Canon 100mm 3.5 LTM - photos?

[Krosya]

I just got a chance to play with this lens and I find it rather good! Pretty small and light for a Tele lens, sharp and with nice bokeh. Anyone else out there using one? If so - lets see your pics!
Here are mine:
First the lens itself:

And now some pics:

 

[Krosya]

All are wide open at F3.5

 

[ferider]

See here http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=64477

 

[raid]

The 100/3.5 is a secret gem which Canon was hiding from people!

 

[Krosya]

Does anyone know what hood this lens takes?

 

[robklurfield]

Krosya, nice shots. I especially like the one of the snow-covered logs.

How do you find composing with this lens and your 90mm framelines? Do you wish you had a 100 VF or are you comfortable estimating? I've always be curious about how people like this combo.

 

[Mablo]

Krosya, I've been asking the same question. Filter size would be nice to know too. So if you can find the information, please let us know.

 

[raid]

I think, I use a 40.5mm lens hood as a slide on hood after addings some black tape on the mount end of the hood for added friction.

 

[Krosya]

According to Canon Museum website - there were 3 Versions of this lens. One called Serenar, second - Canon, which was chrome and black - mostly chrome and last, third one - as I have pictured above - all black with little chrome. For the all black one 3rd version it says it's 40mm filter size:
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/s/data/100-1000/s_100_35v3.html

The older 2 versions have 34mm filter size

 

[Krosya]

Krosya, nice shots. I especially like the one of the snow-covered logs.

How do you find composing with this lens and your 90mm framelines? Do you wish you had a 100 VF or are you comfortable estimating? I've always be curious about how people like this combo.

Thanks!
Well, above shots were taken with RD1s, so my guideline was 50mm frame. A bit challenging, but OK with practice. If I use a camera with 90mm frames - they work out just fine - with either 85mm, 90mm, 100mm or even 105mm (Nikkor LTM 10.5cm/2.5 lens).
I have a Canon 7 body that has 100mm frames and I dont really see much difference when using 100mm frame vs 90mm frames on other cameras.

 

[Bingley]

Nice shots, Krosya. It's a secret gem, as Raid says. Very sharp, too:

This shot enlarged nicely to 11x14.

 

[Krosya]

More pics:

 

[John Shriver]

For that late lens, the correct hood is the T-42. See http://www.cameraquest.com/crflen.htm

 

[Mablo]

Great information here as usual! I was a bit buffled as I received the 40mm filter and T-42 hood measures from elsewhere but they couldn't possibly fit to my version of the lens. Now I know better, my lens is the 2nd version with the correct filter size 34mm.

 

[beezerc15]

hi.i use a leica kikus hood with mine and they take 34mm filters.hope this helps?.regards john.

 

[uhoh7]

I'd been doing mostly very long shots with this lens, and was beginning to wonder about some lack of contrast long distance.

Today I had it portrait mode on my nex, and well....

bigger
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5029/5581079434_a0aca21c18_b.jpg

bigger
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5190/5580492381_995819c8a3_b.jpg

100s:

these shot RAW and no PP at all.

 

[stupid leica]

i have this lens as well (the middle, chrome/black one) and really adore its size. I haven't had the chance to get a whole lot developed from it though.

uhoh7, you say "no PP at all", but converting to jpeg is editing, regardless of any changes made or not. Sorry- just a pet peeve of mine lol 😉

 

[uhoh7]

i have this lens as well (the middle, chrome/black one) and really adore its size. I haven't had the chance to get a whole lot developed from it though.

uhoh7, you say "no PP at all", but converting to jpeg is editing, regardless of any changes made or not. Sorry- just a pet peeve of mine lol 😉

OK I'll say: shot raw, straight jpeg conversion from LR 🙂