Canon LTM Canon 35/1.5: A Tribute

Canon M39 M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
35-15-too.jpg


35-15.jpg
 
Nokton48 said:
Agreed it completes the set. One thing I immediately notice from Mr. Li's photo, is how bluish the coatings are in the 50mm, compared to the later amber-colored coatings, on the later lenses.

The photos in this thread have convinced me as to the worth of the lens:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86537
Click to expand...
The 50/1.5 lens is the earliest among the 3 lenses, which is always blue coating same as the Canon lenses at same era.
85/1.5 should be a bit later (although there is a version I Serenar before), which blue coating either.
35/1.5 is the latest, around 1958 or 1959, utilize the amber coating same as 35/1.8 and 35/2
 
mrlazyli said:
The 50/1.5 lens is the earliest among the 3 lenses, which is always blue coating same as the Canon lenses at same era.
Click to expand...
My Canon 50/1.5 has brown coated glass, the same with my chrome 50/1.8. AFAIK Canon switched to the brown coating around 1954-1955. The black lenses with alloy body came a bit later, 1957-1958.
 
Sonnar2 said:
My Canon 50/1.5 has brown coated glass, the same with my chrome 50/1.8. AFAIK Canon switched to the brown coating around 1954-1955. The black lenses with alloy body came a bit later, 1957-1958.
Click to expand...
I and my friend have collected quite a number of 50/1.5 and 50/1.8 Chrome before, all with blue coating (with some amber coating for some of them). First time to know that all amber coating was available 😎
 
Regarding coating colors, from Jacob Deschin's 1957 book, "Canon Photography":

25mm - purple coating
28/2.8 - magenta
28/3.5 - purple
35/1.8 - umber
35/2.8 - purple
50/1.2 - umber
50/1.5 - umber
50/1.8 - umber
50/2.8 - magenta
50/3.5 - purple
85/1.5 - umber
85/1.9 - magenta
100/3.5 - purple
135/3.5 - magenta
200/3.5 - purple
400/4.5 - purple
800/8 - purple

Jim B.
 
You can add Serenar 50/1.9 collapsible, always blue/purple.
Note that several lenses exist in many versions. The 35/2.8 for example had blue/purple coatings in the first versions (all chrome, 34mm filter ring), then coatings became amber (black and chrome versions, 40mm filter ring).
 
Koni Kowa said:
You can add Serenar 50/1.9 collapsible, always blue/purple.
Note that several lenses exist in many versions. The 35/2.8 for example had blue/purple coatings in the first versions (all chrome, 34mm filter ring), then coatings became amber (black and chrome versions, 40mm filter ring).
Click to expand...

My (chrome) Canon 35/2.8 has blue coating.
 
raid said:
Does the coating color make a difference in performance with color film?
Click to expand...

Again, from Deschin's book, "In color photography, the coatings help to improve color brilliance and result in higher color fidelity."

And, "Depending on the lens, this color will be either purple, magenta or umber. In terms of tone values, the color has practically no effect on the B&W image. In color photography, however, some differenced will be seen from one group of lenses to another in the way the original colors are reproduced on different makes of color film."

Jim B.
 
I am so jealous. I need to sell a bunch of lenses and find one of these. But I did just get my 1937 czj sonnar back from rebuild and it seems great.

Had never been open and has that super- fine oxidation. Sharp even across miles now that it's clean. Crazy zeiss tech made me swear never to clean it 🙂

But I'm learning how unique the various sonnars are. Love the nikkor 5 cm for portraits and it's ability to creamily dynamite the background. This 35 just makes me drool.

I have the three fastest canon 85s. The 1.5 is the hardest lens I own to focus, haha, but great fun and really sharp stopped down, as you guys know. The 1.8 shoots like I just paid 5 grand for it at the leica shop. The 1.9 needs some air: it's the most beautiful in build by a mile: I can't count the blades on that.

To make matters worse I now have a contax, so I'm getting a j-9 for it.... Until someday i find a nikkor "c", yet another fantastic sonnar 🙂
 
I had one in the 70s for a couple of years, and finally traded it off to someone who had an M2 and an RF Summilux pairing. At the time, I'm sure we both thought we got the better end of that deal. The Canon, if I remember correctly, was mushy up to around f4 or 5.6, where the Summilux was mushy to 2.8. Neither was anything to write home about, wide open, and the 35/1.7 C/V I owned later would pound both into dust. I only miss it when I remember how cool it looked. 🙂

I also had at that time the legendary 85/1.8, which was a fabulous lens that I still miss.
 
That's a good story mdarnton, thank you for sharing it.
I even prefer the 100/2 to the 85/1.8. With my 35/50/100 Canon lenses on a M2 and a little stock of Kodak Tri-X, I must confess I'm close to be happy. 🙂
 
nice, that's not really bad flare - i'd call it a nice "glow" 😛
keep the pics coming people 🙂 this lens has such a unique fingerprint
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom