canon 85mm f/1.5 LTM vs nikkor 85mm f.2 LTM

[hrryxgg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

has anyone used both of these lenses and have opinions on which is more interesting and easy to use?

 

canon 85mm f/1.5 LTM vs nikkor 85mm f.2 LTM

 

thank you!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ALUX]

I only have the 1.5/85mm (Version II, black and Chrome barrel) but none of the slower versions. Therefore I can't compare their performances. The 1.5/85mm is a decent performer, I'd say. The images taken wide open have a very nice bokeh and the images habe a good contrast. The images lack some micro details compared to modern designs, though . However, the lens is very heavy. It weights 730g. Another drawback is that the barrel turns when focussing. The apperture ring of my specimen if a bit stiffer to turn than the focussing ring.  This means focussing first and then setting the apperture will be a bad idea as this will alter the focus setting again. 

Here are some examples all taken at f:1.5:

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!

 

All pics are available as 100% view. I can at least say that the Serenar performs better than the Summarex which I also owned for a while. I hope this helps.

 

 

 

[Ecar]

The Canon 85/1.5 is huge and heavy. It's a Planar-type formula IIRC, just like the Summarex, but unlike the more compact Nikkor 85/1.5, which is a Sonnar. Of these, my personal favourite is the Nikkor, but it's getting hard to find (less than 500 made in LTM, I believe) and has become very expensive. They are all amazing lenses, but RF focusing with either of these can be challenging unless one has good eyesight AND the lens is perfectly calibrated.

A properly adjusted Nikkor 85/2 on the other hand is somewhat easier to focus (I have had several copies and have kept 3 of them), noticeably smaller/lighter, also has a beautiful Sonnar rendering (for full disclosure, I'm biased towards Sonnars, despite their infamous focus shift) and is rather easy to find in good condition at a reasonable price. This lens was produced over 25 years and there are numerous versions of it, with mostly cosmetic differences, although coatings also seem to have improved during this timespan. Due to rarity, the early Tokyo/MIOJ versions are more expensive, and a good copy of the late all-black versions costs even more. I haven't found any optical difference between versions, although the all-black is easier to use in practice due to its substantially lower weight. In my (entirely subjective, Sonnar-biased) view, the Nikkor 85/2 is a smaller, lighter and overall *better* lens than the contemporary 85/2 and 85/1.9 Canon lenses (multiple versions as well, all large and heavy). However, the later 1970's black Canon 85/1.8 offers a great balance between "classic" and "modern" rendering, if that makes sense, and is another favourite of mine in this focal length (despite not being a Sonnar...)

I hope this helps, but realise it can perhaps be confusing (sorry for that), so in a nutshell my answer to the original question would be: the Nikkor 85/2.

Edited January 27, 2022 by Ecar

[ALUX]

I would actually say the Canon Serenar also belongs to the Sonnar family. If you look at the block diagram pictured on the Canon lens museum web site, you will notice that the construction has a lot more in common with that of the Zeiss Sonnar 2.0/85mm than with the Summarex. A single element followed by a cemented triplet in front of the diaphragm. Only the rear bildung group consists of a cemented doublet plus a single element instead of another cemented triplet.

The Summarex on the other hand doesn't contain any cemented triplets. 

The Summarex has 7 elements in 5 groups and hence 10 glass-air surfaces.

The Serenar 1.5/85mm has 7 elements in 4 groups.(8 surfaces). And its rear element rather small compared to the Summarex's, but similar to the Sonnar.

The classic 2.0/85mm Sonnar has 7 elem.ents in 3 groups (6 surfaces)

Edited January 27, 2022 by ALUX

[Tp2000]

On 1/24/2022 at 4:12 PM, hrryxgg said:

has anyone used both of these lenses and have opinions on which is more interesting and easy to use?

 

canon 85mm f/1.5 LTM vs nikkor 85mm f.2 LTM

 

thank you!

There's a guy on instagram (legacyshooter, I think) who has the 85 1.5 and some good examples on there. Interesting lens, although does look like a behemoth!

[Ecar]

4 hours ago, ALUX said:

I would actually say the Canon Serenar also belongs to the Sonnar family. If you look at the block diagram pictured on the Canon lens museum web site, you will notice that the construction has a lot more in common with that of the Zeiss Sonnar 2.0/85mm than with the Summarex. A single element followed by a cemented triplet in front of the diaphragm. Only the rear bildung group consists of a cemented doublet plus a single element instead of another cemented triplet.

The Summarex on the other hand doesn't contain any cemented triplets. 

The Summarex has 7 elements in 5 groups and hence 10 glass-air surfaces.

The Serenar 1.5/85mm has 7 elements in 4 groups.(8 surfaces). And its rear element rather small compared to the Summarex's, but similar to the Sonnar.

The classic 2.0/85mm Sonnar has 7 elem.ents in 3 groups (6 surfaces)

I found your post interesting, so went back to my optical diagrams and to the Canon Museum website. In a nutshell, here's what I found:

- You are quite right: the front part of the Canon 85/1.5 definitely looks like a Sonnar, with its front element and cemented triplet.

- Its rear end, on the other hand, looks more like a Planar (actually a classic Xenon/Biotar, but with a smaller single rear element behind the cemented doublet), than a Sonnar, although rather different from the Summarex design, which is itself a Planar derivative anyway, with an extra rear element. Apologies if this sounds confusing.

- Bottom line: the Canon is an interesting "hybrid" from an optical design perspective, but I would agree that, on balance, it looks more like a Sonnar than a Planar. Thanks for pointing this out: it's always fun to go back to the basics. 

Edited January 27, 2022 by Ecar
spelling

[ALUX]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here is another sample (also available in full resolution):

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!

[Ecar]

Unless there's an error in the listing, it seems like the price of these things is now officially out of control:

https://www.leicashop.com/classic/at/en/lcc/Canon-f.-M39-85-1-5/33480-1

They used to go for about 1/10th of that not too long ago.

If that's indeed the current going price my (mint) copy bought back in 2013 has appreciated more and faster than any of the lenses I own, including Leica ones...

Edited January 29, 2022 by Ecar

[349A]

2 hours ago, Ecar said:

Unless there's an error in the listing, it seems like the price of these things is now officially out of control:

https://www.leicashop.com/classic/at/en/lcc/Canon-f.-M39-85-1-5/33480-1

They used to go for about 1/10th of that not too long ago.

If that's indeed the current going price my (mint) copy bought back in 2013 has appreciated more and faster than any of the lenses I own, including Leica ones...

They have recently rocketed in price due to interest from the cinema crowd. I have a nos condition example I almost sold a few times. It has a beautiful rendering but is a dense and heavy lens so it never comes out. I kinda recall paying around $700 8 years ago.

[Ecar]

25 minutes ago, 349A said:

They have recently rocketed in price due to interest from the cinema crowd.

That's funny: until recently, it was the photography people who took flak from the cine folks because they bought vintage movie lenses for conversion, thereby reducing availability and driving prices up. What goes around comes around, I guess.

[ALUX]

WHOW!!  💰 💰💰 

[ALUX]

The question is will it really sell for 5,500€?? But one thing is for sure: A Summarex is easier to find than the Canon. And the Cnon performs better. So why should it be worth less if the demand is there....
Anyhow, I think I paid something around 500-600€ for mine 15 years ago. And I have the matching black 85mm mirror finder and the original hood for it 

[ALUX]

The price seems to be not an error. Leicashop offers the lens for the same price on ebay too!

[349A]

They made 1366 Canon 85/1.5’s in the 50’s, how many are still with us and clean? Many had haze issues. The cinema guys want and need fast lenses. As their cameras become higher and higher rez, they’re trying to find more pleasing rendering lenses to offset this intense look of the sensors. The vaseline of the modern day is older and smoother lenses. 
I quite like these older lenses and also have a Summarex. The problem is they rarely make it out of the house due to the weight. 

[padam]

11 hours ago, 349A said:

They have recently rocketed in price due to interest from the cinema crowd. I have a nos condition example I almost sold a few times. It has a beautiful rendering but is a dense and heavy lens so it never comes out. I kinda recall paying around $700 8 years ago.

I am in the exact same boat, even have all the boxes, presentation case and packaging. But since I have the 75 Lux, I use it only a few times per year, just took it out two weeks ago to shoot some video on the SL2. The faded colours, bokeh, vignetting etc. all look beautiful (timeless), and the SL2 is always heavy anyway, so it actually balances well on it. Nice focus throw as well. I just need to locate the original hood somehow to make it complete.

Edited January 29, 2022 by padam

[tommonego@gmail.com]

I had a black 85 f2 Nikkor, I used it with a 35mm Summilux when I had 2 M2s. I picked up a beat up 90 Elmarit very cheap, had it cleaned up. When I got a CL I found I liked the 90mm better on the CL so I sold my 85. The one I had was meh at f2 and f2.8 but wonderful f4 to f11, it also had 48mm filter threads, so I had a 48 to 49mm step up ring permanently on it. 

[Ecar]

11 hours ago, 349A said:

The vaseline of the modern day is older and smoother lenses. 

😄😄😄