Elmar 50/3.5 on Canon P ???? Help me!

[wallace]

Some days ago I have purchased a wonderful Canon P body.
Now I have to make a quick decision since I have the chance to buy either
a Elmar or a 50/2.5 Skopar for nearly the same money.
I need to know: will the Elmar fit the Canon????

Thomas

 

[kb244]

It'll fit (if its not a M mount), but if its the collapsible version, don't bother pushing the lens in (ie: keep it extended). If you try to collapse it, you risk scratching the light baffles inside.

If it's not a collapsible lens, and its LTM (leica thread mount), then there should not be a problem with the elmar.

 

[Bingley]

Some days ago I have purchased a wonderful Canon P body.
Now I have to make a quick decision since I have the chance to buy either
a Elmar or a 50/2.5 Skopar for nearly the same money.
I need to know: will the Elmar fit the Canon????

Thomas

Yes, the 50/3.5 Elmar will fit a Canon P. I have that lens (coated version) and have used it on my Canon P w/out a problem. It collapses fully, although you have turn the lens barrel carefully to avoid hitting the internal baffles on the camera. A great combination, IMO, for street shooting and travel.

 

[kb244]

Yes, the 50/3.5 Elmar will fit a Canon P. I have that lens (coated version) and have used it on my Canon P w/out a problem. It collapses fully, although you have turn the lens barrel carefully to avoid hitting the internal baffles on the camera. A great combination, IMO, for street shooting and travel.

Hrm tru, if you can get the gap between the "y" shape of the fins to line up with the top it'll slide by without a problem. But I would call that 'working fine', but rather weighted risk, since can you garantee by habit you'll always collapse and extend the lens exactly the same way every time, especially if you have a feeling of haste?

But either way if you nick the paint, nothing a little matte-black acrylic modeling paint can't fix.

 

[wallace]

Thanks for information to all of you!
So if I understand right (my english is far from perfect), no big
harm can be caused? Even if I collappse the lens in the wrong way?

Thomas

 

[kb244]

Thanks for information to all of you!
So if I understand right (my english is far from perfect), no big
harm can be caused? Even if I collappse the lens in the wrong way?

Thomas

Well you could chip the paint off the light baffle, maybe even dent them a bit. And with the paint removed eventually it might cause light flares and other issues of light bouncing off the exposed surface of the light baffle. Or the light baffle could cause damage to the barrel of the lens if you jam it hard enough or it might actually get stuck in the collapsed position.

Generally speaking, its not a good idea to abuse the camera or the lens. As someone else said to me, you can always put some tape on the lens barrel so that you can never collapse it even inadvertantly. But I guess if I was in the 'market' for a lens, I'd least get one that I wouldn't have to worry about.

 

[wallace]

Karl,

you mean I should take the 2.5 Voigtlaender Skopar instead?

Thomas

 

[mr_phillip]

I've got to say that, if had the choice between an Elmar 50/3.5 and the Skopar 50/2.5, I'd take the latter every time. It's a sharper lens with better colour rendition and far better resistance to flair.

If you're dead set on a collapsable lens (or just fancy some vintage Leitz glass) I'd hold out for a Summitar 50/2.0. The Summitar doesn't have any issues at all fitting the Canon P, and the two make a great combination.

 

[crawdiddy]

When I mount my Elmar 50mm 3.5 on my Canon 7, it looks goofy. The lens just looks seriously undersized for the camera body.

Similarly, when I mount my Canon 50mm f/1.2 on my Leica IIIf, the lens looks HUGE.

Only speaking superficially.

 

[kb244]

When I mount my Elmar 50mm 3.5 on my Canon 7, it looks goofy. The lens just looks seriously undersized for the camera body.

Not goofy... just more accurately portraying the average ... lens?

 

[wallace]

Thanks Mr Phillip and crawdiddy,


I forgot to ask one more question:
Take the Skopar or better wait for a Canon 1.8 ?

Thomas

 

[crawdiddy]

I have no experience with the Skopar. I have a Canon 50mm 1.2-- beautiful lens. I think the 1.8 lens has a good reputation, and I've also heard that the 1.4 is the sharpest 50mm rangefinder lens Canon ever made.

 

[kb244]

Thanks Mr Phillip and crawdiddy,


I forgot to ask one more question:
Take the Skopar or better wait for a Canon 1.8 ?

Thomas

That's more or less a matter of personal preference. I liked my 50/1.8 on my P, course felt like it was made with as much brass as the camera so was equally heavy. But I never been disappointed with it. If I had the skopar I'd probably be just as happy, but I tend to want to have at least 1.8 or faster for a primary normal lens.

 

[Bingley]

Thanks Mr Phillip and crawdiddy,


I forgot to ask one more question:
Take the Skopar or better wait for a Canon 1.8 ?

Thomas

The 50/1.8 Canon is a great lens, and is quite a bargain these days given its quality. I have one of the later (chrome and black) versions, and it looks great on my P (and not too shabby on my 7 either). Dante Stella gave it a glowing review in his article on Canon Lenses for Leica at his website. I don't have the CV 50/2.5 and can't express an opinion about it. All I can say is that the Canon 50/1.8 would be a good choice for the P.

Hey Crawdiddy -- I've put the 50 Elmar on my 7, too. Yeah, it looks a little small, but collapsed it means there's a chance that the camera will fit into a jacket pocket. 😉

A 50/3.5 Elmar in good condition is an excellent lens for street shooting and travel. Mine is plenty sharp and renders color very nicely. I have not attempted a side by side comparison w/ my Canon 50/1.8. If you need the extra speed, obviously the Canon is the way to go.

 

[wallace]

Steve,
now I'm back thinking about the Elmar! All of you have good arguments,
but the idea of putting the P. into my all weather jacket stood first.
I know that an M2 would have been a better choice for the Elmar, but the P. that I fished from the forum some weeks ago is so dam nice and so much cheaper than
the Leica including the rec. CLA. It'll be my first RF with interchangebale lens.
The idea that it coul replace my OLy RC or XA came to my mind...
The Skopar is quiet compact but heavy compared to other CVs. (don't know about the Canon). But some people hear say it has "not so good bookeh".
Another thought now is to wait and take the CV 35/2.5 Skopar instead, 35 and 100mm later in the future.
Seems to bea very good buy at cameraquest. How does it look on the P?
How does it balance? Will this kit fit into a jacket pocket?

______


Thomas

 

[Bingley]

Wallace --

I also have the CV 35/2.5. It's a terrific lens, too, very sharp and compact, and another bargain. Whether it's the best option for you depends in part on your preference for 35 over 50 focal length, and whether you have difficulty seeing the 35mm framelines in the P. I find the 35mm framelines hard to see, in large part b/c I wear glasses. But there are a lot of RFF P users who happily use the 35mm. YMMV.

On the Elmar 50, there is one example taken w/ this lens (and using a P) in my Gallery. Also, you might try doing a search on flickr for examples of photos taken w/ this lens. I have a really nice, clean version, and I'm very happy w/ it.

Edit: Sorry, only one shot in my gallery is taken w/ this lens (the one of the "tai-chi" trees). The flickr search may be a better option for you.

 

[kb244]

Steve,
Seems to bea very good buy at cameraquest. How does it look on the P?
How does it balance? Will this kit fit into a jacket pocket?

All the thickness appear to be on CQ's website, so you just have to measure how thick the P body is, and add that to the lens distance on the site. Then just figure out how much thickness is too much for your pocket.

 

[mr_phillip]

The 35mm Skopar is a fantastic little lens, one of my absolute faves at this focal length and a real steal (especially as a used buy). It looks right at home on the P too but, like Bingley, I'm a spectacles wearer so the internal 35mm lines are a push for me – for critical framing I use a Voigtländer accessory finder.

Re the Canon 50/1.8, I used to own one of these and I have to say I never really took to it. There wasn't anything actually wrong with it, but I just found its overall character kinda dull. It's certainly not in the same league as the Canon 1.4 (now that's a special lens!) In the end I found that I was only ever using the Summitar or the 50mm Nokton on the Canon so I moved the 1.8 on.

 

[wallace]

Steve,
I've seen your flickr: really many great pictures! No matter which of your 50s
was on your P!
I wear eye glasses too! That's why I like the finders of my RC, the GSN. No problem
for me to see the frame lines. Right now I tend towards the CV50/2.5 ($170) Somebody has experience with this lens and maybe the P?

 

[Bingley]

Wallace -- Thanks! The P is a wonderful shooter for the 50 (or 100), and w/ an accessory viewfinder can work well w/ lots of other lenses.

Keep your eye on the classifieds here. It looks like a Canon 50/1.8 serenar just went for $65!