Canon 35mm/1.5 on ebay .... close to $600 already!

[raid]

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-35-1-5-LT...49390988?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item2eb1acda8c

This lens is sizzling hot for some reason. It may go for over $600.

 

[Sonnar2]

it's worth the money. First series surplus. It's a great lens digitally too. Creamy at f/1.5, sharp at f/2.8. No CA.

 

[Nokton48]

Agreed it's worth the money.
Cheaper than a Summilux.

 

[LeicaTom]

Yep!

Worth the money, this lens was neglected and cast as many yesars as being a under-performer, now people see it otherwise, it's one of my Favorite lenses to use on the M8 😀

Tom

 

[raid]

The Summilux flares less than the Canon 35/1.5.
I love both.

 

[ferider]

One of the few non mirror lenses with donut bokeh 🙂

 

[maddoc]

The Summilux flares less than the Canon 35/1.5.
I love both.

The Summilux ... 35/1.4 ... ? 😱

 

[raid]

The Summilux ... 35/1.4 ... ? 😱

Yes, the 35/1.4 second version Lux.

 

[raid]

One of the few non mirror lenses with donut bokeh 🙂

Roland,
Do you mean the Canon?

 

[35mmdelux]

Yes, the 35/1.4 second version Lux.

the "pre--asph?" 😱

 

[Nokton48]

So far I have only gotten a very few frames (with any flare at all) with my 35mm F1.5 Canon. It's a great lens for me, coming from using the 35mm F2 Canon, and still have the 35mm F2.8 V1 Summaron. Yes it produces interesting effects with spotlighting, etc but I happen to like those effects. Love it so far.

 

[woodleica]

Anyone have any example photos from this lens - bokeh sharpness etc?

 

[Nokton48]

Anyone have any example photos from this lens - bokeh sharpness etc?




Here you go.

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=canon+35mm+f1.5

 

[sanmich]

There are a few threads around this lens.
some people really like it, and I can understand why.
I ended up selling mine because of the crazy flare, the limited min distance, the long throw, and the impossibility to use it on a Barnack with the hood on (did I mention that it NEEDS a hood?)
On the good side, it is surprisingly sharp, even at full aperture, and it's quite compact.
a question of taste really, but surely not a bad lens...

 

[Sonnar2]

I have a W-50, but wouldn't agree that it needs a hood normally.

 

[Nokton48]

Since it was designed to be used without a hood, that is how I use it.

 

[kevin m]

And the seller has it on a button-rewind M2 with a self-timer. Pretty! 🙂

 

[raid]

the "pre--asph?" 😱

I guess this is what the lens is referred to.

 

[raid]

So far I have only gotten a very few frames (with any flare at all) with my 35mm F1.5 Canon. It's a great lens for me, coming from using the 35mm F2 Canon, and still have the 35mm F2.8 V1 Summaron. Yes it produces interesting effects with spotlighting, etc but I happen to like those effects. Love it so far.

Maybe I meant those effects and not flare.

 

[ferider]

Roland,
Do you mean the Canon?

Yes. The Canon 35/2 behaves similarly, BTW.