established
There is some v helpful information on the board, but It's also like the NY Post comments section on here sometimes. 🤦♂️
wlewisiii
Veteran
Ended up with a nice clean Canon 50/1.4 for what I considered cheap enough a year ago May. Didn't realize at the time that I should have bought a lotto ticket the same day 🤣
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
Not my thoughts. I was just relating what I have read in photo forums these 20 years. I don‘t think it matters what lens was used.
Similar threads
