Canonet 17 photos wide open

[nzeeman]

i saw many nice photos from canonet 17 but i was wondering how canonet 1.7/40 lens performs wide open. anyone have some sample shots?
thanks in advance

 

[sirius]

Try searching on Flickr.

It has pentagonal circles of confusion. It's a bit soft but has a nice quality to it. The lens is on the warm side, quite attractive I thought.

I can't find my sample shot 🙁

 

[sirius]

This person looks like they know how to use it.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/seattlebonvivant/sets/72157594485608550/?page=2

Canonet mon amour (group)

 

[nzeeman]

i found some on the net, but i was also interested in rff members experiences.

 

[imajypsee]

I didn't make notes, but

I didn't make notes, but

these are probably wide open since I was in fairly low light

http://www.pbase.com/jypsee/image/84339814

http://www.pbase.com/jypsee/image/84273527

http://www.pbase.com/jypsee/image/84273598

http://www.pbase.com/jypsee/image/84273658

HTH

(bought my QL17 GIII from greyhoundman; wonderful camera)

 

[Bingley]

imajypsee -- Welcome to RFF and thanks for posting those great photos! There are quite a few of us around here who use and love QL17 GIIIs.

 

[imajypsee]

Hey, thanks!!

Hey, thanks!!

I don't want to hijack the OPs thread, but, I love that camera so much that I've got another one in for new light seals and so forth. That way I can do color and BW.

 

[anirbax]

I have used the QL17 GIII, and it is really sharp, as good as my YE 35 GSN. Pentagonal bokeh does not happen at f/1.7, and bokeh is okay (not as good as YE35). Only, don't shoot at distances shorter than a metre using the RF, since focussing is inaccurate, and will show at f/1.7.

i saw many nice photos from canonet 17 but i was wondering how canonet 1.7/40 lens performs wide open. anyone have some sample shots?
thanks in advance

 

[Bingley]

OK, here's one wide open, not a great picture (unless you like peaches), funky bokeh going on in the upper left corner:

 

[dmr]

It definitely shows some astigmatism when wide open. Let me find some examples and I will post them.

In some threads some people swear this is some other aberration and not astigmatism, but when examining closely, it seems to fit the definition of astigmatism more than other phenomena. ...

 

[dmr]

Here is a good example of what I mean:

http://www.letis.com/dmr/pics/vegas/vegas12/dmr321-R2-023-10.jpg

You will notice that in the far corners, what should be circular shapes of light are assuming kind of a "football" shape. This particular image was taken wide open, and I admit when I shot this I did not think of the fact that this aberration had been identified before.

Here's the thread I started some time ago where Brian Sweeney and JLW gave convincing argments of it being astigmatism. The image I posted here was also shot wide open, although on a film which does not behave very well in that kind of light.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16609

Another aberration in the frame (which also ruins the scene) is a semicircular "swoosh" which appears to eminate from the bright light between the second and third tenements, downward and to the left. I think this is internal reflection, and if you look very carefully the center of what would be a circle there would be at the street light, out of frame to the top of the scene, which is mounted on the pole where the "One Way" sign is.

The QL17 does show these circles when bright lights are present. Here's a better example of this:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5502

For comparison, it looks like I'm going to be in that neighborhood this coming weekend, so I'm planning to re-shoot that scene using the Mamiya SD and Fuji 800, both wide open and stopped down as much as I can in the available light. I want to see how the Mamiya 48mm 1.7 lens compares to the Canon 40mm 1.7, plus I want to see if I can capture more of the mood of what I saw that night and tried to grab with the cheap Walgreens/Agfa 400 film, which is atrocious in artificial light.

 

[ruben]

OK, here's one wide open, not a great picture (unless you like peaches), funky bokeh going on in the upper left corner:

Hi Steve,

Very nice image by itself, and very good for appreciating the lens capacity.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[Bingley]

Thanks, Ruben. It now appears that I am not the only one w/ a little astigmatism; my poor Canon has it too!

 

[Lotari]

Lately I've been shooting quite a lot with QL17, as it's one of my army cameras (I'm serving in the Finnish Defence Forces for one year).

These are all wide open:


room mates


taking it easy


chatting while waiting for the bus


firework show


kamppi, a shopping centre

 

[Anupam]

That fireworks shot is awesome!

 

[nzeeman]

great shots lotari - congratulations - and lens also looks very good.

 

[peter_n]

If not wide open then very close to it:

 

[mike goldberg]

Hi peter_n in Boston... How's the weather there? I like your shot of the sculpture, the grain and bokeh.
Am happy to have found this Thread; I just bought an Exc QL 17 from an RFF member ;-) Mike

 

[peter_n]

Thank you Mike! Weather here is a beautiful fall-like day today. 🙂

I think the lens on my Canonet is very good, but I understand from threads on photo.net there was quality variation in manufacture and some are not so good.

 

[patrickhh]

I think this was wide open (low light)