Canon LTM Collapsible 50/1.9 and Canon P?

Canon M39 M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
P

planetjoe

Just some guy, you know?
Local time
1:51 PM
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
473
Please correct me if I've missed this info somewhere in here, but can anyone comment on whether the 50/1.9 Serenar collapsible will interfere on the Canon P? As this was the "standard" lens on an earlier model with a "semi-universal" flange, I also wonder if the threads are even compatible.

I'm basically parroting the info from Dechert's text, but I don't have it near me at the moment to double-check my assumptions.

Thanks for your help, everyone. Oh - general comments on this lens would also , of course, be more than welcome. Was it (as I assume, perhaps incorrectly) a Sonnar derivative?


Cheers,
--joe.
 
joe, do you know if it's the same on the 7?

Thanks,

William
 
I know that with the Canon 7 you should not collapse any collapsible lenses; it's probably because of the same reason.
 
Ok, good to know. IOW, if I get one it stays on the IVSB :)

Do you people know how dangerous you really are? I'd have probably never even considered trading for a bottom loading ltm camera except you folks keep talking about how great these Canon cameras are... And now that I have one I know all too well what you've been talking about... :eek:

So now I've a Canon body, a couple of FSU lenses, and am trolling the classifieds & ebay looking for bits that fit my "cheap *ssed" personality :D And worse I want either a VIL or a 7 (the P is very nice, just not what I'm looking for. The variable magnification on the VI's VF or the selenium meter on the 7 make a big difference to me.)

Argh. :bang: :bang: :bang: :p

William
 
back alley said:
william, the 50/1.9 is perfect on the ivsb body, so very compact and pretty!

you must have one of these...;)

joe
Click to expand...

Feh, like I haven't figured that out??? But I gotta convince the boss too, and while she's actully pretty good about this habit (hey, better than living in the bars... ;) ) it's still a difficult task roll ...

But I really do like the idea of a very pocketable IV and with the 50/1.9 it would really be that :bang:

William
 
Mmm, pocketable. That's exactly why I'm in the market for one of these things. It's those $#@! baffles on the P, though, that confuse things. I wonder - since the VI/V-type Canon RFs (VI-L, VI-T, VT) are direct predecessors to the P, do they have the same problem with their baffles? I seem to remember that the shutter crate was re-used on several models in that range.

But Joe's right, of course - I don't actually NEED to collapse the lens.

...I just WANT to. Come to think of it, that very phrase has driven most of my photo obsession over the years. Quite a revelation.

Thanks for the info, everyone.


--joe.
 
for pocketable, get a nice user ivsb and that 1.9!
very nice, slower pace shooting but exactly what's needed for a walk around the block etc.

the bottom feeder bodies are just enough smaller than the p/vi series to make a difference, especially in the 'feel' of holding the camera.

joe
 
Last edited:
The later collapsible lenses (Canon 50/1.9, Leica Summitar, Leica Summicron) don't really collapse very far. The Leica Summar is getting there, but for small, it's really still the Elmar, or the Canon 50/3.5 if you're rich. The non-rotating focusing mounts are just big. (But they allow the rectangular hoods that those lenses need.)

While I love the feel of bottom load cameras in the hand, if you're used to a V, VI, L, P, or 7, you're going to be dissapointed in the viewfinder. I upgraded from IIF to IV-SB2 over the viewfinder, it's slightly better.
 
HI,

The 50mm f/1.9 collapsible lens will not collapse fully into any of the back loading cameras. The 50mm f/3.5 has the same problem as the f/1.9 but will just about fit home in the three model 7's but only if you turn the lens slightly so the flanges don't hit the top baffles. Cheers Peter K
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom