Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/29

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] lens question...
From: "John Black" <jblack@ambio.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 16:00:40 -0400
References: <000501c36e37$28df8620$95256a44@ph.cox.net> <p06001f00bb7557d998b3@[10.0.1.34]>

I have one of these lenses that is rangefinder coupled and use it on a Canon
7s. Indeed it uses a dedicated breech/bayonet mount that was found ONLY on
the 7, 7s and 7s2(?) bodies. I have seen (rarely) M bodies modified to mount
it but it requires alteration of the camera itself (I think).

Performance wise, it is an ordinary, unexceptional standard lens at or above
f/2. At full aperture, it is indeed a "dog" unless you like everything to
have a large halo (Canon glow?) around it. The effect is quite striking with
head and shoulder portraits but somewhat of an acquired taste.

The TV lenses are plentiful, cheap and usually in bad condition. Save your
money unless you want an interesting paperweight.

JB




>
> The canon 50mm f0.95 was for the Canon 7, though it was altered to
> fit TV and movie cameras a lot and I've read about some M3's altered
> to fit the lens.(This is pre-Noctilux) I believe it had a breech
> mount outside the regular Canon RF mount.
>
> There's a lot of argument if it is in fact "faster" than a Noctilux.
>
> It's supposedly OK for movie or TV use but is supposedly a real dog
> of a lens for film. That's why they are all so cheap.
>
> I've never used one myself.
>
> Allen
>



- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "Steve Barbour" <kididdoc@cox.net> ([Leica] lens question...)
Message from Allen Graves <ahgraves@prodigy.net> (Re: [Leica] lens question...)