Phantomas
Well-known
OK, first of all apologies for making a "what lens?" type of thread, I know those don't go down well sometimes, but i'll try anyway as I need some voices of reason and advice to put me on the right path.
I'm currently being offered Canon 50/0.95 lens (not TV version) that has been converted to M mount. The price... $750 equivalent. From memory of what I heard about the lens and after a quick search I come to believe that is quite a low price, especially considering M mount conversion. In principle I'm quite interested in this lens, but I'm still a little bit wary of spending all my February "pocket money" on something I don't necessarily NEED at this moment. I mean I certainly wouldn't mind having this lens and i would definitely use it a lot, but my life doesn't depend on it (although spending all my pocket money would result in a lot more shooting, coz I've got fridge full of film and no money
).
Does such price suggest that it's a rare deal and I should go for it, or should i skip it, sit back and wait till I'm really itching for it?
To complicate things further Canon 50/1.2 came along. Hooded and boxed, looks beautiful. $500. And I know that this lens is a better performer (compared to .95) and lighter/more compact.
And lastly 50/1.4 exists somewhere out there, cheapest of them all I'm guessing, and allegedly the best all-around of all three of them.
I don't have a very extensive M lens arsenal. Closest I've got in that range/speed is Nokton 40/1.4 SC (so maybe 50/1.4 is a waste of money anyway).
What to do? 0.95 and a tight belt in February? Minty 1.2 better performer and some change left? Or nothing with more cash for beer and records?
I'm currently being offered Canon 50/0.95 lens (not TV version) that has been converted to M mount. The price... $750 equivalent. From memory of what I heard about the lens and after a quick search I come to believe that is quite a low price, especially considering M mount conversion. In principle I'm quite interested in this lens, but I'm still a little bit wary of spending all my February "pocket money" on something I don't necessarily NEED at this moment. I mean I certainly wouldn't mind having this lens and i would definitely use it a lot, but my life doesn't depend on it (although spending all my pocket money would result in a lot more shooting, coz I've got fridge full of film and no money
).Does such price suggest that it's a rare deal and I should go for it, or should i skip it, sit back and wait till I'm really itching for it?
To complicate things further Canon 50/1.2 came along. Hooded and boxed, looks beautiful. $500. And I know that this lens is a better performer (compared to .95) and lighter/more compact.
And lastly 50/1.4 exists somewhere out there, cheapest of them all I'm guessing, and allegedly the best all-around of all three of them.
I don't have a very extensive M lens arsenal. Closest I've got in that range/speed is Nokton 40/1.4 SC (so maybe 50/1.4 is a waste of money anyway).
What to do? 0.95 and a tight belt in February? Minty 1.2 better performer and some change left? Or nothing with more cash for beer and records?
bob338
Well-known
i'd buy it if i were you.
and if you don't, i'll buy it!
bob
and if you don't, i'll buy it!
bob
Prosaic
Well-known
If it Sounds too Good to be True... It Probably is!
Phantomas
Well-known
So it is a good deal, eh? It would probably be a safe investment at least, so that does tip the scales a bit, but for me a lens is a toy/tool first and investment second.
I have a chance to try the lens physically (offer not from internet, through some contacts). I won't be able to check the pictures, but at least i can check it physically.
If i don't go for it within next week the guy will take it to ebay, in which case I'll tip him about this place.
I have a chance to try the lens physically (offer not from internet, through some contacts). I won't be able to check the pictures, but at least i can check it physically.
If i don't go for it within next week the guy will take it to ebay, in which case I'll tip him about this place.
chikne
Well-known
If you're into collecting cameras then the 0.95 makes sense, hard to find, sought after etc....
If you're into photography, the 0.95 is big, very heavy, you won't be able to find a hood for it, it's hard to find and sought after, so you'll be worried of using it, it probably only focuses down to 1m.
I'd go for a totally different FL of a current production, I had 50mm + 40mm they're very close to each others.
If you're into photography, the 0.95 is big, very heavy, you won't be able to find a hood for it, it's hard to find and sought after, so you'll be worried of using it, it probably only focuses down to 1m.
I'd go for a totally different FL of a current production, I had 50mm + 40mm they're very close to each others.
Phantomas
Well-known
Thanks chikne, that's exactly why I'm hesitating. I'm not much of a collector, even though I ended up with quite a few cameras, I'm using them all. I won't be too afraid to use 0.95 though, I'm not too clumsy and do not shrinkwrap my equipment for shelf display. I'm just curious about using something this fast and although I hear negative things about this lens, I do find the images i found on Flickr quite acceptable. And of course I do not mind having something "unique" At least if I really hate it I can sell it for minimum the same price.
1.2 on the other hand looks like a solid user lens with better output. Although it does look big too, almost as big as .95? Hard to see from here. Would you say it's a lot more comfortable to use?
Can someone please drop some links here to direct comparisons of 0.95 and 1.2 (and 1.4 maybe) Canon lenses? Also to see how big they are. I know I've seen such pages before, struggling to find them now...
At least if I really hate it I can sell it for minimum the same price.1.2 on the other hand looks like a solid user lens with better output. Although it does look big too, almost as big as .95? Hard to see from here. Would you say it's a lot more comfortable to use?
Can someone please drop some links here to direct comparisons of 0.95 and 1.2 (and 1.4 maybe) Canon lenses? Also to see how big they are. I know I've seen such pages before, struggling to find them now...
gdi
Veteran
That is a great price, if it is not infected with fungus or separation. It is a very good lens, but massive. I don't have a Canon 1.2, but the 0,95 improves quickly when stopping down.
And the 1.2 is going to be much easier to use/lug around. Only get the 0.95 if you want superfast or its unique signature!
And the 1.2 is going to be much easier to use/lug around. Only get the 0.95 if you want superfast or its unique signature!
fbf
Well-known
Only get the 0.95 if you want to use it @ F 0.95. From what I have seen, it does have unique signature at max aperture but it is nowhere near the quality of noctilux wide open.
raid
Dad Photographer
How about trading ?
I give you a very clean Canon 50/1.4 plus many other "things" for the 50/0.95.
I give you a very clean Canon 50/1.4 plus many other "things" for the 50/0.95.
Goldorak
-
I have a access to a noctilux whenever I wish, and I know from personal experience that it is an unmatched piece of glass. Not even the fabled hexanon 50 f1.2 comes close. Not close.
This being said, I'd still love to own the 0.95 for the fun of it.
This being said, I'd still love to own the 0.95 for the fun of it.
ali_baba
Well-known
great price, fun lens if flare is not going to ruin the image.
i would add it to the bag for that price, you can always sell for a profit.
i'd recomend using at least a 1.25x mag to achieve crisper focus.
i would add it to the bag for that price, you can always sell for a profit.
i'd recomend using at least a 1.25x mag to achieve crisper focus.
gdi
Veteran
The Hex bests the Noctilux significantly in several areas - sharpness, light falloff and weight for example. Of course like the others - the Noctilux has its own signature and a lot of people prefer it. But the Noctilux is a little faster, of course!
But, unfortunately, the OP has found a good deal on the Canon and not the Hex! But the Canon is a great lens in its own right - much less vignetting than the Noctilux, but probably not as sharp, and it has a lot of halation in high contrast areas @0.95. Carefully used, it can have nice OOF rendering - used with less care (or for effect) and the results can be swirly, bubbly, almost shocking (even more so than the Noctilux!)
Hacker
黑客
Both lenses have the exact same formula, so I'm not sure whether one lens is better than the other. I have both and I actually prefer the 50mm f/1.2 version for its relative weight. BTW, the price of the conversion varies a lot, and you should take that into consideration also.
cam
the need for speed
i'm another one that would happily, happily take it at that price
i am lusting after that f/0.95 but, as someone stated earlier, if you got it you really need to use it wide open. otherwise, it's just too massive to justify. from what i've seen, the f/1.2 is still quite gorgeous and much more of a do everything lens. i think getting that one (rather than the f/1.4) would probably satisfy all your needs.
that said, i'd really love to nab the 0.95! it would be worth the train ride
i am lusting after that f/0.95 but, as someone stated earlier, if you got it you really need to use it wide open. otherwise, it's just too massive to justify. from what i've seen, the f/1.2 is still quite gorgeous and much more of a do everything lens. i think getting that one (rather than the f/1.4) would probably satisfy all your needs.
that said, i'd really love to nab the 0.95! it would be worth the train ride
robertasumendi
Newbie
0.95 vs. 1.2 vs 1.4
0.95 vs. 1.2 vs 1.4
I don't have experience w/these lenses, but I have been looking for a fast lens for capturing dancers -- and learned the other day f/1.2 is only 1/3 stop faster than f/1.4, not the 1/2 stop I'd always assumed. Makes the extra price/weight of a 1.2 over 1.4 less attractive imho, so I'll either go f/1.4 or f/1.
Unless, of course, you want the image signature of the 1.2 wide-open... I think the Canon 1.2 is the same optical formula as the 0.95, so they'll look similar.
0.95 vs. 1.2 vs 1.4
I don't have experience w/these lenses, but I have been looking for a fast lens for capturing dancers -- and learned the other day f/1.2 is only 1/3 stop faster than f/1.4, not the 1/2 stop I'd always assumed. Makes the extra price/weight of a 1.2 over 1.4 less attractive imho, so I'll either go f/1.4 or f/1.
Unless, of course, you want the image signature of the 1.2 wide-open... I think the Canon 1.2 is the same optical formula as the 0.95, so they'll look similar.
edhohoho
Established
At that price, get the 50/0.95, play with it for a while, then "flip" it for about double because that was the market price a few months ago. You would then be able to purchase the 50/1.2 and 50/1.4, and still have plenty of cash left. Put it this way, you will probably never find another good condition 50/0.95 already converted to M mount at that price. Use it and enjoy it. Forget about the original hood...pretty useless looking and waaaaay overpriced if you can even find one. Getting the original hood only makes it more of a collector's lens and you can better use that money to buy the 50/1.2.
Yes, the 50/0.95 is massive, but it takes some interesting pictures at f0.95. The 50/1.2 is a nice size--I personally like the handling of it on my R-D1. The 50/1.4 does not interest me as it's too slow...ha ha! No, but I already have the pre-asph 50 Summilux so no need to double up on 50/1.4.
BTW, geez, how in the world are you getting such great deals? The 50/1.2 hood alone is like $150, and a near mint lens will cost at least $500.
Yes, the 50/0.95 is massive, but it takes some interesting pictures at f0.95. The 50/1.2 is a nice size--I personally like the handling of it on my R-D1. The 50/1.4 does not interest me as it's too slow...ha ha! No, but I already have the pre-asph 50 Summilux so no need to double up on 50/1.4.
BTW, geez, how in the world are you getting such great deals? The 50/1.2 hood alone is like $150, and a near mint lens will cost at least $500.
gdi
Veteran
Wow - I don't think I've seen a 1.2 go for $500! But I don't actively track them.
The original hoods, at $150 (or more for 0.95, of course), are for those who take pictures of gear rather than with gear - you can get a heavystar for about $12-15.
fbf
Well-known
gdi
Veteran
fbf
Well-known
$900 - Ha! Are you sure it sold for that or is that what "you know who" is asking?
I am pretty sure because if i remember correctly, the 1.2 was not a hot lens at all back then but for some reason, the price went up all of a sudden in last 3,4 months. People were going nuts.