Canon 50/1.2 LTM lens photos?

Krosya said:
Raid,
Do you have a link to that fast 50 lens test?
I would sure like to check it out.
Click to expand...

Krosya,
I have not removed any of the test images. You can look it up under my name at RFF. I will also look it up and post a link here.
 
A truly beautiful vintage lens !

Canon P, 1/60 f/4 FP4+ in Ilfotech

gueuleseches.jpg
 
raid said:
. Once you try out 25 lenses at the same time period, you realize after a short while that for what you do in photography, most likely you will not be able to justify certain lenses over what you already own.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

There is also the question of the 'quality plateau'. Up to that plateau, better lenses make so much difference that you would be foolish not to buy them if you could possibly afford it. Beyond the plateau -- which depends on personal skill, experience, preferences and subject matter -- it doesn't matter very much. Most lenses are above the plateau.

If I did not earn my living from photography, I'd probably stick with the Canon. I did for years. But as I can justify the Sonnar as a business expense...

Even so, my comments on the Sonnar vs. the Canon are based on the assumption that the inquirer does not own either. If I had neither, I'd try to find the money for the Sonnar, even though it's slower. But at that point, with either lens, you're paying for a particular look, not for a lens that will or won't take pictures.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Hello Roger,

This is a good choice of words: "quality plateau". Once you believe that you have found your own plateau, you pretty much know what is needed and what is not if you go by this concept alone.

In my test of 26 lenses in the focal range 35mm-40mm there may have been 15modern lenses included. The 40mm/2.8 Rollei Sonnar was noticed for its pleasing performance.

flare and sharpness:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/gallery/2836741#151905516-L-LB
 
Last edited:
Jungle Jim said:
Krosya,

Last year I did a controlled test on four of the 50's, the Canon 50mm f1.2, and the Leica Summitar, Summarit, and Summicron. The photos are pretty big and can be viewed here in the archives at:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=21745
Click to expand...

Wow thanks for that link - Canon 50/1.2 looks very good there! I think I'm gonna start looking for one.
 
Roger sums things up very well with the term "quality plateau." Unfortunately, reaching that plateau is much more expensive for those of us who like to shoot available light. It's far cheaper to attain the plateau at f/2 than at f/1.4 or faster. That can mean compromises based on price.

At prices a few years ago, I had no qualms about getting a 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH. It was very useful for me with film, and is even more useful on the M8. But at today's prices, I have severe qualms about getting a Noctilux. So I figured I'd give the 50/1.2 Canon a try. If it turns out not to be what I want, I can always sell it at little loss.

Incidentally, Roger, I'm with you on the Sonnar "look" for certain kinds of people pictures. Witness my "boy with rabbit" picture earlier in this thread. I can't really justify the current Zeiss 50/1.5 Sonnar for the amount I'd use it. But I have just bought, for $38, a Jupiter-8 that appears to focus properly on an M8. I'm really looking forward to trying it at f/2.8 and f/4. If I was a pro with a business deduction, I'd probably buy the Zeiss like you did.

--Peter
 
Roger Hicks said:
... cheap, nasty brushes are bar stewards to control...
Click to expand...

OK... what's the deal with UK bar stewards? I mean, I lived there for a few years in a previous life and can't recall ever hearing that expression. Are we talking rowdy publicans? 😉
 
Hi All 🙂

I'm still enjoying my "new" Canon F1.2, which sits, rather permanently, on my black Voigtlander Bessa-T, with A-grip, and rapid winder. I "souped it up" with the original Canon hood, original Canon filters, real Leitz M adapter, and a Leicagoodies STEER, That works surprisingly well on the Canon F1.2 .

I like to switch back and forth between my Nokton F1.5, and the Canon F1.2 . Completely different optical signatures, really. Glad to have a "choice".
 
Last edited:
A fairly casual pic I took a day or so ago of a friend I was having coffee with. I like the slight softness wide open and I also like the OOF areas ... it really suits portraits that don't require absolute sharpness.

CanonFast_05.jpg
 
Krosya said:
From what I see Canon's own hood for the 50/1.2 is way overpriced. Is there a good generic one for it?
Click to expand...

I've not found a cheap vented hood that fits - but I have a 55mm Generic Straight hood (from Heavystar) that works quite nicely.

I've heard the 55mm Olympus hoods work well too.
 
rogue_designer said:
I've not found a cheap vented hood that fits - but I have a 55mm Generic Straight hood (from Heavystar) that works quite nicely.

I've heard the 55mm Olympus hoods work well too.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the answer . Follow-up question - does the one you have block VF much?
 
Krosya, Keith's example shows that softness very well and it was what I talked about. I judge the same way as you do. I didn't tried any of 50/1.2 and I don't see a usable widest aperture (for my photography) by judging images here. As other said here that this lens is romantic, suits for portraits on "soft mode" that's maybe Canon with purpose stretched the design a bit. By judging images at the widest aperture is most of reason for me buying a lens. So I find Canon 50/1.5 (Sonnar copy) to be much better choice compared with f1.2 since I see both Canon 0.95 and 1.2 most as specialty lenses. Stick with what you do like no matter how they are reasoning here. The low price is nice bonus for you 🙂
 
Tomas, have you compared the Canon 50/1.5 and the Canon 50/1.2 at the same aperture? It's just a guess, but I'd imagine the 1.2 improves quite a bit stopped down to even f1.4, and it might lose a good deal of that 'softness.' That's been my experience with other fast lenses; they seem to improve quite a bit even closed down 1/2 stop from their max aperture. The Sonnar design has a reallly unique signature wide open, too, so be sure you like that....🙂
 
Kevin M, let us say optics of both are fine at f1.5 but the problem is increased weight, size, longer focus throw to improve handling with a half stop compensation. I think Summitar/Canon/Sonnar f1.5 lens diameter seems to be nice to hold. 1.2 and 0,95 design and size never appeal for me. I will get a 50/1.5 very soon. Don't know if it will be canon or jupiter-3 or even most expensive alternative as sonnar new and used. Summitar will be added at the same period. It will be interesting to explore those lenses in Leica and Zeiss worlds 🙂. A Summitar with a Sonnar copy as complement sounds exciting for me. Maybe a Jupiter then I could add Summitar faster 🙂 or vice versa
 
Last edited:
Canon f1.2

Canon f1.2

memphis said:
fresh 50/1.2 pics
Click to expand...


It's been an interesting and informative discussion regarding this lens, mine, recently aquired on a seven body, has had colour and mono trial, and is fine, but It's a little large and heavy for my taste, and I don't think I'll need that speed very often, - so it's up for trade, in the classified! 🙂

Dave.
 

Attachments

  • canon 007.jpg
    canon 007.jpg
    125.4 KB · Views: 0
  • canon 008.jpg
    canon 008.jpg
    115.9 KB · Views: 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom