Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
can you recomend an adaptor - to put it on the E-P1, so my street shots will have exquisite, creamy bokeh - without having to get too close to my subject...I'm a little nervous about 'confrontations' 😕
Dave.
Dave.
Canon 50mm f1.2 on a Leica M?
- Thread starter nicography
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 54
- Views 20K
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
In spite of it's shortcomings ... and it has a few ... the 1.2 seems to have climbed slowly but steadily in price since I got mine a couple of years ago. The prices you mention are double what I paid for mine which was bought here in the classifieds and is near perfect.
I can't help but wonder if the price will continue it's slow climb in spite of the 1.1 Nokton. I suspect a lot of people initially thought about dumping their Canons for the new Voigtlander but balked a little after the slightly luke warm reception the Nokton received!
Al Kaplan
Veteran
Dave, the best way to avoid confrontations is to go W-I-D-E and close. They don't think you're taking a photo of them.
nicography
Established
Thanks a lot for the reply guys.
This place is so welcome.
I did also look at the Canon 50mm f0.95 dream lens, however it seems like that the Canon 50m f1.2 also has the same characteristics and is a lot cheaper for beginner to start with.
Also, the price for the Canon 50m f0.95 is way out of my budget, especially the one that is already in a m-mount.
I think I will try the Voigtlander 50mm adapter when I can find a 50mm f1.2 that will fit into my budget.
Btw, I also have the Voigtlander 50mm f1.1 and the Voigtlander 40mm f1.4, they are very nice glass too.
I hope when I find a Canon 50mm f1.2, I can do some test test for you guys.
cheers,
Nico
This place is so welcome.
I did also look at the Canon 50mm f0.95 dream lens, however it seems like that the Canon 50m f1.2 also has the same characteristics and is a lot cheaper for beginner to start with.
Also, the price for the Canon 50m f0.95 is way out of my budget, especially the one that is already in a m-mount.
I think I will try the Voigtlander 50mm adapter when I can find a 50mm f1.2 that will fit into my budget.
Btw, I also have the Voigtlander 50mm f1.1 and the Voigtlander 40mm f1.4, they are very nice glass too.
I hope when I find a Canon 50mm f1.2, I can do some test test for you guys.
cheers,
Nico
mfogiel
Veteran
You should know, that this lens is basically a soft lens. What I mean, is that it isn't really sharp at any aperture. But this type of drawing can be very interesting for people shots or photos where sharpnes is not required. Keep in mind, that it is worth to pay the top dollar if the lens is really clean, and has the hood. Without the hood this lens flares very easily, and I have paid 200 USD for the hood alone...
RichC
Well-known
Mfogiel's right - I used to own one in perfect condition but sold it. It's a lens design stretched beyond its limits when used wide open. The problem isn't so much lack of sharpness (its sharpness is adequate when stopped down a bit, even if you prefer modern lenses) but flare - anything bright or light-coloured, such as a white shirt, can have significant halos of light ("glow") even if the person is not in bright light: this type of flare cannot be tamed by a hood.
Also, mine needed servicing as it badly misfocused. I've been told that Canon's quality control was not accurate enough for a lens with such a narrow depth of field, so there are some lemons out there - easily and cheaply fixed by servicing, which a 50-year-old lens probably needs anyway, but if buying, do check focus accuracy and knock down the price to cover servicing.
The Canon 50/1.4 is a better - and cheaper - lens.
(I eventually stumped up for a pre-aspherical Leica 50mm Summilux, which I have to say is the best lens I've ever used - it's not the sharpest lens in the world, but it never flares, and the smooth tones it creates are amazing. Not that this has anything to do with Canon RFs!)
jasperamsterdam
Established
I just received mine, from a UK seller on ebay. It's my second lens on the m8 after the 28mm elmarit-asph which is great but slow.
The lens looks great, includes a generic metal screw in hood and a leica IR filter.
My conclusions after just the last few hours of fooling around are pretty much inline with most comments here.
@1.2 its soft which is not a huge problem shooting my newborn in without flash. (see 100% crop "eye" from DNG, no sharpening)
@ 5.6 its pretty sharp (see 100% crop crop "branches" from DNG, no sharpening) but the corners become top.
Last photo is intended purpose !
The lens looks great, includes a generic metal screw in hood and a leica IR filter.
My conclusions after just the last few hours of fooling around are pretty much inline with most comments here.
@1.2 its soft which is not a huge problem shooting my newborn in without flash. (see 100% crop "eye" from DNG, no sharpening)
@ 5.6 its pretty sharp (see 100% crop crop "branches" from DNG, no sharpening) but the corners become top.
Last photo is intended purpose !
Attachments
rwchisholm
Established
I disagree...
I disagree...
I have owned 2 copies of this lens, shooting with my M8. Both have been very easy to focus and actually quite sharp. The camera "outresolves" the lens if you pixel-peep. However, it is a fantastic lens and I love shooting it wide open. -rob
I disagree...
I have owned 2 copies of this lens, shooting with my M8. Both have been very easy to focus and actually quite sharp. The camera "outresolves" the lens if you pixel-peep. However, it is a fantastic lens and I love shooting it wide open. -rob
Nokton48
Veteran
After using mine for two years, with medium-speed Eastman XX film, I now know it quite well. It is my "go-to" lens and my overall favorite for lower-light shooting. I believe that was it's intended purpose; Look at recent posted results, this lens close-up has DOF as thin as a sheet of paper, that to me is part of it's unique optical character. Note in the grainy closeup of the photo provided by mfogiel, I can resolve the individual eyebrow hairs in the forward eye, that is exactly the point where I would have focused, as well. Focus immediately behind that point quickly blows out, giving that unique optical effect. Both of the photos are lovely IMO, the second one looks sharp across the frame, to me. Nicely done.
Now after several years of using a slower resolution film, I am now carrying the lens on my M5, but now loaded with Fuji Presto 1600, which is opening a whole new set of uses for this lens. But it still good to have a choice of films. This is a great lens, especially for the price, compared to the alternatives IMO.
Now after several years of using a slower resolution film, I am now carrying the lens on my M5, but now loaded with Fuji Presto 1600, which is opening a whole new set of uses for this lens. But it still good to have a choice of films. This is a great lens, especially for the price, compared to the alternatives IMO.
raid
Dad Photographer
Here is an underexposed image that was taken with a Canon 50/1.2:
This lens was soft at first, but after DAG had two CLA/adjustments done, it became a sharp lens with hardly any flaring at all.
This lens was soft at first, but after DAG had two CLA/adjustments done, it became a sharp lens with hardly any flaring at all.
raid
Dad Photographer
This image was taken at 2.0 with the lens. I do not see softness but sharpness.
Compare the above image with a similar image taken with a Canon 50/1.8 at 2.0:
... and with a Canon 50/1.5 at 2.0:
... and with a Summitar at 2.0:
Compare the above image with a similar image taken with a Canon 50/1.8 at 2.0:
... and with a Canon 50/1.5 at 2.0:
... and with a Summitar at 2.0:
Last edited:
ZoomP
Well-known
Just bought a 50 f1.2 in addition to my scratched up 50 f1.4. It's comparison of two lenses @f1.4. What do you think?
50 f1.2 @f1.4
50 f1.4 @1.4
Love the 50 f1.4 for its compactness and the 50 f1.2 for the extra stop. Both seems to have no focusing issue.
Here's the 50 f1.2 @ F1.2!!!
50 f1.2 @f1.4
50 f1.4 @1.4
Love the 50 f1.4 for its compactness and the 50 f1.2 for the extra stop. Both seems to have no focusing issue.
Here's the 50 f1.2 @ F1.2!!!
jasperamsterdam
Established
Some real life examples with 100% crops on M8
Some real life examples with 100% crops on M8
Just had the lens for a week now. I am impressed by its qualities, especially upclose @ 2.0 - 2.8, the sharpness is sufficient. Wide open it is a bit (too) soft.
As general purpose lens, with smaller apertures, its decent but never really, really sharp. It never feeds the sensor more than it can handle, as does my 28 elmar asph.
All in all it performs better than i expected but i'm thinking its neither tea nor fish(?)
No real focus issues as i can find! I'm just not sure the softness wide open is acceptable enough and if the smaller aperture perfomance is..
All these samples are unsharpened straight from ACR to PS savefortheweb.
At 8.0
At ?
2.0
crop
at 1.6
crop
Some real life examples with 100% crops on M8
Just had the lens for a week now. I am impressed by its qualities, especially upclose @ 2.0 - 2.8, the sharpness is sufficient. Wide open it is a bit (too) soft.
As general purpose lens, with smaller apertures, its decent but never really, really sharp. It never feeds the sensor more than it can handle, as does my 28 elmar asph.
All in all it performs better than i expected but i'm thinking its neither tea nor fish(?)
No real focus issues as i can find! I'm just not sure the softness wide open is acceptable enough and if the smaller aperture perfomance is..
All these samples are unsharpened straight from ACR to PS savefortheweb.
At 8.0
At ?
2.0
crop
at 1.6
crop
ZoomP
Well-known
Here's two wide open.
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
I love my Canon, It is the lens I use the most now...I have yellow, blue and ND filters fittin on and I test iits BW characteristics now...
nicography
Established
Guys, I am extremely happy now that my Canon 50mm f1.2 LTM finally arrived today and I will like to share this happiness with everyone who help me along.
Early this week, I found this lens on ebay at a great price. I brought this lens for $300USD with shipping.
In addition, the lens indicates "Canon Camera Co. Japan" which was manufacture during 1956-1960 period.
Although, there are no scratches on the glass, there are slight fungus inside the lens. And these fungus seems to be at the rear lens too.
Does anyone know if this will affect my picture quality?
And can the fungus be clean?
My Voigtlander 50/75 adapter have not arrive yet, so I can't not test the lens now.
I understand that a lens that is 40+ years old must have some wear and tear but I hope I can get this clean.
Thanks in advance,
Nico =D
Early this week, I found this lens on ebay at a great price. I brought this lens for $300USD with shipping.
In addition, the lens indicates "Canon Camera Co. Japan" which was manufacture during 1956-1960 period.
Although, there are no scratches on the glass, there are slight fungus inside the lens. And these fungus seems to be at the rear lens too.
Does anyone know if this will affect my picture quality?
And can the fungus be clean?
My Voigtlander 50/75 adapter have not arrive yet, so I can't not test the lens now.
I understand that a lens that is 40+ years old must have some wear and tear but I hope I can get this clean.
Thanks in advance,
Nico =D
I would have the lens cleaned ASAP. Chances are you might be seeing haze. The Canon lenses of this period are notorious for getting haze on the surfaces on each side of the aperture blades. If not cleaned, it can damage the glass and balsam.
nicography
Established
Mudman
Well-known
you can get it cleaned. I had an ex rollei employee clean a 85mm f2 for me for $30 once.. did a great job but he's semi retired. Depending on where you are in the world, there are many competent repairman that can fix the lens for you - expect $100 or so dollars for the CLA (Clean, Lube, Adjust).
Similar threads
