Re: [Leica] Canon 85/1.9

[Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu>]

Owned one for YEARS, as my only "90" for Leica.....also had the 35 1.5, 
also black/chrome canon from same vintage....used these with an M3 and 
IIIf/rd....along with my Nikons (F/S2/SP-with Nikkors, of course).........in those days, 
I used what I >HAD<, which >WORKED<....this was before the ethnic cleansing 
of my camera gear...hehehehe....

Oh, BTW, used all this JUNK "professionally"---you know, bought food/paid 
rent/etc......price was an issue, and PARTICULARLY speed.....the 35 1.5 was 
expensive used, cost me $35, cuz the camera store idiot thought it was 
an enlarging lens.....the 85 1.9, tho, I had to pay full retail for....$75....
the nikon S2/50-1.4/105 cost me $65 (pawnshop) and the SP cost REAL money, 
I think $200........had a nifty Canon with built in Leicavit (VI-t) and 
a Canon 7 for a while (fine camera, felt like a damn brick, tho....)
I made VERY sharp, VERY salable photos with all, but the Nikons and the 
Canon 85 1.9 were my FAVORITES....gave the 85 to my wife when I got a 
Summicron, she later sold it when she got an Elmarit......

If I knew what I know now, of course, I'd have given up photography altogether, 
rather than embarrass myself with that stuff....luckily, I got a real job (non-
photographer) and upgraded my stuff to 'real' Leica lenses and M bodies.....
Unfortunately, they're not the "asph" versions, so I'm thinking about throwing 
them away.....and giving up photography again....THANK GOD I got back on the 
LUG, cuz otherwise I might have taken this obsolete stuff out and made pictures...
ignorant of the newer versions, I could have REALLY screwed up....my God, I think 
my 50 is even two or three versions removed from current....

I only wish I had the Nikons/Canons/etc back, along with my relative youth, 
and the LACK of knowledge I displayed while carrying them around shooting 
pictures all the time, beating the hell out of them and "wearing" out those 
precious collectibles.

The 85 1.9 is a FINE lens, if you get one cheap, (nowadays I guess $150 would 
be cheap)....have it cleaned/lubed if necessary, and PLEASE ENJOY IT the way I 
did mine....kinda flarey (big glass, close to the front, so use some mongrel 
hood arrangement......also, if you look at the corners, wide open, with velvia,
and a 20x loupe, it might not compare to the latest 90 asph.....but then it 
might, cuz I don't recall ever doing that.... :) :) :)

Have a great weekend, 
Walt in Denton.....

 
On Fri, 22 Sep 2000 12:00:28 +1000 "A.H.SCHMIDT" <horsts@primus.com.au> 

> 
> 
> "Peter A. Klein" wrote:
> 
> > Has anyone actually used the Canon 85mm f/1.9 lens?  I may have the chance
> > to buy one. I'd like to hear from someone who has actually used it.  The
> > only information I've seen on this lens is that Steve Gandy says the Canon
> > 85/2.0 and 1.9 are "not as good as the other Canons."
> >
> > Can anyone be more specific? I'm especially interested in its f/1.8-2.8
> > available light performance, relative to the 90 Summicron or other known
> > quantity.
> >
> > --Peter
> 
> Peter, I do owe this lens. I received it as part of a set. I don't know, if I
> would have bought it separate, unless the price was really good. I personally
> think the Russian 85mm lens is somewhat better, but I don't know how much they
> vary.
> The Cannon looks quite impressive, but it is very heavy. It has a rotating
> focussing mount.
> The filter thread is 48mm. I use a 48-49mm adapter with mine and a Pentax
> 105mm lens hood with it. (No vignetting with this hood) . This lens is ok for
> portraits. Optically, I believe it is the lowest of all Cannon 80 -85mm
> lenses. Having said all this, it is not a bad lens.   It is a pity nobody else
> has replied, with maybe a different opinion. I may be a bit biassed.
> 
> I hope this helps a bit. Regards, Horst Schmidt.
> 
>