Using the Canon LTM 50mm 1.2 on a CLE?

ishpop

tall person
Local time
6:46 AM
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
434
Location
Seattle
Ok, so decided to buy the Canon 1.2 from the classifieds. Not because I don't like my Rokkor-m 40mm, I love it. But for low light, the extra stops could be helpful for night shooting and indoors stuff, plus I can experiment with the unique OOF elements the 1.2 produces.

So, I am wondering if it is worth it to try and force the issue with my CLE, or spend a little cash and have a seperate body for this lens?

I realize I would ne an LTM-to-M adapter to even attempt to use the CLE, but then I also read about having to have the body alligned to the Canon 1.2 also to get good results. So knowing that I might be in for quite an effort to even make it all work, I am also cosnidering just adding a second body to my collection.

BTW, I can't afford the Shintaro IIIf that just popped up, hehe.
 
I have used Angenieux 50/1.5, Noctilux 50/1.2 and M-hexanon 50/1.2 on my CLE.
The M-hexanon 50/1.2 is too big and blocks about half part of rangefinder.
For Angenieux 50/1.5 and Noctilux 50/1.2, both work fine on CLE even set the aperture wide open.
I have not tried yet, but I think it would work fine on CLE.
 
It's possible, but focusing it will be slow. The wider baselength means that you will be able to converge on the focus more quickly. I use a Canon 50/1.2 on a Bessa R2, and have tried it once on the CL. Focus is much quicker on an M3, but is possible on the short baselength cameras.
 
It's possible, but focusing it will be slow. The wider baselength means that you will be able to converge on the focus more quickly. I use a Canon 50/1.2 on a Bessa R2, and have tried it once on the CL. Focus is much quicker on an M3, but is possible on the short baselength cameras.

My experience exactly, congrats on the lens. That'll teach me to pay attention there, I was number 5 in line for it...:bang:
 
Back
Top Bottom