CV 50/1.5 or CV 50/1.1 for my M9

[bideford]

Seeing as I have already contributed to this post on topic, I'm going to go just a little off piste and show how good the Canon 50mm 1.2 really is.....

Lens mounted on an M240.

Sublime. Beats anything the CV1.1 could ever produce (and the CV is not a bad lens!).

James

 

[Huss]

Seeing as I have already contributed to this post on topic, I'm going to go just a little off piste and show how good the Canon 50mm 1.2 really is.....

Lens mounted on an M240.

Sublime. Beats anything the CV1.1 could ever produce (and the CV is not a bad lens!).

James

No offense but that looks really soft, which is the general knock on the 1.2 Canon. The 1.4 versions are a lot sharper wide open and there's a reason they are often called the Japanese Summiliux.
The Nokton 1.1 and 1.5 are also much sharper than the Canon 1.2.

But if that softness is the look you are going for, then case closed.

 

[Frontman]

No offense but that looks really soft, which is the general knock on the 1.2 Canon. The 1.4 versions are a lot sharper wide open and there's a reason they are often called the Japanese Summiliux.
The Nokton 1.1 and 1.5 are also much sharper than the Canon 1.2.

But if that softness is the look you are going for, then case closed.

I have had all these lenses. The Canon 1.2 was not bad, but I seldom shot it wide open. The aperture blades in my Nokton 1.1 lens came apart before I was able to complete the first roll of film. My Nokton 1.5 has been a superb lens (I have the older version). I had the black paint type, which in time got as brassy as the black Leica I had it mounted to. I also have the Canon .095 lens. which is about as soft as a lens can be when shot wide open, but is sharper when stopped down to 1.4 than the Canon 1.4 is when shot at the same aperture.