Canon LTM canon 35mm f2 ltm compare summicron....?

Canon M39 M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
goamules said:
I like the Canon quality (and all Japanese of that era). Since we're comparing intangibles, let's not forget the very tangible prices.

Canon 35/2 - $400
Leica 35/2 - $1500
Click to expand...

An important point, that. There appear to be some fortunate folk on the list for whom cost is no object. Sadly, I am not in that group.

Cheers,
Dez
 
I had the Canon 35/2 twice so far, and I let them go to others.
The OOF is better looking in the V1 Summmicron than in this Canon lens, and it is much better built.
 
goamules said:
I like the Canon quality (and all Japanese of that era). Since we're comparing intangibles, let's not forget the very tangible prices.

Canon 35/2 - $400
Leica 35/2 - $1500
Click to expand...

An important point, that. There appear to be some fortunate folk on the list for whom cost is no object. Sadly, I am not in that group.

Cheers,
Dez
 
raid said:
I had the Canon 35/2 twice so far, and I let them go to others.
The OOF is better looking in the V1 Summmicron than in this Canon lens, and it is much better built.
Click to expand...

And 4 times more expensive. A Ferrari is faster and better looking too, but I like my Miata. How do you measure "much better built?" The delicate stippling of the metal? The more clickable click stops of the aperture? I just don't get "much better built" when comparing German to Japanese lenses. My Canons and Nikkors are as well made or better than any Leica I've handled.

Are you saying just the black Canon 35/2, or ALL Canons are "much worse built?"

On OOF, didn't you shoot a comparison of these two? Can you post it so we can see if we agree that the OOF is "better looking"?

I'm just trying to justify why someone would pay 4 times more for a similar lens. Is the build and OOF 4 times better?
 
goamules said:
And 4 times more expensive. A Ferrari is faster and better looking too, but I like my Miata. How do you measure "much better built?" The delicate stippling of the metal? The more clickable click stops of the aperture? I just don't get "much better built" when comparing German to Japanese lenses. My Canons and Nikkors are as well made or better than any Leica I've handled.

Are you saying just the black Canon 35/2, or ALL Canons are "much worse built?"
Click to expand...

I guess I sort of have the same questions regarding a true comparison between these lenses. I briefly handled the Canon years ago and it seemed quite nice. But then I think Voigtlanders are nice too. I suppose I'll never know what I'm missing, but I do react skeptically to most posts that don't include some sort of personal experience-based analytical comparison. So does anyone here have both the Canon and an older version of the Summicron? If so, could you describe your comparative experiences with them? Thanks ahead of time.
 
Jamie Pillers said:
I guess I sort of have the same questions regarding a true comparison between these lenses. I briefly handled the Canon years ago and it seemed quite nice. But then I think Voigtlanders are nice too. I suppose I'll never know what I'm missing, but I do react skeptically to most posts that don't include some sort of personal experience-based analytical comparison. So does anyone here have both the Canon and an older version of the Summicron? If so, could you describe your comparative experiences with them? Thanks ahead of time.
Click to expand...

Oops... never mind. I just went back through the thread and found what I was looking for. :eek:
 
goamules said:
And 4 times more expensive. A Ferrari is faster and better looking too, but I like my Miata. How do you measure "much better built?" The delicate stippling of the metal? The more clickable click stops of the aperture? I just don't get "much better built" when comparing German to Japanese lenses. My Canons and Nikkors are as well made or better than any Leica I've handled.

Are you saying just the black Canon 35/2, or ALL Canons are "much worse built?"

On OOF, didn't you shoot a comparison of these two? Can you post it so we can see if we agree that the OOF is "better looking"?

I'm just trying to justify why someone would pay 4 times more for a similar lens. Is the build and OOF 4 times better?
Click to expand...

I prefer the Ferrari to the Miata in cars, even though I have neither of these cars.

The bokeh of the 8 element V1 Summicron is extremely pleasant. I was fortunate to get thus lens over twenty years ago for a low price (for these days). It was my first RF 35mm lens.

You can browse through hundreds of posted images by photographers with these two lenses on flickr.
 
raid said:
I am trading my Canon 35/2 (plus cash) towards a Nikkor 35/1.8, which is a different animal. I have the 8 element Summicron 35/2, so I am happy with that lens. The Canon was hardly ever used by me.
Click to expand...

I bought a Canon35/2 yesterday. I want to use it thoroughly this time.
 
Joe Vitessa said:
Does anybody know the serial number cut-off between Version 1 and Version 2 of the Canon 35mm f2?
Click to expand...

According to Peter Kitchingman's book on Canon RF lenses, version 2 of the 35/2.0 lens begins w/ serial no. 37237. The lettering on the i.d. ring is also a little different on version 2; it says "CANON" in caps, instead of "Canon Camera Co. Inc.".

There are some reports on the web that Canon tweaked the lens design slightly between ver. 1 and 2, but Kitchingham's book does not mention this.
 
I shot a Canon 35/1.8 a lot for years. Finally got a 35/2.0 about a year ago. Yes, it's sharp, contrasty, and boring. I went back to the 1.8.
 
As I recall back in the 1990's I bought a Canon 35/2.0 C-mount movie camera lens in like new condition for $35. Of course when I unscrewed the adapter on it I had a Canon 35/2.0 LTM lens. Cool!
 
I have obtained a very nice example of this lens, but it has some greasy aperture blades. Does anybody have any tips to get there? I've googled etc. but can't find a repair guide on this (beautifully made)lens...
Thanks in advance!
 
Accessing the blades from the rear is pretty easy. First unscrew this ring with a lens spanner:


Untitled by Peter Jennings, on Flickr

Then unscrew the rear element group with your fingers:


Untitled by Peter Jennings, on Flickr

The rear side of the blades is now exposed. To access the front you'll need to remove the name ring:


Untitled by Peter Jennings, on Flickr

The name ring is more difficult if you don't have the right rubber tool to grab it, but you can probably clean the blades adequately enough from the rear. Dab some lighter fluid on with a cotton swab, work the blades, and dry them off with some tissue, and repeat several times until the oil is no longer visible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom