Canon LTM Canon 50mm f/2.2

Canon M39 M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
Here's a bokeh sample from this lens

ok57lr-C8FxM-PUFVJCRvRQaxEHM1T6TQ1CmBGo1oxgS9Xf8IR4zXHTdZtcU92KnnOAe9Ip0ePW4Wan_TPORmr0N0evM7G0Tl0bws4c_prwqRbxyCTP1SsJIzAdQeQgy9KIuGCxzbA8=w1000-h667-no
 
Great shots Colton! I have a early f 3.5 35mm Canon lens it is so small I'm afraid I'll loss it. Even though you hit F5 this is a nice right up.
 
Great shots Colton! I have a early f 3.5 35mm Canon lens it is so small I'm afraid I'll loss it. Even though you hit F5 this is a nice right up.

Thank you, John. Ya, some of those Canon 35mm and 28mm lenses are tiny.
This 50/2.2 almost feels too small on the big Canon 7 :)
 
I just finished scanning a roll of Portra 400 that I shot almost entirely with the Canon 50/2.2, and I have to say I am pretty impressed with this lens. It has very slight pincushion distortion, but other than that I don't see any noticeable weaknesses.

rSmOjm2o2Yap7AxIJkRR4OXoD90ulzysh930x94JH-S5Bsa4kEFT8IpPaVmwOIOiUMI3ZvfTQnHxwMdZUTJ0U1SPer-x2s0l5PWXDnhEdk1i0Uu9QVP-NYjAUkJbORvW3td1MfWLSUY=w1024-h731-no

Canon 7 rangefinder
Canon 50/2.2 LTM
Kodak Portra 400
Epson V750-M Pro​
 
Like the urban-feel in the shot. I should use this lens more often. Busy shooting a KIEV II these days..
 
Cool to see a review done on this lens.
I can't say I agree with the review regarding sharpness, but I am not using mine on a digital Leica.
From looking at my scans from my Nikon Coolscan, I would say this lens easily falls into the "sharp enough" category.

Same here. I have done a non-scientific, quick comparison between my 50/2.2 and J-8, J-3, I-61, using an M4/3 digital camera. As I wrote above it is sharper and more contrast-y than any of the FSU lens at the same aperture, across the frame. Judging from results on film scans, I think it is on a par with Helios-103. It is definitely more than enough sharp.

That article mentioned distance affecting sharpness, as well as stopping down not helping. To me that sounds like there is misalignment of the elements/lens unit.
 
I was just about to link to the 35mmc review, as well. I saw one on eBay a while back and almost bought it just out of curiosity. Wish I had.
 
That article mentioned distance affecting sharpness, as well as stopping down not helping. To me that sounds like there is misalignment of the elements/lens unit.

I had gotten the same impression [as that expressed on 35mmc] from images displayed on this forum, especially by Colton: the 50/2.2 appears uniquely suited for portraiture, less so for landscapes.
 
Here's a Fujicolor C200 frame shot with the 50/2.2 and scanned with my Nikon Coolscan V. Crop from scan below.

jmrg6mj0LhfPpKbS_VNSErsGeSNmAj_-BzPkms1lHIt5jI_nkvXDwb2Kk5U2ZHfLaOT43IqVNJWZNnGhGqbIMc5hHhPncGV8H__VbzSVPcZSEmfw6FEVAA9i9uJ3Mq-EX0TYdHbehbM=w1024-h683-no



9t4BUUuRt9TDZCKMUtFpfY5R_UvE2qEsh_e_CRphZ2i6Y-Y8EKXygVwckTsxhCo2eppxsqBFZ9u7hSqAPm5vZDgHiX4PDSU9OAH7-QBhbgqztgiLRCDTlXGaKSsTlA4VSO0eS4sxsLk=w900-h600-no
 
Yeah, that works :).
I still really want one for the close work, ok! If works this well at distance, so much the better.

I found mine on ebay, then a few weeks later another one showed up on ebay. Keep an eye out, you might get lucky.

Here's another from mine,


Untitled by Colton Allen, on Flickr
Canon 7 rangefinder
Canon 50/2.2 LTM
Fujicolor C200
Nikon Coolscan V ED​
 
I found mine on ebay, then a few weeks later another one showed up on ebay. Keep an eye out, you might get lucky.

Indeed I do keep an eye open.. and it’s ever a play between price and condition and my present budget. There’s been one listed recently which looks fine but for the :( fungus ...
-dave
 
Here's one from my new photozine that was done with the Canon 50/2.2
Of the 21 photos in the zine, all but 1 were done with the 50/2.2



Untitled by Colton Allen, on Flickr
Canon 7 rangefinder
Canon 50/2.2 LTM
Kodak Portra 400
Epson V750-M Pro​
 
Back
Top Bottom