Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/03/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]By the way - my comment about non-Leica LTM-M adapters was NOT aimed at the set sold by Steve Gandy, which I haven't seen and assume to be up to the usual quality of everything Gandian....:-) B. D. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Mark Langer Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 10:12 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Cc: Mark Langer Subject: [Leica] Canon screwmount lenses Amen to LarryZ's praise of Canon screwmount lenses. I've had similar happy results with the 100mm and 135mm lenses. To his list, I'd like to add a recommendation on the 35mm f2. This is a superb performer and is much lighter than the earlier chrome body Canon or Serenar lenses. The only Canon lens that I've used that wasn't as good a performer as its equivalent Leitz lens was the 50mm f1.9 Serenar, which wasn't quite up to the 50mm f2 Summitar I tested it against. It was less sharp, although it was better at rendering tonal gradations. Physically it was almost a twin to the Summitar, although I am told that optically it owes more to a Zeiss design. I have just bought the 85mm f2, which is a beautifully finished lens, and am trying my first roll with it mounted on a M3. The lens is quite heavy and handles better on a M Leica than on a screwmount. In every way these lenses are better mechanically and in terms of finish than Soviet lenses, and in no way have I found them to be optically deficient in comparison to their Soviet equivalents that I have used. The downside to the Canon lenses is that they take odd-size filters and lens hoods. The 34mm and 48mm are findable, but the 40mm filters are darn pesky to locate. And I'm still in search of lens hoods -- this is a pre- "For Sale Friday" hint to anyone who might want to contact me off-list. As for Marc James Small's assertion that the Canon lenses are more expensive than their Leitz equivalents, most of my Canons were bought off eBay. I paid $100 each for the 100mm and 85mm lenses and $52 for the 135mm lens - all in E+ condition with great glass. These were pretty much the going rates for 100 and 85mm Canon or Serenar lenses. If this is double the going rate for the Leitz equivalents, as Marc claims, I'll take all the $50 and $26 Leitz lenses that he wants to sell. I might add that the Canon 35mm f2 was less than half of what I must have mistakenly thought was the going price of a used 35mm f2 Summicron. I'm glad that Marc has pointed out the error of my ways, and I have the following proposition for him. Marc, you can contact me off list to make arrangements for selling those Leitz lenses that are half the price of the Canons. I'll run over to the bank to get you a money order for $50 for a 90mm f2 Summicron to start. I'll go all the way up to $125 for a 35mm f2 Summicron, and at half the rate of the 50mm Canon f1.4, I guess a screwmount 50mm Summilux will set me back around $85. How much do I add for shipping? Or how about some 2 Leitz lenses for 1 comparable Canon lens trades? Mark - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Langer Email address: mlanger@ccs.carleton.ca - ----------------------------------------------------------------------