Canon LTM Canon 50mm f/2.2

Canon M39 M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
Fascinating thread about a rarely spoken about lens. Still trying to see how this lens would size up against my 50/1.8 LTM.

Anyone own both and care to comment?
 
james.liam said:
Fascinating thread about a rarely spoken about lens. Still trying to see how this lens would size up against my 50/1.8 LTM.

Anyone own both and care to comment?
Click to expand...

I've very briefly used both. The 2.2 is smaller, and is every bit as good or better I think.

Here's one of mine from last year, on expired TRI-X.


Untitled by Colton Allen, on Flickr
Canon 7 rangefinder
Canon LTM 50/2.2
Expired Kodak TRI-X 400
Epson V750​
 
Thanks for all the images and link to Hamish’s review.
I’ve been taken with the Canon 1.8 and it’s signature unique enough that I bought one in addition to the 1.4. Not sure the F/2.2 makes the cut. I use the LTMs I own exclusively on an M9M; colors of these Cold War veterans always seems ‘off’.
 
:cool:
james.liam said:
Fascinating thread about a rarely spoken about lens. Still trying to see how this lens would size up against my 50/1.8 LTM.

Anyone own both and care to comment?
Click to expand...

I own both and now that I have used the 2.2 for a while I will be putting my Canon 1.8/50 and 1.9/50 and an Elmar 3.5/50 up for sale. For fifties I will keep the 1.4/50, 1.5/50, and 2.2/50 from Canon, a Jupiter-8 2.0/50, a Topcon 2.8/50, and some assorted Soviet lenses.
 
newst said:
:cool:

I own both and now that I have used the 2.2 for a while I will be putting my Canon 1.8/50 and 1.9/50 and an Elmar 3.5/50 up for sale. For fifties I will keep the 1.4/50, 1.5/50, and 2.2/50 from Canon, a Jupiter-8 2.0/50, a Topcon 2.8/50, and some assorted Soviet lenses.
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, why are you putting the 1.8 on sale as opposed to the 2.2?
 
james.liam said:
Out of curiosity, why are you putting the 1.8 on sale as opposed to the 2.2?
Click to expand...

While both lenses are fine performers I like the image quality of the 2.2 slightly better than the 1.8. The 2.2 is also smaller and lighter than the 1.8 (mine is a Serenar style chromed brass body).
 
newst said:
While both lenses are fine performers I like the image quality of the 2.2 slightly better than the 1.8. The 2.2 is also smaller and lighter than the 1.8 (mine is a Serenar style chromed brass body).
Click to expand...

I think (though not certain) that the later 1.8 with the black focusing ring is of a newer design and of higher resolution.
 
james.liam said:
I think (though not certain) that the later 1.8 with the black focusing ring is of a newer design and of higher resolution.
Click to expand...

Peter Kitchingman does not mention any change in the optics between the first production and last production 1.8/50 lenses. Other sources I have seen state it more specifically. If there is any optical difference between them I suspect it to be due to better coatings on later glass. I don't see where an anti-glare coating could produce higher resolution images however.

https://web.archive.org/web/2011022...ex.php?page=lenses&type=standard_lenses&id=14
 
Hello
I just received a 2.2 and was wondering what the filter thread size was, can't seem to find it

Thanks
Don
 
Yes, the filter thread is 40mm. Although I have a couple of old Canon 40mm filters, they’re hard to find and may not be in as good condition as modern filters. My solution has been to use a 40-43mm step ring on each of my Canon lenses, and then use new 43mm filters. I also use generic 43mm hoods.
 
james.liam said:
I think (though not certain) that the later 1.8 with the black focusing ring is of a newer design and of higher resolution.
Click to expand...

Not sure this is correct. The 50/2.2 was produced during a 6-mo period in 1961, mainly for the Japanese market, which means that its production coincided with production of the later series of the 50/1.8 (the chrome and black version). Kitchingman found no evidence that the optical formula of the 50/1.8 changed over its long run. As far as I know, the 50/1.8 is not a “newer design,” at least optically speaking.

My sample of the Canon 50mm f1.8 was made during the 1960s, probably later in the decade to judge from the serial number.

My sample of the Canon 50mm f2.2 was made between January and July 1961.

Both lenses are really excellent, very sharp with smooth bokeh. I recently acquired the 50mm f2.2 and have been shooting a lot with it recently. Very impressed with the results so far.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom