Canon LTM Canon Model 7, Newbie Advice? Lenses?

[rfPNW]

Hi, new-ish member here. First post.

I've been "tinkering" for a few years with a Contax IIb, but purely through instinct and casual skill development. Recently I decided I wanted to get more serious about the art/craft and wanted to try a RF. I was recently lucky enough to come across a Canon 7 in excellent condition. It came with a 135 lens and the kinda-rare/desirable 50mm f1.2. As I load this up and start testing it, I have a couple newbie questions.

First, wondering if I actually need the 50/1.2 lens? Or for my casual, beginner-intermediate skills I'd be better off just trying to swap into 1.4 or 1.8?

Second, wondering what "other" lens range ya'll might suggest I add as I learn more? I tend to do a good bit of outdoor/wilderness photography, so I'd love to try a wide angle lens. Any recs in that canon ltm line that'd be better than others?

Lastly, and this is one I guess for Canon 7 users-- I've given the camera a good once over and all seems great, except I can't for the life of me figure out how to change the viewfinder window selector? This was actually a big reason I sought this model out, for the integrated viewfinder framing option. It's a little doll on the top left, but mine seems perpetually stuck on the 50mm, which is fine for now. But I'd love to try the 135 lens in this test roll, and curious what I am missing about changing that setting?

Many thanks for any wisdom, advice, guidance you might be willing to share!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The Dial to change the framelines has probably jumped the underlying mechanism. There is a small Pin on the dial that engages the mechanism underneath. This can happen when the top is taken off the camera, and someone does not line it up properly before putting it back on. The dial on top has four positions to select sets of frames. It's been over 10 years since I popped the top on mine.

The Canon 50/1.8 is a good lens to start with. Beware of damaged glass on Canon lenses behind the aperture. Be sure to have return privilege on any bought.

As far as the 50/1.2 goes...

A clean one is really good, and gives a unique rendering.





But- I went through a couple to find one with undamaged glass.

 

[wlewisiii]

I'd say keep the 1.2 for it's unique look when you want it but the 50/1.4 is a far better every day user lens.

If you want to stick with Canon lenses, I'd also recommend the 35/2 & 100/3/5 as well.

There aren't any frame-lines for it, but the 28/2.8 is a wonderful lens and I always felt that using the whole area of the frame was "close enough" for me.

 

[OlivierAOP]

Try to wiggle the dial frame dial and maybe the pin will engage? Otherwise Richard Haw has a tutorial on how to remove the top cover. Needs three different tools unfortunately.

 

[rfPNW]

I'd say keep the 1.2 for it's unique look when you want it...

Thanks for the advice. Yeah I think I'll take my time and find a 1.8 and any of the others you mention when the opportunity (and funding) arises.

But yeah.... I actually just realized that in the gear I have the original import paperwork and canon warranty papers for both the camera body and this 1.2 showing their serial numbers and original purchase together. Call me sentimental..... but if they've managed to stay together this long, far be it from me to split them up!

For now, I'm going to load it up with a roll of BW, test it all out, and hope that in time I develop the skills to appreciate what the lens can do!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Is the glass on the F1.2 clean? Easy to tell when the glass is damaged- can be almost like wax paper, up to "plastic wrap" looking.

If the glass is clean- Keep it! Chances are you will not get another like it.

Note: Canon made special filters for the 50/1.2 with the glass all the way forard. The front element protrudes that it will hit the glass of many 55mm filters. Test before screwing a filter into it. Safe bet- get a 55->58 step up ring and use 58mm filters.

 

[Mackinaw]

There are two types of haze found on the 50/1.2, the garden-variety type that cleans up easily, and the more permanent staining that can't be cleaned off. I've learned how to take apart and clean the ordinary haze off my 50/1.2 in about 20 minutes. My lens does show some staining, but the effects on my images are minimal to non-existent.

Kanto Camera in Japan has partnered with a Japanese optical firm to supply replacement elements for the ones that stain. No idea of the cost, but it's good to know that this is an option for those who really like the 50/1.2. Once properly calibrated, it can produce very unique images.

Jim B.

 

[shawn]

Note: Canon made special filters for the 50/1.2 with the glass all the way forard. The front element protrudes that it will hit the glass of many 55mm filters. Test before screwing a filter into it. Safe bet- get a 55->58 step up ring and use 58mm filters.

Or a cheap 55mm filter and take the glass out to act as a spacer for another filter.

 

[Bingley]

I’ll address your next lens questions. It’s my opinion, but I think it’s a falacy that you should seek out a wide angle lens for outdoor/wilderness photography, at least in 35mm. Landscape photography entails a process of elimination, not inclusion. Perhaps a different story if you’re shooting medium or large format, but for 35mm negatives I’d stick w/ a lens in the “normal” range, or maybe a modest telephoto. About 90% of my landscape work in 35mm is done w/ a 40mm, 50mm and/or 85mm lens, and I use the latter mainly for detail shots. Others have suggested keeping the Canon 50/1.2 and adding another 50 as a daily shooter. I think that’s good advice. If you want to venture beyond Canon lenses, there are some Nikkor rangefinder lenses in 50mm that are very good and the Leica Summitar 50/2.0 is outstanding for landscape photography if you get a clean sample.

If you do decide you want something wider, I agree w/ the advice above that the Canon 35mm f2.0 and Canon 28mm f2.8 are excellent lenses, assuming you get a clean copy. The Voigtlander Skopar 35mm f2.5 and Skopar 28mm f3.5 in LTM mount are also outstanding.

Good luck with the Canon 7 and post some photos here!!

 

[rfPNW]

Good luck with the Canon 7 and post some photos here!!

Thanks for all the good advice here, especially on the landscape issue! And I will definitely post photos once I get some.

There are two types of haze found on the 50/1.2, the garden-variety type that cleans up easily, and the more permanent staining that can't be cleaned off. I've learned how to take apart and clean the ordinary haze off my 50/1.2 in about 20 minutes. My lens does show some staining, but the effects on my images are minimal to non-existent.

And good to know on this! I might post a pic of the glass tomorrow to see all your impressions of if I've got either/both hazes. thank you!

 

[newst]

My personal favorite Canon LTM lenses are the 2.8/35, 3.5/100, 2.2/50, and 1.4/50. I am in the process of selling off a number of others, the 1.2/50, 1.5/50, and the 3.5/35. This is after selling the 2/35, 1.7/35, 3.5/50, and 3.5/28. The selling/sold items do not indicate any flaws in the lenses themselves, but a realization that I am not using them, or have other lenses in my collection that outshine their Canon counterparts.

I have acquired a range of Topcon Topcor lenses over the years, the 1.8/50, 2/50, 2.8/50, and 3.5/50, that outperform their Canon equivalents.I also recommend that you research the Soviet-era lenses. Some of these are quite good, in particular the Jupiter 12 2.8/35, the Industar 50 3.5/50, and the Industar 61. The quality of the Soviet optics available these days ranges from trash to brilliant, for a number of reasons, so I don't recommend shopping for them unless you have thoroughly investigated them. There are a lot of information sources available online, starting right here on the Rangefinder site.

 

[jankap]

I use the 50mm f/0.95 on a Sigma fp. This is an excellent lens, it offers a beautiful rendering. I can recommend it for your Canon 7, despite its weight and cost.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Some of these are quite good, in particular the Jupiter 12 2.8/35, the Industar 50 3.5/50, and the Industar 61. The quality of the Soviet optics available these days ranges from trash to brilliant, for a number of reasons, so I don't recommend shopping for them unless you have thoroughly investigated them. There are a lot of information sources available online, starting right here on the Rangefinder site.

The Jupiter-12 has a very large rear element that is to big to fit safely through the Light Baffles of the Canon 7 and Canon P. There are some changes made through the long run, some with a metal ring to protect the rear element, some bare glass. The J-12 can be used with the older Canon cameras.

The Canon 50/0.95 used to sell for $200, I bought two in those days. Sold one for 10x that, the second- perfect condition- I use on my Nikon Z5. Prices are over $2K. The 50/1.2, 1/4 that price to give up 1/2 F-Stop.

 

[wlewisiii]

My black J12 works fine with a Canon 7. It doesn't have the extra ring on the rear and it screws into place just fine.

That said, there are many other & better 35mm LTM lenses that are not much more expensive. A Color Skopar 35/2.5 or a Canon 35/2 would be far superior lenses.

 

[newst]

The Jupiter-12 has a very large rear element that is to big to fit safely through the Light Baffles of the Canon 7 and Canon P. There are some changes made through the long run, some with a metal ring to protect the rear element, some bare glass. The J-12 can be used with the older Canon cameras.

The Canon 50/0.95 used to sell for $200, I bought two in those days. Sold one for 10x that, the second- perfect condition- I use on my Nikon Z5. Prices are over $2K. The 50/1.2, 1/4 that price to give up 1/2 F-Stop.

You are right about the J-12. My LTM Cannons were earlier models, since I didn't like the feel of the 7, and I just forgot that issue when I wrote the response.

 

[newst]

My black J12 works fine with a Canon 7. It doesn't have the extra ring on the rear and it screws into place just fine.

That said, there are many other & better 35mm LTM lenses that are not much more expensive. A Color Skopar 35/2.5 or a Canon 35/2 would be far superior lenses.

I find it difficult to define these lenses as better and superior. They certainly produce more 'modern' images, and if that is your goal then they are certainly better. If, like myself, you prefer a more classic image, then maybe not.

 

[wlewisiii]

The Canon is a classic lens. I own a J12 that is the finest of them I've ever seen, even better than the Kiev mount ones. That said, it's still not that good of a lens compared to anything classic from Canon, Nikon, Minolta (Chiyoko) or even Leica much less modern lenses from Cosina/Voigtlander. Obviously it's a matter of opinion but, to me, the only real reason to buy FSU lenses is cost because the QC makes them a gamble.

That said, if the OP wants to try it, message me your mail address and I'll give you this J12.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I've used several J-12's on my Leica M9 and M Monochrom. I know they hit the Baffles in the Canon P and Canon 7 - they left marks.
I have a lot of lenses, each has a character.

 

[Coldkennels]

The Jupiter-12 has a very large rear element that is to big to fit safely through the Light Baffles of the Canon 7 and Canon P. There are some changes made through the long run, some with a metal ring to protect the rear element, some bare glass. The J-12 can be used with the older Canon cameras.

Old photo, but...



The biggest problem with the J12/Canon 7 I had was the lens is far too late for the camera to balance properly. I spent the best part of a week covering a giant trade show in Vegas with that thing tipping backwards and jabbing me in the side whenever I wasn't using it.

Still, got some fun reactions from people who were surprised to see that being used alongside whatever digital kit I was using back in 2013.

In fact, that'd be my number one tip for picking lenses out for the Canon 7: pick something heavy if you plan on using it with a strap. Almost every LTM lens I have causes it to tip backwards; it's really annoying. The only solution I found was to use a tripod mount strap lug and swap it to a vertical hanging setup, a la M5.

 

[das]

I would go for Voigtlander M39 lenses because not only are they newer and optically better, but they can focus down to 0.7m, which no native Canon M39 lens can do. I always thought it was odd that Canon RFs could focus down to 0.7m or 0.8m, but none of its lenses could.