Leica LTM Nikkor 50/1.4 vs. Canon 50/1.5 (simple) tests

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
V

vrgard

Well-known
Local time
4:42 AM
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,716
In the spirit of lens test shots that others have so diligently performed (in particular, thanks to Raid, the "king of lens tests" :D ), I thought I should share the test shots I did comparing the Nikkor 50/1.4 ltm to the Canon 50/1.5 ltm lenses. Both lenses are from the early 1950's and are Sonnar designs. Both examples are in exceedingly good condition. The test shots are, however, very simple "shoot half of a roll of film around the house and see what you get" type shots. However, I believe they do show how similar these two lenses are yet still reveal their differences. Hope this is helpful and/or interesting to others. Oh, and thank you very much Roland (ferider) for taking my simple shots and putting them together in such a nice way for others to view. So, without further ado, here's the website with the test shots:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/gallery/2196281

Just as Raid has said in his test shot threads, please post comments as well as any other exemplary shots from these lenses you care to share.

Best,
Randy
 
Nice work Randy (and Roland). And a good cholce using smugmug to present the tests. It's very easy to see comparisons.


.
 
What is smugmug and how could I benefit from such a site for lens comparisons?

The tests done by Randy (with Roland's support) are excellent.

Raid
 
RayPA said:
Nice work Randy (and Roland). And a good cholce using smugmug to present the tests. It's very easy to see comparisons.


.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Ray. And yeah, Roland's smugmug presentation really helps. Not just the physical layout on smugmug but also his annotations and commentary.

-Randy
 
I appreciate the in-depth analysis of fine detail from the pics. Both lenses are outstanding, hard to believe that they are 50 years old. Thanks to both parties!
 
thank you Randy and Roland
that was a sweet test.
I love the look of the Nikkor 50/1.4 lens,
a fine great lens of the 1950s era.
it is really sharper than the Canon.
 
many thanks to both Randy and Roland

amazing how well made these old lenses are, and the signature of the 50/1.5, well, pretty impressive.
 
Yeah, as much as I keep getting tempted by newer, higher priced fast 50's and all the posts on this forum about them, I have to say that I'm pretty happy with my lil' ol' Canon 50/1.5 lens. And talk about well made; that chrome over heavy brass construction belies the fact that it's a 50+ year old lens. It's a keeper in my camera bag! :)

-Randy
 
get both lenses Raid.
they all have their good points.
just having a lens that was re- calulated by an army of japanese ladies with abucuses at Nippon Kogaku,.. is worth the price of admission in my book.
 
xayraa33 said:
get both lenses Raid.
they all have their good points.
just having a lens that was re- calulated by an army of japanese ladies with abucuses at Nippon Kogaku,.. is worth the price of admission in my book.
Click to expand...

I already have the Nikon 50/2.0 in LTM, so the Canon 50/1.5 may be less expensive than the Nikkor, or am I wrong ?

Raid
 
The Nikkor 50/1.4 was usually priced a hair more than the Canon 50/1.5,
but now, thanks to forums like this, they seem even price wise.
 
Yes, I believe the Nikkor has been priced higher than the Canon. Whether that's now changed I can't say. I also don't know about availability of one versus the other and whether that's also a factor in the going price. I can say, however, that while the Nikkor may be marginally sharper, I prefer the Canon due to its slightly better flare control, as evident in the shots I took. I also prefer the oof rendition of the Canon over the Nikkor (but then, I'm partial to that Sonnar look). So, I would choose the Canon over the Nikkor even if the price were the same for both. But that's just my opinion as I know there are others who prefer the Nikkor's greater sharpness. Go for the Canon, Raid; I truly believe you won't regret it. Would be great for more portraits of your daughther. That is, if you can ever get her to let you take any more pics after all the lens testing you've done with her! ;-)

-Randy
 
back in the late 1980s
Alt Camera at Queen & Church in Toronto wanted $145 for the Nikkor 50/1.4 lens.
the Canon 50/1.5 lens was priced at $ 95
they always charged more for the Nippon Kogaku glass and it sold pretty fast too.
the Canon/Serenar glass lingered on in the display case it seems.
 
I don't doubt that at all, xayraa33 (and sure wish I had had the foresight to have bought some of them then!). But I would question how much that had to do with the quality of the glass versus how much that had to do with the great history of the Nikkor lenses as used by David Douglas Duncan. Not to take anything away from his work or the incredible sharpness of the Nikkor, particularly considering when and how it was made (lots of women, each using an abacus, as you pointed out), but others have since commented on the high quality of the Canon 50/1.5 lens (see Dante Stella's high praise here: http://www.dantestella.com/technical/canoleic.html) and that somehow the Canon remained a bit of a well-kept secret. Regardless, as said above, my personal preference is for the Canon even though I readily admit to the greater sharpness of the Nikkor. Heck, if you want to be blown away by how sharp are the images taken with the Nikkor, just look at Roland's test shots he did with that lens (also on smugmug). There's a shot there of a harbor with a blow up of a sign on the end of a pier. Talk about amazing detail for a 50+ year old lens! Still, I like the look I get with the Canon and the greater flare control so I'm happy with the Canon. Oh, and for what it's worth to anyone, I also recently did a test comparing the same Nikkor 50/1.4 to a Summarit 50/1.5. Unfortunately, the Summarit had a bit of haze and, as a result, had horrible flare problems.

-Randy
 
Last edited:
I always thought that Alt Camera charged more for the N.K stuff because it could, and it was not as common as most of the Canon/Serenar glass and the Nippon Kogaku gear had a pro aura to it deservingly or not), and alot of the Canon pieces had the EP orange diamond engraving, as it was more popular at PX store if it originated state side.
example; the 25mm Canon lens, it was not that common.
I seen two at that store, I bought one(it was not cheap though).
I never seen the Nikkor 25/4 in ltm in that store ,as few were made
and are rare, as they stopped being made in 1960 .
 
Yes, although I'm no expert here, I believe that you are right xayraa33 that the Nikkor 50/1.4 lens is less common than is the Canon 50/1.5 lens. Commonality, or the lack thereof, and its affect on item pricing, is relevant to a collector but it seems to me that it should not be a factor when considering which lens to buy for one's own use. In other words, the Nikkor may have sold for a higher price because it was less common. If true, that's certainly no reason for accepting the higher price as an indication of higher quality (either in build or image-taking ability). Please understand that I'm not trying to say anything negative about either lens by this comment. I'm merely responding to the previous post about the Nikkor selling for more and the possible implication about its resulting superiority. Fortunately for all of us, we have test shots to compare these two lenses and the test shots clearly show them both to be excellent lenses that are more alike than they are different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom