Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/07/27

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Canon RF mount
From: ralph fuerbringer <rof@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:42:28 -0400

the canon p is the only 35 interchangeable lens rf camera with a l to l
viewfinder w/parallax correction involving moving frames.  the finder is
brighter than any m . m-ers dont know or (me) ignore the fact that the leica
projected frame, specifically the center window actually subtracts from the
illumination. this of course is more than compensated for by the elegant
floating frame. the canon has all three frames like the nikon s-3 in the
window all the time. this is inelegant but not that much a negative now
leica has cluttered up the pristine m2 finder w/2  frames each. with the
canon and nikon its impossible to see the whole 35 frame w/glasses and hard
to see w/o.but you can leave both eyes open, something you have to get used
to if you want to do it . i have all three mentioned using a canon 35mmf2 on
two(tested superior to first 2 35 summicrons and smaller) a superior 35mm
f1.8 nikkor. ww.eugene smith possibly the preminent photojournalist of them
all used the canon lenses. he made the fatal error of exposing in japan a
horrible situation that those suffering deeply resented. in the best way
a photographer could do an ecological expose  he developed a roll of film
with just water from tokyo bay. what panache! ralph


> From: "M.E.Berube - GoodPhotos" <meb@goodphotos.com>
> Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:12:41 -0400
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Canon RF mount
> 
> At 07:28 AM 7/27/00 -0700, you wrote:
>> I was just looking at a photo of a Canon 7, and it really looks like one
>> could just take the mount off and screw it onto the front of an LTM
>> camera. Anyone ever done more than just think about doing that? (Though
>> since my 85/1.5 blocks most of my IIIa RF window, I guess the 50/.95 would
>> probably do the same thing, right?)
> 
> From what I've read, why wouldn't one with access to a Canon 7 just use
> the Canon 7 with a 50/.95 lens? (Also from what I read the .95 is so flare
> prone that it is really not that impressive to begin with.)
> If anything, I would think you would want to use Leica glass on the more
> advanced and user friendly Canon bodies not the other way round.
> 
> Keep in mind I've only ever read about any of them, but I wouldn't mind a
> P, 7 or 7s body to play with as a larger back up to the M5 than my CL.
> 
> I also can't imagine why anyone, given an option, would buy an M lens over
> an LTM lens...the LTMs have far wider range...I would think that Leica
> would make all of its RF lenses in only LTM with an M adapter standard...if
> we really are in the midst of an RF revival, they could increase their
> sales base over all without having to reintroduce LTM bodies and while
> still offering the highest quality product for more options to the user. It
> seems to me a win/win situation, but, they must have a viable economic reason.
> 
> Carpe Luminem,
> Michael E. Berube
> http://www.goodphotos.com
> 
>