gdi
Veteran
I just got a Canon 7 And a 50mm 0.95 yesterday and took a chance by taking the untested rig for a try out last night.
I like it and I am very impressed with the lens with film - I have never shot a Noctilux, but the "Canolux" is a blast. It has very little vignetting cmpared to Nocti shots I have seen - but ohh, that coma!
I shot these at various speeds (1/60 - 1/1000) mostly wide open, on Kodak 400UC print film.
And finally - an example of the Coma King in its glory!
I like it and I am very impressed with the lens with film - I have never shot a Noctilux, but the "Canolux" is a blast. It has very little vignetting cmpared to Nocti shots I have seen - but ohh, that coma!
I shot these at various speeds (1/60 - 1/1000) mostly wide open, on Kodak 400UC print film.
And finally - an example of the Coma King in its glory!
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Applause, applause! You're using that lens exactly the way it was intended: to get shots that couldn't be gotten any other way.
The results are beautifully atmospheric -- they actually make me wish I were in New York City right now, and it takes a LOT to make me want to be in New York City!
The coma doesn't bother me because I'm used to it... and maybe because I think this is one of those lenses that works better for color than for b&w. In b&w the coma flares would just reduce contrast; in color they're kind of pretty...
The results are beautifully atmospheric -- they actually make me wish I were in New York City right now, and it takes a LOT to make me want to be in New York City!
The coma doesn't bother me because I'm used to it... and maybe because I think this is one of those lenses that works better for color than for b&w. In b&w the coma flares would just reduce contrast; in color they're kind of pretty...
Bingley
Veteran
Beautiful! Nice work!
gavinlg
Veteran
That is an absolute beast of a lens! Thanks so much for sharing, i've looked over the shots probably 5 times now.... I love the way the lens interprets the world at f.95.
Any more samples? I'd love to see some
Any more samples? I'd love to see some
wintoid
Back to film
Never mind the lens, that first shot is just a great shot! 
Deep fry your pickle, I say!
Deep fry your pickle, I say!
gdi
Veteran
Thanks all - here is one more I scanned last night. I shot three rolls and there are couple of decent ones on each roll. (But you can see I am not much of a street shooter) I may scan a few more this afternoon...
JLW - in most situations I think the coma is an asset - making the bokeh interesting. But if you try - like my last shot above it gets weird! Also, I found that flare is not really much of an issue in the conditions I shot that night - it happens, but in expected situations. And it is really nice to shoot at reasonable shutter speeds with a fine grained color 400 film in these circumstances. (Transparencies would be tough!)
Wintoid - I guess if that guys right it can't hurt to try anything...
JLW - in most situations I think the coma is an asset - making the bokeh interesting. But if you try - like my last shot above it gets weird! Also, I found that flare is not really much of an issue in the conditions I shot that night - it happens, but in expected situations. And it is really nice to shoot at reasonable shutter speeds with a fine grained color 400 film in these circumstances. (Transparencies would be tough!)
Wintoid - I guess if that guys right it can't hurt to try anything...
Last edited:
gdi
Veteran
sitemistic said:
Yes, I am in a tough situation now. I planned to have the lens converted to M mount, but the 7 is very nice and obviously the combo is in "tune". Also, the lens is mint, so I am feeling reluctant to go forward with the plan at this moment....
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
gdi said:
What a GREAT WAY to finish off the year by seeing finally what this infamous combo really does...........my opinion was right, when it works it REALLY works, the lens was MADE for this camera and works fantastic when it`s in capable hands, (it will be regretful to many in the years to come that they modified their lenses to Leica M mount) the original Canon 7 mount lenses will become very hard to find someday and much more valuable - and I agree, these look FAR BETTER than any Noctilux work I`ve seen, I think the f0.95 is a "color" lens and that 400 ASA is right on the money, what scanner are you using?????
Tom
PS: This photo is GREAT
, reminds me of a 1960`s protest photo, they all are beautiful, I`m very impressed, I must have this combo for shooting Retro PiNups....
Last edited:
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
gdi said:
I had mine converted to M so I could use it on my R-D 1... but if you're a film shooter and you like the handling of the 7 body, leave yours alone!!!
The 7 was the body for which the lens was designed, and with your pair so well-matched, it's obvious they belong together.
If you ever decide you want an M-mount one, you can always look for another, maybe one that has some cosmetic damage (mine has a badly-repaired rim dent, so I didn't feel guilty about having it converted) or is the non-RF-coupled TV version (the RF coupling can be added during the conversion.)
There must be quite a few of these lenses around, as there always seem to be several on the market, but there will never be more near-mint unmolested ones than there are right now. As they say in classic-car circles, "You can restore it as many times as you like, but it's only original once" -- so I would say keep yours original and enjoy using it on its original partner, a 7 or 7s.
Who knows, maybe you'd also enjoy tracking down a Canon 35/1.5 and 100/2... then you'd have the complete period-correct lens lineup for the discerning low-light Canon shooter...
nico
Well-known
Wonderful set of photos, my favourites are the first and the very last you posted. I can't say anything about that canon combo except it's in good hands. Hope to see more in the Gallery,
ciao
ciao
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
Great shots.
Gonna have to get a wide lens.
Gonna have to get a wide lens.
VictorM.
Well-known
Really nice night shots! I feel the rumblings of GAS, uh oh...
gdi
Veteran
Thanks again for the comments.
I have to say that all the negative comments I heard about the lens were, thus far, unfounded. I don't see it lacking in sharpness at all - I don't know if my Summilux (Ver 1) would be much sharper at 1.4. And focusing on this body was not difficult at all, most of the OOFs I got were due to people moving quickly and the extremely long throw making it hard to keep up.
Tom - thanks for the compliments and also for the earlier advice on seeking out a RF lens and not settling for a TV conversion! I would never had sought out a 7 otherwise. I can't wait to see what you can do with this combo - I believe your style of photography would absolutely be complimented it. Also - I am scanning with the Nikon 9000.
JLW - I've seen your site and shots on the RD-1. I have one of those and intended to convert for digital use (and for occasional M3 duty). However now, I am not going to make any rash decisions ( even though I am not a collector of cameras.) This pair does seem to perform fine together - though I got them separately, so there was never any pairwise adjustments performed. This may be attributable to the unmolested lens, mostly. The body is from KEH and the meter doesn't work - I'm sure it could come in handy, but in the low light levels I don't see it as a big problem.
I have a few more I am going to try to scan today as I watch some football, so I may post some later...
I have to say that all the negative comments I heard about the lens were, thus far, unfounded. I don't see it lacking in sharpness at all - I don't know if my Summilux (Ver 1) would be much sharper at 1.4. And focusing on this body was not difficult at all, most of the OOFs I got were due to people moving quickly and the extremely long throw making it hard to keep up.
Tom - thanks for the compliments and also for the earlier advice on seeking out a RF lens and not settling for a TV conversion! I would never had sought out a 7 otherwise. I can't wait to see what you can do with this combo - I believe your style of photography would absolutely be complimented it. Also - I am scanning with the Nikon 9000.
JLW - I've seen your site and shots on the RD-1. I have one of those and intended to convert for digital use (and for occasional M3 duty). However now, I am not going to make any rash decisions ( even though I am not a collector of cameras.) This pair does seem to perform fine together - though I got them separately, so there was never any pairwise adjustments performed. This may be attributable to the unmolested lens, mostly. The body is from KEH and the meter doesn't work - I'm sure it could come in handy, but in the low light levels I don't see it as a big problem.
I have a few more I am going to try to scan today as I watch some football, so I may post some later...
John Shriver
Well-known
Great use of 400UC film as well, the high saturation works great with the subject matter. High contrast also makes up for the lowish contrast of this lens wide open.
(Just like the low-contrast original Summicron was a great match for high contrast Kodachrome film...)
(Just like the low-contrast original Summicron was a great match for high contrast Kodachrome film...)
gdi
Veteran
John Shriver said:
Thanks John - I do like the UC with older lenses. Of course I have nothing to compare to with this one, but shortly, I am sure I will.
Here are a few more form the first outing, since some asked
fishtek
Don
Hey, GDI....it looks as if you're a natural for street shooting....and well aided and abetted by the .95 lens and the proper film. Great stuff.
Happy New Year!
Don
Happy New Year!
Don
David Murphy
Veteran
awesome!!!
kevin m
Veteran
These are the best shots I've seen from the 0.95 Canon! I guess it really pays to get a good copy and have it dialed in to the body you're using. A good eye doesn't hurt, either.
BTW, I prefer the coma of this lens; it looks more natural than the vignetting of the Noctilux.
BTW, I prefer the coma of this lens; it looks more natural than the vignetting of the Noctilux.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
kevin m said:
He posted a reply to me earlier in which he said he got the body and lens separately, and did not have any specific adjustments done to "mate" them.
Maybe what this proves is that a Canon lens really does work best on a Canon body! (although I've been reasonably happy with the results from my R-D 1 conversion.)
A good eye doesn't hurt, either.
For sure. These photos really make me feel as if I'm right there (except that I'm not cold and not worried about having my pocket picked.) Of the second batch, I especially like the one of the street portraitist -- although if I had the opportunity to do some post-production on it, I might subdue the brightness of the portraits in the upper right a bit, to draw more attention to the faces of the portraitist and his customer.
wintoid
Back to film
OK, I'll ask the stupid questions. This is a lens with Leica Thread Mount right? So why does it need to be adapted? What would happen if you put a LTM->M converter on it?