Jump to content

Which 50/1.4 LTM for a Monochrom?


james.liam

Recommended Posts

Both are decent lenses. I'd make sure you got a good clean example without haze or fog, although the Canon is fairly easy to service.

 

The following are images I took with the Canon 50/1.4 and my MM at the Santana concert, House of Blues Las Vegas. I was very pleased with the reuslts. It did help to be seated 10-15 feet away from the stage!

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Image #2

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Image #3

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the Canon 1.4, and had it cleaned, lubricated and adjusted at Wil van Maanen @ Zoetermeer NL. He did a great job. 

I tried various Sonnar formulas which I did like for their intelligence but all had a focus shift I did not like. What I like is the tranquility of mind to be in total control of focussing.

 

Here an example of the Canon at full opening and at 1 meter on the MM1 - the drawing fits the grain at 1250 asa.

 

39356625271_78a7716b5e_b.jpg

Steph

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Canon does not shift focus?

 

Canon 1.4/50 LTM is NOT Sonnar type formula.

So it shifts focus less than Sonnar type lenses.

It does shift a bit though with mine (about f/2 to f/4), normal for this type.

 

A test here (ferider in RFF):

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155193

 

After seeing this test, I bought the 1.2/50 Canon LTM, it's nice and in use "better handling" than my Noctilux 1.0 in viewfinder blocage

(1.2/50 very short lens).

Edited by a.noctilux
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great images. So no particularly distinguishing differences between them? Similar resolution, contrast?

 

They are very different lenses.

The Canon is a Planar design, the Nikkor is a Sonnar (except the black Millennium Edition, which is also a Gauss and was issued much later and only in S mount for the S3).

The Canon is a great lens, well corrected for its age, solid, reliable, sharp, etc. - but a bit "boring" (for a vintage lens, of course) IMO. Think of a pre-ASPH Summilux.

The Nikkor is softer in the corners wide open with more "glow" and less contrast. Think of a classic, vintage newspaper look.

AFAIC, I'm somewhat partial to Sonnars, particularly in B&W, and will happily accept some focus shift to get better OOF rendering (aka "bokeh").

You may also want to consider the Canon 50/1.5, which is a Sonnar formula and closer in its rendering to the Nikkor 50/1.4.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I totally agree with Ecar.

There is no 'magic' attached to the lens, to balance the reliability in handling.

Next to the Canon, I have retained the Nikkor F2 LTM, and it has the vintage look even when stopped down a bit. 

 

James, I also suggest looking at the new Jupiter 3. I have appreciated the old one very much ; with the new production it might now be well-aligned for a Leica RF. (because of focus shift I almost never it used on my MM but with the OVF It was well used on the M240)

 

See a BW here with that lens:

31523544454_bf1cddb1df_z.jpg

Fragility by Albert K., on Flickr

 

Edited by Alberti
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 on the Nikkor 50/2 and Lomography/Zenit's "New Jupiter 3+". Both Sonnars with (very) little focus shift.

The former is a real bargain.

The latter is actually on of the least focus-shifting Sonnars I have encountered and otherwise a very pleasant surprise compared to the other Lomography lenses I have owned and/or used. It's basically much more predictable than my two "original" J-3s, which can be quite temperamental (each in its own way), while retaining a classic Sonnar character. However: my NJ-3+ is an early 2016 one and arrived with a loose aperture ring - I found that one of the three retaining grub screws was missing and that another was not properly in place. Assembly QC at the Zenit factory may well have improved since then, and my lens was optically spotless and properly adjusted, so that's just a word of caution on potential niggles with this lens.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Canon ltm lenses are truly excellent, both for price and quality. The build is very good, and they look "nice" on black or chrome cameras.

 

I have 35mm f2, 50mm f1.2, f1.4 f1.8, and the 135mm f3.5. All focus well, without any backfocus, on my M8's and M-P240.

 

The 50mm f1.2 has quite a bit of glow fully open, which I'll keep telling myself is character.

 

...

Edited by david strachan
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...