| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Socrates
Joined: 20 Jun 2011
Posts: 18
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 5:37 pm Post subject: Canon 50/0.95 |
 |
|
Socrates wrote:
I've been hearing alot about this lens lately. Some people hate, some people love it. And it goes for sky-high prices on ebay.
Does anyone have any experience with it? Is it really worth the insane prices it goes for?
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
trifox
Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 3614
Location: UK
Expire: 2014-05-29
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:30 pm Post subject: Re: Canon 50/0.95 |
|
|
trifox wrote:
| Socrates wrote: |
I've been hearing alot about this lens lately. Some people hate, some people love it. And it goes for sky-high prices on ebay.
Does anyone have any experience with it? Is it really worth the insane prices it goes for?
|
Do not hesitate to buy that lens. if you get a chance ..
I mean for reasonable money -- that lens is a highly valuable item.
tf
_________________
Flickr.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LucisPictor
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 17633
Location: Oberhessen, Germany / Maidstone ('95-'96)
Expire: 2013-12-03
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LucisPictor wrote:
It's an extreme lens, so it will provoke extreme reactions.
Those who really want extreme "speed" on fullframe, this is one of very few opportunities. Expensive yes - but much cheaper than the latest Leica Noctilux. 
[mod]
Socrates, may I ask if the images you show are yours?
If not, please add at least a source link, ok? It's just a matter of fairness to the photographer.
If they are yours, everything's fine.
[/mod]
_________________
Personal forum activity on pause every now and again (due to job obligations)!
Carsten, former Moderator 
Things ON SALE
Carsten = "KAPCTEH" = "Karusutenu" | T-shirt?.........................My photos from Emilia: http://www.schouler.net/emilia/emilia2011.html
My gear: http://retrocameracs.wordpress.com/ausrustung/
Old list: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=65 (Not up-to-date, sorry!) | http://www.lucispictor.de | http://www.alensaweek.wordpress.com |
http://www.retrocamera.de |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Willem
Joined: 08 Jun 2011
Posts: 280
Location: Netherlands
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Willem wrote:
Thats a lot of glass.
_________________
www.willemvs.wordpress.com
Canon EOS 500D, Canon Powershot SX10IS, 2 x Asahi Pentax spotmatic F, iPod touch
AF lenses:
Canon 18-55 kit lens, Canon 1.8/50mm, Canon EF 85 1.8 USM, Canon EF-S 10-22
MF lenses:
SMC Takumar 1.8/55 (2x)
S-M-C Takumars 3.5/24, 3.5/28, 3.5/35, 4/50 Macro, 4/100 Macro, 2.5/135 (v2), 4/200
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
That Canon has a lot of aberrations. The Leica is better by far.
Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uhoh7
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 1300
Location: Idaho, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 6:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
uhoh7 wrote:
| estudleon wrote: |
That Canon has a lot of aberrations. The Leica is better by far.
Rino. |
Oh really?
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3010/2969516774_fedb257546_o.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2542/4054645797_e5127447de_z.jpg?zz=1
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2395/2265978179_ff0e86ca0a_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2368/2166676632_f9fd314756_b.jpg
"I recently bought a Canon f.95 lens from a forum member. I have read many despariging comments about this lens and wanted to see for myself how something so heralded in it's debut could fall so far from perfection. I had previously bought a Canon f1.2 lens, also much maligned. It was obviously out of adjustment, so I sent it to be repaired with Don Golberg (D.A.G.) and it came back a wonderful performer. The ,95 also was out of alignment at infinity and I sent it out to Don as well. I decided to test it against my current version Noctilux, and fully expected it to perform much below this venerated optic. OK, the Noctilux does seem to have the advantage in contrast (not always the best thing pictorially I have found), but the Canon actually appears to outperform the Noctilux at 10 feet in the center. A real surprise. All images were shot at 1/1000 wide open on Fuji Acros. I used a B+W MRC UV filter on the Noctilux and an original Canon UV on the .95. The scans were done from negatives on a Polaroid 4000. No sharpening was used, only levels were adjusted. Draw your own conclusions, but I believe the reason many of these older lenses get a bada rep is because people use them without checking to see if the years and use have put them out of adjustment. I have found with two older Canon lenses, that if you have them professinal ly looked at, they can be made to perform extraordinarily well for such old glass."
Charlie Lemay
http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/0099xZ
Compared to the very small number of Canon owners who have their .95s adjusted and know what to do with it, the nocti crowd is leigon and all too ready to dismiss what they know nothing about.
The 85/1.5 Canon LTM I just found is another ground breaking Canon optic maligned as "soft", when in fact few own it and fewer work with it enough to get the best out of it.
here that one is handheld at 1/60 @1.5 the other night, wide open:
A really clean copy of a .95 Canon for anything under 2.5K is quite a good value for an utterly unique optic 
_________________
Making MFlenses safe for the letter *L* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Abbazz
Joined: 23 Jun 2007
Posts: 1098
Location: Jakarta
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Abbazz wrote:
I confirm the Canon 50/0.95 is a great lens, despite a bad reputation dating back from a few reviews that I suspect were made by guys with badly adjusted rangefinders. Here's an old thread with some pictures from mine:
http://forum.mflenses.com/canon-50mm-f-0-90-t21083,start,15.html#182031
Cheers!
Abbazz
_________________
Il n'y a rien dans le monde qui n'ait son moment decisif, et le chef-d'oeuvre de la bonne conduite est de connaitre et de prendre ce moment. - Cardinal de Retz
The 6x9 Photography Online Resource:
http://artbig.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kuuan
Joined: 14 Jan 2008
Posts: 4569
Location: right now: Austria
Expire: 2014-12-26
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
kuuan wrote:
wow impressive!
first one for sharpness, and last one is super funtastic crazy 
_________________
my photos on flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/collections |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
A) In the comparison between the canon and the leica lens, I can't see the canon doing better than the Leica lens.
B) In the example of the four images, the first, really nice, I don't know which aperture was used. I don't think that was a wide open pic. F/5,6? F/8? F/11? Should be. Almost all the lens are good enough at that apertures. There aren't any pics taklen with the leica lens with the same subjects. That should be more objective to take a conclusion.
C) About the second, it's very soft and with very distractive bokeh. I can't see the point of focus, all seem to me to be very soft like out of focus.
D) The last two, with a very distractive bokeh. I don't like them.
The bokeh of the nocti isn't so good, perhaps the first version should be a bit better for me.
And the bad reputation, don't became only by the magazines, no. That opinions became by a lot of users, some of them are friends of mine.
Now I can say, again, the leica was a better lens than the 0,5 Canon, by far
Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uhoh7
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 1300
Location: Idaho, USA
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uhoh7 wrote:
| estudleon wrote: |
Now I can say, again, the leica was a better lens than the 0,5 Canon, by far
Rino. |
There is always a better lens for twice the money, my friend.
Not really the point, is it?
Besides the fact it's debatable with these wild high character models.
I've heard it said the CV 1.1 is better than the nocti as well. Loudly.
_________________
Making MFlenses safe for the letter *L* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 11:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
I don't know, I don't try the 1.1
yet.
Rino
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uhoh7
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 1300
Location: Idaho, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 6:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
uhoh7 wrote:
I had my nokton 1.1 out tonite:
_________________
Making MFlenses safe for the letter *L* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PBFACTS
Joined: 24 Dec 2008
Posts: 568
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PBFACTS wrote:
| estudleon wrote: |
Now I can say, again, the leica was a better lens than the 0,5 Canon, by far
Rino. |
And on this picture : the quality of the canon 0.95 is very poor
http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/Canon_RF_2e.html
Never forget that on all 0.95/1.0/1.1/1.2 lenses dof is very very narrow and out of focus comes very fast (as fast as the lens !)
_________________
OM USER .. I KEEP/USE:
Om2 sp + T32 (grip/filter/zoom) + T8
+ Zuiko 16mm 3.5 / 55mm 1.2 / 65-200 4/ x1.4
+ Sigma 8mm 4.0 / 14mm 3.5 / 18-35 3.5-4.5
+ Tamron 35/105 2.8
+Tokina 150/500 5.6
+ Kiron 105/2.8 macro 1:1
+ Vivitar S1 90/180 falst field macro
+ 2x Doubler HR7
>>I SELL: OM10 + OM4ti
+ i sell: OM Md1 + Md 2 + Grip PowerPack + charger
+ i sell: OM Zuiko 24mm 2.8 / 28mm 3.5 / 50mm 1.8 / 50mm 1.4 / 50mm 3.5 macro / 35-70 3.6 / 35-105 3.5-4.5 / 75-150 4 / 500mm / 2xA
+ i sell: OM Kiron 28/105 3.2-4.5 / 1.5 converter
+ i sell: OM Makinon reflex 5.6/300 + Spector reflex (makinon) 500mm
+ i sell: OM Macro panagor extender 1:1
+ i sell: OM Sigma 16mm 2.8 fisheye (last version) / 21-35 3.5-4.2 ot/ 28-70 2.8 /1000mm mirror
+ i sell: Tamron 28-70 3.5-4.5 / 28-80 sp 3.5-4.2 / 28-135 sp 4-4.5 / /28-200 3.5 / 35-135 3..5-4.5 / 90mm sp macro 1:1 2.8
+ i sell: OM Soligor 2x doubler / x3 converte
+ i sell: Soligor FisheEye x0.15
+ i sell: OM Tokina 28/135 4-4.6 / 70/210 3.5 (= vivitar S1 v2)
+ i sell: OM Vivitar 28-70 3.5-4.8 / 28-90 s1 2.8-3.5 / 35-70 2.8-3.8 / 55/2.8 Macro 1:1 (komine) / 70-150 3.8 ot (kiron) / 75-150 ot 3.8 (tokina + 2x matched)
+ i sell : OM cosina 100-500 5.6/8 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
Nokton lens.
Very nice pics posted.
Good contrast for me.
Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
estudleon
Joined: 15 May 2008
Posts: 3754
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
estudleon wrote:
| PBFACTS wrote: |
| estudleon wrote: |
Now I can say, again, the leica was a better lens than the 0,5 Canon, by far
Rino. |
And on this picture : the quality of the canon 0.95 is very poor
http://www.taunusreiter.de/Cameras/Canon_RF_2e.html
Never forget that on all 0.95/1.0/1.1/1.2 lenses dof is very very narrow and out of focus comes very fast (as fast as the lens !) |
For that reason, it's a good habit to explain to the viewers where the focus point is, when the image is for a test or similar.
Rino.
_________________
Konica 2,8/100
CZJ: 4/20, 2,4/35, 1,8/50 aus jena, 3,5/135MC, Pentacon 1,8/50
Pentax S-M-C-1,4/50
Helios 44-3
Mamiya 2,8/135
Misc. : jupiter 9
Stuff used:
A) SRL
Alpa 10 D - kern macro Switar 1,9/50 -black, Kilffit apochromat 2/100.
Asahi pentax spotmatic super takumar 1,4/50
Contaflex super B tessar 2,8/50 Pro-tessar 115
Leica R3 electronic summicron 2/50 elmarit 2,8/35
Konica Autoreflex 3 (2 black and chrome one), TC, T4. 2,8/24, 3,5/28 not MC and MC, 1,8/40, 1,4/50, 1,7/50 MC and not MC, 1,8/85, 3,2/135, 3,5/135, 4/200
Minolta XG9 2,8/35, 2/45, 3,5/135
Nikkormat FTn 1,4/50, 2,8/135
Fujica ST 801, 605, 705n. 3,5/19, 1,4/50, 1,8/55, 4/85, 3,5/135.
Praktica MTL 5 and a lot of M42 lenses.
Voigtlander. Bessamatic m, bessamatix de luxe, bessamatic cs, ultramatic and ultramatic cs.
Skoparex 3,5/35, skopagon 2/40, skopar 2,8/50, skopar X 2,8/50, super lanthar (out of catalogue) 2,8/50, dinarex 3,4/90, dinarex 4,8/100, super dinarex 4/135, super dinarex 4/200, zoomar 2,8/36-83, portrait lens 0, 1 and 2. Curtagon 4/28 and 2,8/35
Canon AV1, 1,8/50
Rolleiflex SL35 and SL35 E. 2,8/35 angulon, 2,8/35 distagon, 1,4/55 rolleinar, 1,8/50 planar, 4/135 tessar, 2,8/135 rolleinar, x2 rollei, M42 to rollei adap.
Etc.
RF
Yashica Minister III
Voightlander Vito, vitomatic I, Vito C, etc.
Leica M. M2, M3 (d.s.) and M4. Schenider 3,4/21, 2/35 summaron 2,8/35 (with eyes). Summicron 2/35 (8 elements with eyes), 2/35 chrome, 2/35 black, 1,4/35 pre asph and aspheric - old -, 2/40 summicron, 2,8/50 elmar, 2/50 7 elements, 2/50 DR, 2/50 - minolta version, 1,4/50 summilux 1966 version, 1,4/75 summilux, 2/90 large version, 2/90 reduced version of 1987, 2,8/90 elmarit large version, 4/135 elmar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uhoh7
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 1300
Location: Idaho, USA
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uhoh7 wrote:
any time you look for samples from a super tight DOF lens, you are going to get alot of bad shots, hehe
Here is the nokton in very dim light:
below, Canon LTM 50/1.2
not as sharp as nokton, but utterly unique rendering
the little Pen F 42mm F/1.2 is probably sharper than either:
The Pen cannot cover FF, but aps-C is no problem. It might be the best of all super speeds for the APS-C in terms of sharpness, though perhaps nFD 50/1.2 L is sharper
_________________
Making MFlenses safe for the letter *L* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ylyad
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Posts: 476
Location: Zentralschweiz
Expire: 2013-12-05
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2011 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ylyad wrote:
The last one is great. And the pie looks fantastic 
_________________
Camera: Fuji X-E2, Fuji X100T
MF: Canon nFD 50/1.4, Canon nFD 100/2.8, Tokina RMC 135/2.8
Tamron SP 24-48/3.5-3.8
http://www.flickr.com/derdide/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
uhoh7
Joined: 24 Nov 2010
Posts: 1300
Location: Idaho, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
uhoh7 wrote:
well, here's a decent deal on the .95:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost-classifieds/showproduct.php/product/29698/title/fs-3a-m-mount-canon-50mm-f0-95-rf-dream-lens/cat/2
_________________
Making MFlenses safe for the letter *L* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
