Leica LTM Something cheap and fast in 50mm for leica LTM?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
Keith said:
I'm rather liking the idea of the Canon f1.8 .... that's plenty fast enough and from memory they are fairly compact. Does anyone have a pic of one mounted on a screwmount?
Click to expand...

chrome canon f1.8 on a leica IIIc
 
Last edited:
Keith

I would advise a canon 1.4 and add an external VF to your camera.
not the cheapest on earth but by far the best bang for the bucks for what you defined.
The lens is impressively good BTW.
 
Yet another vote for the Canon 50/1.8 or the Summitar on a Barnack. Those lenses, as well as the Canon 50/1.5, are very good and not too large (although prices on the Canon 50/1.5 have gone up over the last year). Best bang for the buck is probably the Canon 50/1.8, either in chrome (first version) or chrome and black (later versions). I bought mine a few years ago after reading Dante Stella's write-up noted above. I've since had it cleaned, and it's really good. For use on a Barnack, I prefer a collapsible lens or a lens w/ a smaller form factor (e.g. CV 50/2.5), but if you're looking for f2 or faster, that Canon would be hard to beat for the price.
 
Keith said:
I'm rather liking the idea of the Canon f1.8 .... that's plenty fast enough and from memory they are fairly compact. Does anyone have a pic of one mounted on a screwmount?

I had the Canon f1.4 and sold it ... but I do remember it was reasonably large and would have to intrude into the finder I'd imagine.

I have a J3 and really like it's look but sadly it's Kiev mount ... and the lack of aperture click stops is annoying for me.

I do have a Summitar but it's the one with the broken aperture blade ... I removed all the blades and it's now permanently f2! :D
Click to expand...

The canon chrome is really heavy. To a point I find objectionable.
The black one is a very cute lens and an excellent performer. Unfortunately, they seem to have coating that self-destroy, and it's very difficult to get one with good glass. If you get one, it's a very good option.
 
Last edited:
Of course this whole obsession to use my screwmount has been driven by the recent spate of threads about them ... which is unusual because it had been a little quiet on the screwmount front of late IMO.

Not to mention scanning those damned negatives I'm knee deep in that have just blown me away and made me realise good photography doesn't have to be complicated ... we just seem to choose to make it that way for some reason!
 
Last edited:
You are going to be shooting wide open anyway, and the difference between f3.5 and f2.0 is around a stop and a half so buy Tmax400 version 2. And keep what you have.
 
Keith said:
Thanks dexdog ... that looks great!

I notice there's one for sale on eBay thay's actually black: http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200520959728&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

It looks very different to the one on your camera?
Click to expand...

Slightly later manufacture is all. A bit higher than I remember paying but within reason if it's in good condition. Excellent lenses - I had one of the Chrome ones and one of the black ones and shouldn't have sold either. At least I have the Summitar now so it's not so painful.
 
There's a couple of Nikkor 50m f2's in BGN condition for under US$300 on KEH. From what I've heard, it's quite a nice Sonnar-based performer.
 
Canon 50/1.4 on the same leica IIIc. Peter K's book gives the weight of the 50/1.4 at 243g.
 
Last edited:
The thing that makes me not really consider the 1.4 Canon is the fact that I had one and sold it ... it really annoys me when this happens. You agonise over selling something and then realise two years later you totally did the wrong thing.

Good to punish yourself for being so foolish! :p
 
Keith,
I have very simillar thoughts on this issue.
I sold the Canon 50/1.4 and I got a Heliar 50/2 and 50/3.5.
 
Keith

Keith

aperture blades are highly overrated. I don't think I've closed down my J3 from wide open more than once or twice in the past year. Seriously, you don't need the blades, they just harshen up the bokeh.

Keith said:
It's ironic ... I had three Summitars and sold two of them then the remaining one broke an aperture blade! :p
Click to expand...
 
The Canon 50/1.4 blocks at least 1/3rd of the finder on a Leica IIIf. I did not like that combination, do not use it. Likewise with a Summarit 5cm F1.5- blocks too much of the finder.

Collapsible Summicron- somewhat shorter than the Summitar.

I count 4 lenses mentioned in this thread that I do not currently own.

Do not even consider a 5cm F1.5 Simlar- "strange Bokeh", not as sharp at F1.5 as the others mentioned, and expensive. "uncommon", interesting optical formula, missed the mark. Own one, makes up for one of the four I don't have....

I would get the chrome 50/1.8 Serenar for best bang for the buck.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
The Canon 50/1.4 blocks at least 1/3rd of the finder on a Leica IIIf. I did not like that combination, do not use it. Likewise with a Summarit 5cm F1.5- blocks too much of the finder.

Collapsible Summicron- somewhat shorter than the Summitar.

I count 4 lenses mentioned in this thread that I do not currently own.

Do not even consider a 5cm F1.5 Simlar- "strange Bokeh", not as sharp at F1.5 as the others mentioned, and expensive. "uncommon", interesting optical formula, missed the mark. Own one, makes up for one of the four I don't have....

I would get the chrome 50/1.8 Serenar for best bang for the buck.
Click to expand...



God (the lens one) has spoken!

Now it's easy. :D
 
My current favorite on the III is a collapsible summicron. If you don't get one in collectors condition, they aren't too expensive. I like collapsibles on my III since they (summicron and summar) are also light weight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom