Swift1
Veteran
Wow thanks for the diagram.
BTW this is how it looks on Bessa-R
They make a pretty pair.
I need to use my Bessa R more...
Swift1
Veteran
Here's a bokeh sample from this lens
charjohncarter
Veteran
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.
Swift1
Veteran
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
Swift1
Veteran
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.
Canon 7 rangefinder
Canon 50/2.2 LTM
Kodak Portra 400
Epson V750-M Pro
Canon 7 rangefinder
Canon 50/2.2 LTM
Kodak Portra 400
Epson V750-M Pro
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
Like the urban-feel in the shot. I should use this lens more often. Busy shooting a KIEV II these days..
Swift1
Veteran
Like the urban-feel in the shot. I should use this lens more often. Busy shooting a KIEV II these days..
Thanks.
Last weekend, my two main cameras were my Canon 7 with 50/2.2 and my Kiev-2a with Jupiter-12
dourbalistar
Buy more film
Hamish over at 35mmc.com posted a review of this lens today:
https://www.35mmc.com/05/08/2018/canon-50mm-f-2-2-leica-thread-mount-lens-review/
https://www.35mmc.com/05/08/2018/canon-50mm-f-2-2-leica-thread-mount-lens-review/
Swift1
Veteran
Hamish over at 35mmc.com posted a review of this lens today:
https://www.35mmc.com/05/08/2018/canon-50mm-f-2-2-leica-thread-mount-lens-review/
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.
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
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.
bcostin
Well-known
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.
davhill
Canon P
Hamish over at 35mmc.com posted a review of this lens today:
https://www.35mmc.com/05/08/2018/canon-50mm-f-2-2-leica-thread-mount-lens-review/
Its a good analysis. Its a shame that Hamish isn't active on this forum. He has a unique ability to discuss cameras and photography.
davhill
Canon P
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.
Swift1
Veteran
Here's a Fujicolor C200 frame shot with the 50/2.2 and scanned with my Nikon Coolscan V. Crop from scan below.
Mackinaw
Think Different
What aperture?
Pretty sharp image for a lens that (supposedly) isn’t good for landscapes.
Jim B.
Pretty sharp image for a lens that (supposedly) isn’t good for landscapes.
Jim B.
Swift1
Veteran
What aperture?
Pretty sharp image for a lens that (supposedly) isn’t good for landscapes.
Jim B.
That was f/11 IIRC.
davhill
Canon P
That was f/11 IIRC.
Yeah, that works
I still really want one for the close work, ok! If works this well at distance, so much the better.
Swift1
Veteran
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
davhill
Canon P
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
-dave
Swift1
Veteran
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
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
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.