Pictures from Canon LTM 35mm f:2, please

[menos]

Here are a few from the weekend:

http://www.teknopunk.com/en/Blog/Entries/2011/11/2_just_married_and_water_in_Shanghai.html

… all shot wide open on M9.

 

[39per1]

...a good lens....anyway.....a good companion for Leitz lenses of the pre-asph era......

 

[stupid leica]

Menos, those are wonderful shots. Looks like a great companion to the M9.

 

[menos]

Thanks - I really like this little lens.
It's small.
It's light.
It doesn't clip shadows.
It has a very organic, natural rendering, but still shows sharp detail, where it matters.

It has one fatal flaw though - being prone to flare.
… which leads me to: "Where can I find a nice lens hood, that helps against the flare, but doesn't ruin the nice small size and ergonomics?"

 

[mkok]

I bought this lens some days ago, and I am very glad to use it, It has a good rendering color and bokeh, I can compare It with a Leica Summicron IV that I've had. 🙂

 

[menos]

Nice photo, I like that swirl mkok!

 

[farlymac]

Thanks - I really like this little lens.
It's small.
It's light.
It doesn't clip shadows.
It has a very organic, natural rendering, but still shows sharp detail, where it matters.

It has one fatal flaw though - being prone to flare.
… which leads me to: "Where can I find a nice lens hood, that helps against the flare, but doesn't ruin the nice small size and ergonomics?"

If you can't find a 40mm hood (and I've looked around for one to put on my 50/1.8), an Ednalite 617 adapter for Series VI will fill the bill. Then you can get a decent Series VI hood, and filters. Mine is a really nice plain black metal no-name brand hood, and you should be able to get one in wide-angle from the usual sources. It looks better than the original Ednalite or Kodak hoods.

PF

 

[KEH]

Small, light, sharp. Prone to flare as others have noted, and the bokeh can be grim. I find that a 40-40.5mm step-up ring makes an ok hood, since the front element is so deeply recessed. Plus its easier to find a cap for 40.5mm

Above from Dupont Circle, WDC.

Kirk

 

[kzphoto]

Small, light, sharp. Prone to flare as others have noted, and the bokeh can be grim. I find that a 40-40.5mm step-up ring makes an ok hood, since the front element is so deeply recessed. Plus its easier to find a cap for 40.5mm

Kirk

OOF areas look unusual in some photos but not all of them -- is this a planar based design?

 

[KEH]

OOF areas look unusual in some photos but not all of them -- is this a planar based design?

Agreed - it is only occasionally that the bokeh bites you. As to whether this is a planar design, I defer to anyone more knowledgeable ...

Kirk

 

[menos]

Thanks guys for the tip on the hood ;-)

Kirk, that's a nice shot - great light in this one … and it's a Planar.

 

[umcelinho]

Kirk, thas a beautiful image!!

 

[DominikDUK]

kzphoto the Canon 2/35 is a 7 elements in 4 Groups Planar/ Double Gauss Type lens.

Dominik

 

[Tom A]

Canon 7, Canon 35mm f2.0. Neopan Presto 400, D96 developer.
To the left Cosmos and to the right Neuman (13 weeks old and highly opinionated).

 

[menos]

Haha - nice one Tom - he looks boss!

I will have to strip the sample down, I bought here on RFF and adjust for the play of the optical cell in the focus mount.
Anybody has done this before here - any tips?

 

[menos]

rainy day shots | Canon 35 f2 LTM

rainy day shots | Canon 35 f2 LTM

2 weeks no posts - here is a rainy day shots with my version 1:

 

[Pikapig]

Nice Pics Menos!

 

[35mmdelux]

Beautiful Rob, I like the last two a lot!

Here is the outcome of me, having the Canon and a 35 Lux ASPH with me, when seeing this flare test scene ;-)

Leica 35 Lux ASPH @f2, no hood, no filter:

Maserati and Leica 35 f1.4 Summilux ASPH - f2 by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

Comparing a $300 lens (Canon 35/2 LTM) vs. a $5,000 lens (35 Sum ASPH) is comparing apples and oranges. I mean really. Nice try though.

 

[menos]

Nice Pics Menos!

Thanks ;-)

Comparing a $300 lens (Canon 35/2 LTM) vs. a $5,000 lens (35 Sum ASPH) is comparing apples and oranges. I mean really. Nice try though.

I think, you read too much into my "test" ;-)
I got many 35mm lenses, liking them all, especially liking the Canon 35 f2 LTM.

I always shoot a newly bought lens and compare it's behavior to the lenses, I know, so whats the deal? :bang:

I thought, it would be interesting, to see the difference between these two lenses wide open in the same scene and same light (a very difficult strong street lamp from up, outside the frame).
I was quite surprised, but not in a way of "Man, this Canon sucks!" but more like "Man, I looove that little Canon 35!"

 

[jsrockit]

Comparing a $300 lens (Canon 35/2 LTM) vs. a $5,000 lens (35 Sum ASPH) is comparing apples and oranges. I mean really. Nice try though.

Hmmm, I think you are undervaluing the Canon... it is $500-600 these days. 😉