Travis L.
Registered Userino
I picked one of these up for a song a few years ago and it quickly became one of my favorite lenses
Pics with the Canon 35mm f/2.8 ltm
- Thread starter SamShio
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 72
- Views 22K
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
I have just boght that lens with canon iia. I am excited but I also have jupiter-12. How is it compares to Jupiter? I want to keep only one 35mm.
Darinwc
Not left handed
The Canon 35mm f2.8 wide open is very sharp in the center, and quickly goes un- sharp away from the center. I have both the Serenar chrome version and the Canon black & chrome version. Both have this quality. It gets better as you stop down. At 5.6 it is sharp over most of the frame and just a little soft in the outer corners. I think this is the sweet spot where you still get some blur in the background and edges but the center in focus is sharp.
https://flic.kr/p/25fQ6yR
https://flic.kr/p/25fQ6yR
davhill
Canon P
Personally, I'd keep both. They both have 'character' and there's enough difference in their characters that both are worthwhile.
I have a J12 and I like the lens quite a lot. It's soft wide open, sharpens up as you stop down, but not til f/8 does clarity move towards the edges, so unless I'm looking for a particularly soft look I tend to use it around f/8 or f/11. There's some color cast which makes it more suitable for b/w than color work. Ergonomics are a bit awkward with the aperture buried deep in the front recess, and that glorious Biogon rear element makes it incompatible with some cameras- you may have trouble with a Canon P, and definitely can't use it with a m4/3 digital.
All things considered, I think the Canon 35/2.8 wins out, but the Jupiter-12 is interesting enough (and inexpensive enough) to make it worthwhile keeping. And you have a Fed-3, for which the Jupiter is a natural fit. I'd keep both.
That's my opinion, which matters not a whit unless you agree with it 🙂
D
goamules
Well-known
I got one a few weeks ago cheap, the early silver one. Loving it. But I love all Canon LTMs.
largedrink
Down Under
These were taken with the black Canon version
These were taken with the black Canon version
Stones and sand by Hugh B, on Flickr
Canon P, 35mm Canon LTM lens, Ilford FP4 125 film
Man sitting in the park by Hugh B, on Flickr
Canon P, 35mm Canon LTM lens, Ilford FP4 125 film
These were taken with the black Canon version
Stones and sand by Hugh B, on Flickr
Canon P, 35mm Canon LTM lens, Ilford FP4 125 film
Man sitting in the park by Hugh B, on Flickr
Canon P, 35mm Canon LTM lens, Ilford FP4 125 film
KEH
Well-known
My favorite lens when traveling. A couple of shots with the second version of the lens (black and silver) on my R2M shooting Tmax 100.
New College, Oxford:
Balliol College, the Hall, Oxford:
Cheers,
Kirk
New College, Oxford:
Balliol College, the Hall, Oxford:
Cheers,
Kirk
goamules
Well-known
DavidC
Established
I have the 35mm f2.8 and the f2.0 and usually gravitate towards the 2.8 because the controls are more user friendly and the lens has a more solid feel. But for landscapes the 2.0 is superb at f16-22. Both suffer from a close focus of 3.5 feet which was standard for the period they were built.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
ALL the photos in this thread are so GOOD !
thinking about getting this lens...
can't have enough compact 35's, my new motto
thinking about getting this lens...
can't have enough compact 35's, my new motto
Mackinaw
Think Different
- Local time
- 6:28 AM
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 4,714
Canon IVSB2 with chrome-on-brass 35/2.8. Ferrania P30.
Jim B.
Jim B.
goamules
Well-known
I trust this lens so much I took it on a hike in the Grand Tetons a few weeks ago, shot on Velvia 50.
maigo
Well-known
Burnaby Civic Square
Burnaby Civic Square
Snack Time, Spring 2015 by Maigo, on Flickr
Canon P, Canon Serenar 35/2.8 (Small chrome one), Expired Fujifilm Sensia 100 (2007)
Burnaby Civic Square
Snack Time, Spring 2015 by Maigo, on Flickr
Canon P, Canon Serenar 35/2.8 (Small chrome one), Expired Fujifilm Sensia 100 (2007)
Jeremy Z
Well-known
Bump
Bump
*bump*
I just ordered one of these from a Japanese ebay seller. Can't wait. It'll be my second lens for my Leica IIIc. (first is a Summitar 50/2)
This thread has useful pictures for the lens, but it has me wondering about Canon rangefinders now...
Can someone give me a breakdown of the models and their differences? Seems like a Canon rangefinder with LTM might be a nice alternative to an M-$erie$ Leica. ;-) Maybe a *little* more convenient than the Leica, which needs an accessory finder and which lacks a rewind crank. (I don't mind the lack of advance lever as much)
Bump
*bump*
I just ordered one of these from a Japanese ebay seller. Can't wait. It'll be my second lens for my Leica IIIc. (first is a Summitar 50/2)
This thread has useful pictures for the lens, but it has me wondering about Canon rangefinders now...
Can someone give me a breakdown of the models and their differences? Seems like a Canon rangefinder with LTM might be a nice alternative to an M-$erie$ Leica. ;-) Maybe a *little* more convenient than the Leica, which needs an accessory finder and which lacks a rewind crank. (I don't mind the lack of advance lever as much)
largedrink
Down Under
In terms of hands on use I can only comment about the Canon P. Mine came from my mother and she purchased it new in the 1960’s. It’s a very handsome camera, solid and beautifully built and finished, good to hold, ergonomic, reliable, and works flawlessly. It has 1:1 viewfinder magnification and bright framelines, with the 50mm frameline easiest to use. The only aspect of the P that I would criticise is the rangefinder patch is vague and dim compared to Leica M’s. In my opinion the Canon P and late Canon interchangeable lens rangefinder cameras are excellent deals, as is the Canon LTM lens range.
largedrink
Down Under
Here are a couple using the Canon 35mm 2.8 LTM mounted on my M2:
Mobile cafe by Hugh B, on Flickr
Market on Hopper Street #2 by Hugh B, on Flickr
Mobile cafe by Hugh B, on Flickr
Market on Hopper Street #2 by Hugh B, on Flickr
bluesun267
Well-known
I can comment on the later, larger body Canon rangefinders (the ones that look less and less like a "Leica copy"), including the P and 7.
Starting with the V/L series:
L1, L2, L3, VL, VL2 all look similar, differing only in top shutter speed (1/500 vs 1/1000), rewind knob vs crank, flash sync capabilities, and foil vs. cloth curtains.
VT/VT Deluxe are the same except have the bottom trigger wind.
The above (lever winding) cameras are all very versatile and best-built of the Canon RFs IMO. With all these models you have a 3 position switchable viewfinder with combined rangefinder. Giving you both 50mm and 35mm field of view, as well as 'magnified' which corresponds roughly to a 135 lens. There are no framelines.
The P has the 35/50/100 combined rangefinder with reflected framelines. The P feels clunky in comparison to the L/V series though it is the same size.
VI-L (lever wind) and VI-T (trigger wind) is sort of a hybrid of the P and the L series with a complicated (and prone to hazing) viewfinder. Pretty rare. (Have never owned one.)
And lastly, the Canon 7. This was Canon's attempt to offer serious competition to the Leica M2/M3. It has a projected brightline finder offering switchable 35-50-85-100-135 framelines. They improved the build quality over the P, but it still isn't quite up to the smoothness of the V/L cameras. But they're very usable cameras, cheap and plentiful. The top plate is quite a bit taller giving the appearance of a much bigger camera however the bottom half of the 7 is identical in size to the others.
Starting with the V/L series:
L1, L2, L3, VL, VL2 all look similar, differing only in top shutter speed (1/500 vs 1/1000), rewind knob vs crank, flash sync capabilities, and foil vs. cloth curtains.
VT/VT Deluxe are the same except have the bottom trigger wind.
The above (lever winding) cameras are all very versatile and best-built of the Canon RFs IMO. With all these models you have a 3 position switchable viewfinder with combined rangefinder. Giving you both 50mm and 35mm field of view, as well as 'magnified' which corresponds roughly to a 135 lens. There are no framelines.
The P has the 35/50/100 combined rangefinder with reflected framelines. The P feels clunky in comparison to the L/V series though it is the same size.
VI-L (lever wind) and VI-T (trigger wind) is sort of a hybrid of the P and the L series with a complicated (and prone to hazing) viewfinder. Pretty rare. (Have never owned one.)
And lastly, the Canon 7. This was Canon's attempt to offer serious competition to the Leica M2/M3. It has a projected brightline finder offering switchable 35-50-85-100-135 framelines. They improved the build quality over the P, but it still isn't quite up to the smoothness of the V/L cameras. But they're very usable cameras, cheap and plentiful. The top plate is quite a bit taller giving the appearance of a much bigger camera however the bottom half of the 7 is identical in size to the others.
Jeremy Z
Well-known
Thanks bluesun!
Are all those Canons LTM?
Are all those Canons LTM?
bluesun267
Well-known
Yep! All LTM
dourbalistar
Buy more film
Peter Dechert's Canon Rangefinder Cameras 1933-1968 book is probably the definitive resource. If you can't get your hands on a copy, the Canon Camera Museum is a great place to start online:
https://global.canon/en/c-museum/series_search.html?t=camera&s=film&sort=old
Also, fellow forum member huffmalw created a web site devoted to all the Canon rangefinder cameras and lenses:
https://www.canonrangefinder.org/
