Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Canon Pellix with 1.2/58 lens, Fuji Superia 200, DIY C41 dev
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Colour Film Gallery
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 10:13 pm    Post subject: Canon Pellix with 1.2/58 lens, Fuji Superia 200, DIY C41 dev Reply with quote
I borrowed this from a friend as I've never used a 1.2 lens before. Light was crap but even so, with a 1/1000 top speed it wasn't easy to avoid overexposure at 1.2 and I ended up with some blown highlights as a result. It's a good lens, nice bokeh but it suffers from a lot of CA and contrast is a bit on the low side. In some shots it's not that sharp, seems to do better at medium distance than close to the mfd. I only tried it at 1.2, can't say this wide open thing is my bag but it was interesting to try for once. Pellix is crap imho, the pellical mirror reduces light to the viewfinder by almost 2 stops. It's not too bad with the 1.2 lens but I imagine with a slower lens it would be useless unless the light was pretty bright. As an example, I'd say my Konica AR T with Hexanon 1.7/50 has a far brighter and better viewfinder. Build quality of the Pellix feels closer to the bottom end of Japanese production, certainly not in the same league as the Konica AR T or Miranda Sensorex. Also, it has a really annoying tiny lock on the bottom for the back, like a Contax lock but tiny and less well engineered. Seeing as the rewind lever also lifts up, it seems pretty superfluous to have this lock at all. I'd like to be able to try this lens on a better camera but I threw away all three of my Canon AE-1s because all three jammed on me.


#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8

#9

#10

#11

#12

#13

#14

#15

#16

#17


PostPosted: Thu Nov 15, 2012 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I also shot a roll of Kodak Color Plus 200, but as usual with this crappy film, results were poor, this film always has a brownish tone that I dislike, here's the few frames that were okay:


#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6


PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 12:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
#7,#8 and #14 what I like.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 2:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks. It's a lens that I think needs practice to get the best out of, I'll try it again with some Pan F 50 BW film, but I'm worried I might come to really like it and I can't afford one.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm liking some of these results a lot! Is this a point and shoot camera?


PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Katastrofo wrote:
I'm liking some of these results a lot! Is this a point and shoot camera?


No SLR, with Canon FL lens.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
There has gotta be a VERY small number of fixed-lenséd cameras that offer f1.2.


PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 10:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Katastrofo wrote:
I'm liking some of these results a lot! Is this a point and shoot camera?


Cheers Bill, wide open shooting is a rare thing for me, and I've never used a 1.2 lens before so I found it not so easy, but I am sure practice would help.

This is the camera I used, it has a fixed pellical mirror, that cuts out almost two stops of light so even with the 1.2 lens it wasn't a very bright viewfinder in the dull light I had to work with. I had to be very careful and take my time when focussing. One big fault for me was the lack of dioptre correction and as an eyeglass wearer, that caused some difficulty, being I'm blind as a bat. Smile





http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/pellix/

BTW, I didn't use the camera's TTL meter, I prefer to use a handheld Weston meter.

Katastrofo wrote:
There has gotta be a VERY small number of fixed-lenséd cameras that offer f1.2.


Not that I know of, there is the Yashica Lynx with the 1.4 lens, I had one, the lens on it is huge and heavy, not the best idea for a compact camera, but the lens is very good so you can forgive the clumsiness.

I think I need more time with this Canon lens to learn to love it, but sadly it goes back to it's lucky owner on Monday Sad


PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Silly me, it's an FL lens, not a fixed lens. Laughing Maybe you can haggle with him
for the lens. An FL takes the weird 48mm thread filters and hood, which would
make a nice starting point. Then again, maybe not. Laughing


PostPosted: Fri Nov 16, 2012 11:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Katastrofo wrote:
Silly me, it's an FL lens, not a fixed lens. Laughing Maybe you can haggle with him
for the lens. An FL takes the weird 48mm thread filters and hood, which would
make a nice starting point. Then again, maybe not. Laughing


Oh, he wants to keep it for sure. Smile

I think this one is a bigger thread, 55 or 58mm, I have an FL 2.5/35 as well (now that is one excellent lens available for peanuts) and that has the same barrel with the same filter size I think.

I absolutely hate the Canon FL/FD lens mount BTW, hate it hate it hate it. I haven't been able to try this 1.2/58 on my NEX because the locking ring won't turn all the way. That is probably the fault of my Chinese adapter. Taking the lens off the Pellix was an unpleasant experience, you have to apply quite a bit of force to get it to come off after turning the locking ring, and the chance of bending that aperture pin at the bottom seems pretty high. Now I see why my FL 2.5/35 had a bent pin when I got it!


PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Agree, I summarily hate the FD mount, too. I bought two different FD>EOS adapters and both were a total POS.

Nice to know and avoid about FD>NEX, thanks.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 1:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Katastrofo wrote:
Agree, I summarily hate the FD mount, too. I bought two different FD>EOS adapters and both were a total POS.

Nice to know and avoid about FD>NEX, thanks.


I've had maybe 5 or 6 FD lenses on my NEX at various times, 3 or 4 Canons the others were Tokina and Cosina, the adapter was only 13ukp and while quality isn't the best, it does work okay most of the time.

Some went on okay, some were a bit tricky to get the locking ring to turn. This FL 1.2/58, it won't turn more than a quarter of an inch and I'm not a weak guy, but no way was I applying more than sensible torque to it, not being my property.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 4:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, better to be safe, than sorry. It is the fussiest mount there is, IMO.


PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 5:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oh yes, this mount has had me issuing many cuss words on several occassions. I shot another roll of Kodak Color Plus 200 (which seems to be Kodacolor 200) today in the Pellix, I'll soup it shortly, hope it comes out better than yesterday's Color Plus roll.


PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Still go back to this one:



Nice catch.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Colour Film Gallery
Page 1 of 1