Incoming L1...and a pair of questions

[Wulfthari]

It has been a while since I last bought a "new" rangefinder but last night I was able to get a relatively rare member of the prolific Mark V family, the L1.

I am not much familiar with this camera but I read around it has a good reputation, I also found out it should have a special shoe that allows focusing with an external finder, does anybody know more about it? Does it have to be a special one, I assume, and I wonder which one it is.

Also, I would like to get a Canon 50mm or 35 mm for it, I already have a f1.2 but besides the cool factor I must say I don't like that much, does anybody have some suggestion to share? And are all these lenses focusing at 1 mt? Can't they be modified to get a closer focus range?

 

[mcfingon]

My understanding is that the special shoe allows parallax correction with an external finder, not focusing, Wulfthari.

 

[mcfingon]

My son has the 50/1.9 collapsible Serenar lens, which is made for the Barnack-style Canons. It would work well on the L1 and make it very compact. The Serenar looks just like a Summitar lens, and I prefer it for higher contrast, more even sharpness across the frame and better flare resistance than the Summitar I have. Minimum focus is 1 meter though.

 

[peterm1]

Some later Canon rangefinders had a little "pin" poking up through the bottom of the accessory shoe. This pin bears upon the barrel of the accessory finder (which itself is spring loaded to keep it pointing downward when not being pressed upwards by the pin). As the camera lens is rotated to focus it further away the pin pushes the barrel of the accessory finder upwards to correspond with the distance / new point of focus. And of course for close focus the accessory finder points more downwards to also correspond with that point of focus. I presume this may be what is being referred to. I have a multi focal length Canon accessory finder designed for use with those cameras having this facility. BTW I have long had a soft spot for this camera being one of the relatively few models in this later era which did not have a bottom trigger wind. which I never much liked. (Why Canon did not design their cameras to have both facilities in the one camera I do not know as that would have been a real selling point. Whereas the pure bottom wind ones, I suspect would have put many potential buyers off.) In any event its a nice camera.

 

[oftheherd]

That looks to be in great shape. What is the wheel on the upper forward right part of the body? It doesn't look like it comes out far enough for focus.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

That looks to be in great shape. What is the wheel on the upper forward right part of the body? It doesn't look like it comes out far enough for focus.

Perhaps it changes the film speed indicator on the advance lever?

 

[Larry H-L]

It is the film counter reset, I believe.

Best part of these Canon models is the built-in RF magnifier. It has a setting for 35, 50, or magnified view.

 

[02Pilot]

I love my L1. The only thing I can add on the finders is that only the later black-bodied ones work with the automatic parallax correction. They're not always easy to find, especially in 50 and 35.

As for lenses, there are lots of options. I also keep a collapsible 50/1.9 on mine most of the time. Some people don't care for that lens much for whatever reason, but I'm quite happy with it. Note, however, that it will not collapse on the L1, as the light baffles get in the way. My other Canon 50 is the Sonnar-formula 50/1.5, which is heavier but oh-so-good (it tends to live on my Canon P).

In 35, it's hard to go wrong with the 35/2.8; I prefer the earlier chrome versions of Canon lenses, but the 35/2.8 came in both that and the later black/chrome style.

For closer focus, you need the appropriate Canon Auto-up add-on lens, which is frankly pretty cumbersome and awkward.

 

[job]

This is not a L1 but a VL as it has a delay action ( self timer).
I love my L1 because of its handsome look and excellent finder. Its small size and handling is outstanding.
L1 has a warm golden patch and VL should have a cooler ssilvery blue patch.
Enjoy.

 

[job]

Moreover, L1 has a cloth shutter but a VL should have a metal one.

 

[photomoof]

L1 sold to a fellow collector. IMO the black L1 is the holy grail of Canons.

 

[mcfingon]

I noticed using a friend's L1 (or VL) that the frame counter which is reset by that wheel near the film advance lever counts down instead of up. So, for a 12 exposure film, use the wheel to set it to 12 after loading, not 0 as you would normally do. I know the book says L1's don't have self-timers, but I've seen them fitted. Maybe they were an option, like they were on early M2 Leicas.

 

[mcfingon]

This website shows the best summary of the many Canon RF models I've seen:
http://www.antiquecameras.net/canonrfcameras.html
In 1957 (the L1 year) you could buy seven different models of the same camera shape! The models with a T in them had a trigger wind, the L is for Lever I suppose. This guy says early L1 had cloth shutter, later had metal.

 

[Mackinaw]

For more info on the L1, buy Peter Dechert’s Canon rangefinder book and take a look at the Canon museum.

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/....html?lang=undefined&categ=crn&page=1956-1965

I’ve owned an L1 for over 20 years now. It’s been my rangefinder camera of choice for the summer of 2015. I own several Canon LTM lenses though my favorite lens the past few weeks has been the LTM Nikkor 50/2.0. The before-mentioned parallax corrected viewfinders are the ticket for really enjoying this camera. In a word, these special vewfinders work and work well (but they are rare and pricy). I have three, one for the 25mm lens, one for the 50mm, and one for 100mm.

Great camera the L1. Maybe my favorite Canon rangefinder.

Jim B.

 

[peterm1]

For more info on the L1, buy Peter Dechert’s Canon rangefinder book and take a look at the Canon museum.

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/....html?lang=undefined&categ=crn&page=1956-1965

I’ve owned an L1 for over 20 years now. It’s been my rangefinder camera of choice for the summer of 2015. I own several Canon LTM lenses though my favorite lens the past few weeks has been the LTM Nikkor 50/2.0. The before-mentioned parallax corrected viewfinders are the ticket for really enjoying this camera. In a word, these special vewfinders work and work well (but they are rare and pricy). I have two, one for 50mm and one for 100mm.

Great camera the L1. Maybe my favorite Canon rangefinder.

Jim B.

I was wondering if the multi-line one is rare as well? I have one which from memory I got reasonably cheaply without knowing at the time that it had this facility. I have a small collection of finders (dont ask). In truth the auo parallax gizmo renders it not very functional for use on ordinary cameras as there is no way of manually setting the finder for parallax.

 

[Mackinaw]

I was wondering if the multi-line one is rare as well? I have one which from memory I got reasonably cheaply without knowing at the time that it had this facility. I have a small collection of finders (dont ask). In truth the auo parallax gizmo renders it not very functional for use on ordinary cameras as there is no way of manually setting the finder for parallax.

Just a guess on my part, but the parralax-corrected, multi-frame viewfinder is probably much more rare than single-focal length viewfinders (they probably didn't make as many because of cost, I'm sure they were more expensive than any single frame viewfinder).

The parralax-corrected viewfinder were just made for Canon rangefinder cameras that have the magic pin in the shoe (V-series, L-series, etc.). For other cameras, Canon made ordinary viewfinders that have an adjustable distance scale (look for the lever). For what it's worth, I have found that the 25mm viewfinder works well when mounted on my Leica MP. The extreme coverage area of the 25mm seems to mask any major parallax error.

Jim B.

 

[goamules]

For lenses, I would suggest the Canon 50/1.4. This camera is large, and the lens fits well. Besides that, the 1.4 is probably the best Canon 50mm made. The much earlier ones some have suggested are a generation behind the 1.4, and will have lower contrast, and probably some aberrations. I'd get the 1.4, it's radically better than the 1.2.

 

[Mackinaw]

.....This camera is large.......

Size is relative? The L1 is much smaller than a Canon 7 and is moderately smaller than my Leica MP (narrower, lower, but longer).

Jim B.

 

[rhl-oregon]

The film counter clicks round nicely 0-36. On the advance lever there's an ASA reminder window, ISO 8-400. The patch is a beautiful golden circle like a tiny sun, and shows best at 50mm, but the magnifier is great. I'm quite nearsighted, but can focus without glasses.

 

[Wulfthari]

This is not a L1 but a VL as it has a delay action ( self timer).
I love my L1 because of its handsome look and excellent finder. Its small size and handling is outstanding.
L1 has a warm golden patch and VL should have a cooler ssilvery blue patch.
Enjoy.

The bottom plate of the camera says otherwise:

For lenses, I would suggest the Canon 50/1.4. This camera is large, and the lens fits well. Besides that, the 1.4 is probably the best Canon 50mm made. The much earlier ones some have suggested are a generation behind the 1.4, and will have lower contrast, and probably some aberrations. I'd get the 1.4, it's radically better than the 1.2.

Size is relative? The L1 is much smaller than a Canon 7 and is moderately smaller than my Leica MP (narrower, lower, but longer).

Jim B.

From the measurements online it appears the L1 is more or less as large as my Mk 7S, which is almost as big as my M5, are they correct?

If so I would agree that a big lens would look better BUT I've been burned by the unpleasant experience of the 1.2, so I was thinking about the tiny 1.8. Do these lenses tend to fog inside and have the coating of the element after the diaphragm damaged like ther 1.2? I've seen that many lenses on ebay are reported to have "little haze"

Last question regarding these lenses: they all focus at 1 mt, which is annoying because I like bokeh so shooting wide open at close range, is it possible to modify them in order to get a shorter minimum distance? I've a Jupiter 8 that for some reasons is able to focus down to 0.78 mt and I'm pleased with that lens.