Considering my options on a 90mm

[Bingley]

It sounds like you got a good deal on the Canon 100/3.5 if, as Roland says, it's haze free. And Roland would know, since he was the one who cleaned my Canon 100! 🙂

Yes, hoods and filters are hard to find, but here's the workaround I use: a series of step-up rings. I use a 34-37 step up ring, a 37 mm filter, and then another step up ring (I think 37-49mm) to complete the "hood." Works pretty well.

Good luck and post pix with the lens!

 

[traveler_101]

The canon 100/3.5 is nice. It's very difficult to find one without coating damage, however, and both the 34mm and 40mm versions are not easy to find a hood for or to filter if you are looking for yellow, orange or red filters. You also need a good LTM adapter for your Bessa, of course.

For modern performance, since your camera is M-mount, the un-sung 90mm hero, IMO, is the 90/4 Elmar-C or Minolta Rokkor (I have the CLE version). Wonderfully sharp, and compact, great handling (aperture doesn't turn when focusing), and the Rokkor versions are easy to find modern filters and hood for (40.5mm). Usually similar in price to the Canon lens when clean (around 300 US).

WRT viewfinder, do yourself a favor and use either Voigtlander or Leica brightline finder. Should be around US 100 used.

Roland.

PS: 200 US is a great price for the Canon that you bought - if it is haze free with intact coating.

Hi Roland, thanks for taking the time to write a very helpful post.

Yes, I really want a Minolta Rokkor-M CLE for my Bessa--and I came close to going ahead with one, but the more affordable examples on e-bay disappeared and everything I found was in the 500 dollar range. That is more than I want to spend. Besides, I want at least one LTM 90 so I can use it on my IIIf.

I have a Leica LTM to M mount converter on my Bessa T: (so far all my lenses are LTM). I have recently ordered a 34mm screw on hood from jack-in-the-hat for use on a Summar. http://www.ebay.com/itm/120487645335?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649 I am hoping this will fit the Canon 100.
I've been debating biting the bullet and ordering a Voigtlander 90mm viewfinder to go along with the Canon 100; I may very well do so, though I was thinking of waiting to see how bad the Canon viewfinder actually is.

You're right, 200 is no big deal if the lens is well preserved. The listing claims absolutely haze, fungus and scratch free which should mean the coating is fine, but claims are claims. Any suggestions about what I am looking for that indicates damaged coating: discoloration maybe?

 

[Bingley]

There's a Minolta Rokkor 90/4 for sale on KEH in Ex+ condition for abt. $366.

Shine a flashlight through the lens when you receive it, and look for crud or haze on the internal element. If you see haze, get the lens cleaned.

 

[traveler_101]

There's a Minolta Rokkor 90/4 for sale on KEH in Ex+ condition for abt. $366.

Shine a flashlight through the lens when you receive it, and look for crud or haze on the internal element. If you see haze, get the lens cleaned.

Thanks Steve. $366 is a good price for the Rokkor, but at this point I will use the Canon for a while then reassess the situation. Still not sure whether I will use 90mm frequently or not. And I am experimnenting now with developing color film as I begin to move away from digital. I will see how that goes before dropping more money into RF lenses.

If there is haze on the Canon, I will invoke the "Buyer Protection Plan": it would be a case of blatant false advertising.

By the way, do you have any opinion on the Canon finder? Roland is saying I should buy a Voigtlander 90 right away.

 

[fotomeow]

+ for the 90/4 Elmar LTM. Incredible mid-tones, great OOF.
its such a good affordable lens that I also bought one in M-mount.


that said, the Canon 100/3.5 is probably a good choice as well. I have a couple other Canon's from the 60s, the Serenar series, including the 135/3.5, and again, best bang for buck.

 

[ferider]

Hi Roland, thanks for taking the time to write a very helpful post.

Yes, I really want a Minolta Rokkor-M CLE for my Bessa--and I came close to going ahead with one, but the more affordable examples on e-bay disappeared and everything I found was in the 500 dollar range. That is more than I want to spend. Besides, I want at least one LTM 90 so I can use it on my IIIf.

I have a Leica LTM to M mount converter on my Bessa T: (so far all my lenses are LTM). I have recently ordered a 34mm screw on hood from jack-in-the-hat for use on a Summar. http://www.ebay.com/itm/120487645335?ssPageName=STRK:MEWNX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1439.l2649 I am hoping this will fit the Canon 100.
I've been debating biting the bullet and ordering a Voigtlander 90mm viewfinder to go along with the Canon 100; I may very well do so, though I was thinking of waiting to see how bad the Canon viewfinder actually is.

You're right, 200 is no big deal if the lens is well preserved. The listing claims absolutely haze, fungus and scratch free which should mean the coating is fine, but claims are claims. Any suggestions about what I am looking for that indicates damaged coating: discoloration maybe?

Since you want to use the lens also on your IIIf, you made a great choice ! Like Steve said, just shine a light through it.

To help you until the mail arrives, I took this picture a couple of minutes ago 🙂 :

Cheers,

Roland.

 

[traveler_101]

Since you want to use the lens also on your IIIf, you made a great choice ! Like Steve said, just shine a light through it.

To help you until the mail arrives, I took this picture a couple of minutes ago 🙂 :

Cheers,

Roland.

Hey Roland, thanks. Looks great and I'll bet it is a joy to shoot with that nice Voigtlander finder!

 

[Bingley]

Thanks Steve. $366 is a good price for the Rokkor, but at this point I will use the Canon for a while then reassess the situation. Still not sure whether I will use 90mm frequently or not. And I am experimnenting now with developing color film as I begin to move away from digital. I will see how that goes before dropping more money into RF lenses.

If there is haze on the Canon, I will invoke the "Buyer Protection Plan": it would be a case of blatant false advertising.

By the way, do you have any opinion on the Canon finder? Roland is saying I should buy a Voigtlander 90 right away.

The Canon 100 finder is pretty squinty. My thought would be to try it out, and if you're finding you like the lens, get the Voigtlander brightline finder. I don't have the 90 brightline, but I do have some others and they're outstanding.

 

[Livesteamer]

The Canon 100mm finder is squinty but then so is my IIIc. When I got my Canon 100mm f3.5 on e bay adding in the shipping brought it up to $170. My Leica adjustable hood fits on the lens and I presume it will work. Such a lens just sold on e bay for $200 and had the late model finder that automatically adjusts parralax on the Canon VT and a few others. A scarce finder. In some ways this lens is better than the famous Nikkor 105 f2.5 because it is so much smaller and much more affordable. Joe

 

[traveler_101]

The Canon 100mm finder is squinty but then so is my IIIc.

LOL! I know I was thinking the same about my situation. Heck, I shoot with the very limited vf on the IIIf. I put up with that because I like the ultra-portability of the IIIf with the collapsable Elmar and it hasn't really been a problem for me. Of course I woudn't mind a good viewfinder to use with the 100mm lens.

When I got my Canon 100mm f3.5 on e bay adding in the shipping brought it up to $170. . . . Such a lens just sold on e bay for $200 and had the late model finder that automatically adjusts parralax on the Canon VT and a few others. A scarce finder. In some ways this lens is better than the famous Nikkor 105 f2.5 because it is so much smaller and much more affordable. Joe

The $200 Canon on e-bay you referred to: that was my purchase. 😀 Could this finder be re-sold to raise cash to use toward a better finder? Apparently the Canon one I bought has parallax correction, but only if you have a shoe on your camera designed for it, i.e. on certain Canon models.

 

[Bingley]

The parallax correction on the Canon 100 finder requires you to manually adjust the finder in addition to focusing the lens, i.e. it's not automatic, as I've discovered when using the finder on a Canon IVSB2 which has the shoe designed for it.

 

[Livesteamer]

Travelor 101, Congratulations on your purchase. Yes. Your viewfinder is a somewhat rare and desirable late model. On the Canon VT and a few others, the flash shoe had a small button in it that raised and lowered along with the focus, to automatically adjust parrallax when the proper finder was in place. I have the old style finder where you manually turn a little ring to adjust parrallax. Your finder is uncommon and to the right person it would be of some value. Finding the right person and gauging the value is the question. It might not give the correct view on other cameras. Good Luck, Safe Travels and Enjoy. Joe

 

[traveler_101]

On the Canon VT and a few others, the flash shoe had a small button . . . that raised and lowered along with the focus, to automatically adjust parrallax when the proper finder was in place.

What an ingenious little system! I'll be darned . . .

 

[goamules]

I know the OP has his choice coming, but another we forgot to mention is the Jupiter 9, which is a 85/2.0 sonnar. Not super sharp wide open, but has a nice look to it. This one is a 1956 KMZ I was shooting yesterday.

 

[traveler_101]

Nice shots,especially the first one:"primordial soup, a composition"!

I must say, however, speaking just for myself that I have sworn off the Russian (and Ukranian) gear (and the Russian sauce too, lol). Seriously, I bought an Industar 61-LD which is still sitting around here somewhere. It was very poorly built and the threads differed from LSM so I couldn't use it on my RF cameras. I read that if you shoot Leica you can expect that the Jupiter series--best of the Russian lenses (taken from Zeiss blueprints right after the war, I believe)--is incompatible with your camera unless the lenses are shimmed.

 

[goamules]

Yeah, when the Soviet equipment was 25% of the cost of Leica and Canon LTM gear, it was a good bargain to take a chance on. Now that J-9s are $200 compared to a $100 Elmar 90, J-3s are $250 compared to a $300 Canon 50/1.5...etc. I'm not so sure. The feel of the FSU are definitely inferior.