Out of only curiosity...

[Stephanie Brim]

What do you think of the collapsible Canon 50/1.9 lens? Has anyone used one? How does it fare next to, say, the collapsible Summicron?

I'm purely curious at this point, but who knows when curiosity could turn into something else? 😉

 

[rover]

It has been likened to a Summitar in optical design and performance. Joe had a couple for a while and liked them. I have not gone that way yet myself, but will when I get around to picking up an older Canon knob winder. They have the 40mm filter ring, and were replaced by the 50/1.8. My only concern about old Canon glass is that mine have come with some haze, so be aware of that when questioning about condition.

 

[back alley]

click here

 

[Mackinaw]

I had one for years (came with a III-A I bought back in 1976) and sold it to somebody on this list several months back. Mine was OK, but nothing to write home about. Soft wide-open but it sharpened up nicely at F2.8 or so.

I seem to recall reading, on the Canon Museum website I believe, that one of their lens designers was dissatisfied with the 50/1.9, so redesigned one of the elements, which gave rise to the 50/1.8. That lens, of course, is legendary.

Jim Bielecki

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Ooooh...yeah...I like that.

Story behind this, anyway: I'm getting a Zorki 3M and, in a little bit, I want to purchase a faster collapsible lens for it. This, in addition to the Summitar and the Summicron, are a few of my choices. Ideally, this will be my pocket camera for taking out: the bars, the hockey game, the walks around town at night.

 

[charjohncarter]

Nice to see you back on RFF.

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Thanks. I missed you guys. 😛

I'll be here sporatically now that my boyfriend and I are going to be buying a house and moving, but once we're moved I have the chance to build myself (gradually) a nice wet darkroom. I should be here more then.

 

[physiognomy]

It was me who bought Jim's 50/1.9, & it is a lens I like a lot... I don't have any other similar col. lenses for comparison, but I would agree with Rover's description that it has some qualities similar to the Summitar. It is softish wide open (only shot once @ f1.9), but overall I like it. It also only stops down to f11 & initially that gave me a bit of trouble when I was trying out the sunny 16 rule 🙂

One thing to note - It does not collapse fully on my Zorki 4 or Fed 2L... I think it catches on the rangefinder coupling, so that is something to consider if you are getting a Z3. It is fine on my Fed 5B & Niccas, but I would be wary without getting some further info.

It definitely gives the ungainly Zorki 4 a bit of class 🙂

Peter

 

[Stephanie Brim]

One reason I'm looking hard at this and other faster options is that I don't mind softness wide open. It gives portraits something that incredible sharpness just doesn't. While I do see a place in my photographic bag for a lens that takes a good, sharp portrait wide open, I much prefer to fill the void of a faster, softer lens first.

 

[John Shriver]

Boy, my words take flight. I said it is very direct copy of the mechanical design of the Summitar. But it's a rather different optical formula. Similar only in being double Gauss derivatives, but that's about it.

I've never used one, so I can't comment on it's performance.

Generically, it's always been a compromise squeezing a 50/2 lens through the small rear element allowed by a collapsible LTM mount.

 

[harry01562]

I own a couple of these, and like them. Also have the Summar and a nice Summitar, so I can compare a bit. Haven't used the Serenar wide open, and not for some time, but I was happy with the results. The Leica glass is also very interesting, but may be more expensive and problematic. I would think either the Canon or the Summitar would be a good choice for a first lens, with possibly a Summar as a future purchase. They are different, and Raid has an excellent series of shots of his ever patient daughter that shows many of the characteristics you are looking for in a lens. Another good idea might be a nice FSU that has had the back focus properly shimmed. Brian Sweeney did several of these lenses, and most turned out to be very nice.
Lots of choices in 50's, as you can read here in several places.

Harry