Heads up, Canon 50 F1.5 & Nikon 50mm/F1.5

[Canon7SZ35f2]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7559401730

I have no connection.


The auction is for a Canon 50mm F1.5 LTM lens but I am not interested
because I got two already and I am very satisfied with what I got.

I am more interested in the Nikon 50mm F1.5 mentioned in the description.
Anyone has information on the price, availability, performance, etc.?
I am a new member, any input welcome. Thanks a lot.

 

[xayraa33]

Kevincameras had a Nikkor f 1.5 50mm for sale, check his site out, these are not cheap, they were made for less than a year, to be superceded by the f1.4 in December 1950. David Douglas Duncan used a Nikkor F 1.5 on his Leica IIIc, to get some fine images in the Korean War conflict. The Nikkor 1.5 is a direct Sonnar copy, where the later 1.4 was recomputed to be slightly better at full aperture at a closer distance. The f1.4 is still a Sonnar copy.

 

[xayraa33]

according to Robert Rotoloni, approx. 800 Nikkor f 1.5 /50mm were made. probably half were in LTM .

 

[rover]

This seller sold a Canon 50/1.5 last week. It closed for $185 ish.

 

[Peter Klein]

I could swear that the same Canon 50/1.5 lens was up for auction ending just a few days ago. Same pictures, same description, and a private auction. I think it sold for around $200, but I can no longer find it in Completed Items. Now it's on the block again. Guess the deal fell through, for whatever reason.

As others have mentioned, the Canon 50/1.5 is essentially a Sonnar clone, and reputed to be very nice. Probably harder coatings and better mechanics than the Jupiter-3, and you know it will focus on a Leica. The Nikkor 50/1.5 is also a Sonnar clone, but perhaps with some tweaking, and is a collector lens if in good shape. I had the later 50/1.4 for years, optimized for close up and wide open at the expense of the edges of the frame. I loved it, but the current Summicron and C/V Nokton both blow it away.

The old fast 50 Nikkors tend to have higher resolution at the expense of contrast. The Canons have a bit more contrast and slightly less resolution.

--Peter

 

[rover]

I will also add that I have bought a lens from this seller during his clearence sale. It is in very good condition just has he described and shipping was fast. His packing left a little to be desired, but everything else about the transaction was very good.

 

[back alley]

such good deals now and then later, when i'm not broke, there will be none!

damn damn damn

joe

 

[back alley]

will do!

joe

 

[FrankS]

I'm getting the impression that the Summarit and Canon 50 f1.5 give similar results. Yes? No?

 

[Hektor]

It helps if you have a bit of background Frank,

The Canons and Nikons are essentially sonnars, a bit tweaked for contrast at the expense of resolution.

In the '30s Leitz had no answer to the sonnar but they had to maintain sales and market position.

They decided to "buy in" the technology, and so formed an "alliance" with Schneider, but Schneider didn't have a full solution either.

What they did was use a British design owned by Taylor & Taylor, (thats why a summarit doesn't look like a sonnar) and had to recognise the British Patents

Schneider did all the optics and Leitz did the mount. Because Leitz hadn't designed the lens they called it a 'Xenon' - which means 'stranger'.

A Summarit is basically a coated Xenon, it made a huge improvement to the lens,and early summarits have the Taylor & Taylor name and patent No's engraved on them as well as Leitz.

The co-operative design strengthened and Leitz did a lot of development on the lens which eventually became Summilux.

So thats why they don't look like a Sonnar, 'cause they ain't a Sonnar......

Enjoy........

 

[FrankS]

Thank you. Can't wait. 🙂

 

[Hektor]

I find Morgan and Neblette to be superficially interesting, but not reliable since they are not primary sources. Unfortunately Herr Dr Mandler sadly died earlier this year but his work is well documented. He began work with Leitz under Max Berek, - the designer of leitz lenses from the beginning and for many years after-, and ended up in charge of the Leitz optical design facility in Canada. His swansong was the 75f1.4 but his lifes work, and indeed his doctorate, -which produced the Noctiluxes-, was the study of the double gauss design.

A planar was a registered design of Zeiss, and consequently the Xenon was developed from Taylor, Taylor & Hobsons work in Britain of the double gauss design.

This is essentially why Max Berek could not immediately produce a competitor to the Sonnar, because his design experience and development work was based on the Cooke triplet.

It was necessary to take on board a new concept, and that was the double gauss design which became Mandlers' lifes' work. His efforts sustained the Leitz company for more than forty years,
and personally I miss him and his influence greatly.

The best and most reliable information is to be had from speaking to the men who actually did the work. Journalists and commentators who follow on frequently have a lesser understanding of the subjects and are prone to inadvertant errors.

 

[Canon7SZ35f2]

Thanks so much for all the inputs, all informations are very valuable indeed.
And after reading the price tag of Nikkor 50/1.5 in Kevincameras site,
I have no more question relating to this lens, I also treasure my own
Nikkor 1.4 and TTH 50/1.5 more than ever before.

 

[dexdog]

wow, hektor, I'm impressed, very informative post!

 

[back alley]

very good info...and now i want one even more...the canon 1.5 that is!

joe

 

[Canon7SZ35f2]

Thanks so much for all the inputs, all informations are very valuable indeed.
And after reading the price tag of Nikkor 50/1.5 in Kevincameras site,
I have no more question relating to this lens, I also treasure my own
Nikkor 1.4 and TTH 50/1.5 more than ever before.

I also treasure my own Canon 1.5 more than ever before, the Canon 1.5
has better balance between contrast and resolution. I want to try the
Nikkor 50/1.5 too, but at $2800 😛 🙁

 

[xayraa33]

yes, I said that the Nikkor 50mm f1.5 is not cheap. its more for the well heeled collector.

 

[raid]

I love my Canon 5cm/2 and Nikon 5cm/2 lenses . Are they very different optically from their expensive 1.4/1.5 cousins?

 

[John Shriver]

The Canon 50/2 is a double-gauss. So the character will be similar to the 50/1.9 or 50/1.8, but probably not as refined. The 50/1.8 is where they really mastered this design.

The Nikon 50/2 is a Sonnar, but with one less element in one of the groups (thus six elements in three groups) than the 50/1.5 or 50/1.4 Nikkor. Should have the same character. I'd expect that Dante Stella is right that the 50/2 will have less veiling flare than the faster lenses.

 

[raid]

The Canon 50/2 is a double-gauss. So the character will be similar to the 50/1.9 or 50/1.8, but probably not as refined. The 50/1.8 is where they really mastered this design.

The Nikon 50/2 is a Sonnar, but with one less element in one of the groups (thus six elements in three groups) than the 50/1.5 or 50/1.4 Nikkor. Should have the same character. I'd expect that Dante Stella is right that the 50/2 will have less veiling flare than the faster lenses.

John: Actually, I have a Canon 50/1.8 and not a Canon 50/2. The Nikon lens really is like a Sonnar lens. Both are fine perfomers.