p.2 #1 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
rscheffler wrote:
Thanks Derek. I'm not averse to that kind of rendering. Not at all. Given the price of the Cron v1, the pre-ASPH also gives you that extra stop and glowy goodness, if desired. Just wish I could find one at a bargain price.
i see ones in the $1300 range pretty regularly. not sure where you draw the bargain line... michael also pointed me to a 8 element cron at that price point not too long ago. it's difficult to justify double the price of the ultron for what i expect is lower performance in most measurable ways, but i could probably be happy shooting just the lux pre-asph for the rest of my days...
p.2 #3 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
rscheffler wrote:
What vintage lens don't you have, Charlie? Let me know when you no longer want the 100/2, 100/3.5 or 85/1.8... Any experience with the Canon 28 LTMs?
I need to bone up on the Nikkor 35s and wider, and all the early RF 28s and wider. I got into the Canons as a cheap RF intro. But the wides were always much more money.
I have craved both the Nikkor 50/1.1 and 85/1.5 but those really are quite dear.
Regarding the 28s
"The 28mm Canon f/2.8 owes its reputation to Garry Winogrand, who used it to shoot a lot of this street photographs of the late 1960s and early 1970s. As it turns out, I recently stumbled into a copy of "Public Relations", Garry's 1977 monograph, which contains pictures he shot in that time period. I am less impressed with their technical quality now. To be fair, Garry's work wasn't about technical excellence. The pictures were sharp enough to get the idea across." JJW on RFF
He goes on to say the F/3.5 is much better than the 2.8. Others say it's the other way round
The 28/2.8 was released with another lens: the fastest UWA in the world: the 25/3.5 Apparently these lenses were made long after RF camera production ceased, as late as 1970. The 25mm still brings around 500USD and is not often seen. Even more rare is the 19mm.
Now if they had half a clue, they would re-release the "interchangeable Q" in the guise of the Canon 7 or something like that. It would be EVIL and have the LAEA4 thingy to make all the EF glass AF, but it would but smaller and more beautiful than the A7r2
The histories of Leica, Canon, Ziess, and Nikon are tightly bound together, and only Sony is un-cultured in camera history. You might think this is a silly statement, unless you use the Sony GUI
Thanks for testing and sharing the results - very helpful. Just a minor suggestion: I would find it more convenient if the overall conclusion section would be on top of the page before all the test charts are shown. Easier to read this way and to scroll down to the specific section of interest following the conclusions. The advertisement/commercials on the site are distracting.
p.2 #6 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
Thank you,
Ads/Commercials is not mine, and displayed because account with free plan used on WordPress.com. I have never seen ads actually, but know that it can be shown for some readers
p.2 #8 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
bjhurley wrote:
Resurrecting this old thread as I recently got the 50mm 1.4 LTM and am finding it quite extraordinary. Small, fast, sharp, and beautiful bokeh.
+1. I got my Canon 50/1.4 LTM last year locally as version II in mint condition (scratch- and dust free) for $80! I love its rendering wide open, and the vignetting at f/1.4 adds a nice vintage flair to images. I use it parallel with my Leica Summicron 50/2.0 version V which are very different lenses regarding performance especially in regard to background blur.
I also have the Leitz 50/1.5 LTM lens which is also quite different from the Canon 50/1.4 LTM lens. The Canon is much smoother in bokeh whereas the Leitz 50/1.5 lens provides more glow wide open and has sometimes crazy cool looking but unexpected bokeh in all kind of forms.
p.2 #9 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
This said, since the thread is a bit dated by now, prices for the Canon 50/1.4 LTM lens have dramatically gone up online in the past two years. A good copy often goes now for about $300 and sometimes even more. The related Canon 50/1.2 LTM lens has also gone up in pricing significantly even there are lots of copies out there with dust or moisture residue built up inside the lens. The Canon 50/1.4 LTM is the better sealed and built lens so less issues with this lens.
p.2 #10 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
retrofocus wrote:
This said, since the thread is a bit dated by now, prices for the Canon 50/1.4 LTM lens have dramatically gone up online in the past two years.
Yes, I paid about $380 for mine, although it was in mint condition with both caps and the hood in the little leather carrying case.
A better bargain these days is the Minolta Rokkor 55/1.7, which I got last year for $80 and I often prefer it to the famous Rokkor 58/1.2. It's not much bigger than the Canon 50/1.4 LTM and has beautiful smooth bokeh but is not as sharp. The Canon's images feel much more modern to me even though these two lenses were manufactured around the same time. The colors on the Minolta are very painterly.
p.2 #11 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
bjhurley wrote:
Yes, I paid about $380 for mine, although it was in mint condition with both caps and the hood in the little leather carrying case.
A better bargain these days is the Minolta Rokkor 55/1.7, which I got last year for $80 and I often prefer it to the famous Rokkor 58/1.2. It's not much bigger than the Canon 50/1.4 LTM and has beautiful smooth bokeh but is not as sharp. The Canon's images feel much more modern to me even though these two lenses were manufactured around the same time. The colors on the Minolta are very painterly.
+1. My Canon lens didn't have the original caps, it came without the carrying case, and without hood. The focus ring was a bit stiff when I got it because the owner told me that the lens wasn't used for more than 10 years. Simply by moving the focus ring back and forward multiple times made it run smoothly again. But I found later for a very good online deal the original Canon lens hood which was fitting this lens.
I wish used M- and LTM-mount lenses would come more often with the original lens hood. But I also see used M-lens hoods going for exorbitant prices these days which explains why they are often sold separately.
p.2 #12 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
Prices for everything classic in M/LTM mount went up with the advent of FF digital Leica M, and further when FF MILC arrived. Just before this era, I picked up a near-mint Wetzlar chrome Summilux 50 v2 for—please don't hurt me—$750. I was happy to cough up the Leitz premium for a XOOIM hood. Hell, even Canon FD lenses are seeing market demand: who would've guessed?
p.2 #15 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
I liked this lens a lot but mostly for BW. Greens tended to glow a lot with it in color. It is a look you either like or don’t, and I was in the latter camp, but for BW, it is great.
p.2 #16 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
helimat wrote:
Great shots, BJ!
Do any of you have experience with the Canon 50/1.4 on Leica M? I am curious about rangefinder accuracy 📷
I actually do - using it both on my M3 and my M-E 240. It is very accurate. I have the LTM version of this lens and use it with simple LTM/M adapter. Needless to say, I can also use it on my Leica IIIc camera.
Some examples on my M-E 240.
At f/1.4 focused with rangefinder. Love the swirly bokeh
At f/1.4 focused with rangefinder. I took this one to see how the colors turn out - no complaints
At f/5.6 focused with rangefinder. I tested the flare performance here - it doesn't look bad!
At f/1.4 focused with rangefinder. Taken with B&W film mode in camera but PP with SilverEfex from the DNG file
At f/8.0 focused with rangefinder. Taken as decribed above
Below a few photos taken with my M3 and on Ilford PanF+50 film. Not much PP done after scanning other than just minor dust spot removal and a bit increase of contrast.
p.2 #18 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
retrofocus wrote:
I actually do - using it both on my M3 and my M-E 240. It is very accurate. I have the LTM version of this lens and use it with simple LTM/M adapter. Needless to say, I can also use it on my Leica IIIc camera.
OK, I remembered the fantastic tree root images, but couldn't remember who took them. I'm sold, even at the increased price. Thanks!
p.2 #19 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
retrofocus wrote:
A while ago I wrote a lens review of this Canon 50/1.4 LTM lens on my blog: Canon 50/1.4 Lens Review
Great review, very informative!
Now that I've bought adapters (both LTM to M and LTM to e-mount), I'm starting to ponder the prospects of building a small LTM set. I've seen mixed reviews of the Canon 35/2 LTM and haven't seen a lot of inspiring images from it online; earlier in this thread there is talk of the longer lenses (85mm, etc.).
What LTM lenses should I consider at the wider end (35-40) and longer end (85-100) that would nicely complement the 50/1.4 LTM?
p.2 #20 · The Canon 50mm f/1.4 LTM - Abundant and Still a Bargain
bjhurley wrote:
What LTM lenses should I consider at the wider end (35-40) and longer end (85-100) that would nicely complement the 50/1.4 LTM?
There have been an ocean of LTM options since the war due to patent nullification. You can't go wrong with an Elmar 90 for $150 (I own three of them). 35mm is well represented but the Leica brand is more expensive at this FL: I own three Summicrons (expensive), and the Summaron 35/2.8 (slightly less expensive). The Schneider Xenagon 35/2.8 has always intrigued me but there's competition from KMZ (Jupiter-12), Canon, Nikon (the expensive W-Nikkor 35/1.8 LTM), and Konica UC-Hexanon 35/2 (modern).
