I know the merits of various LTM lenses have been discussed a lot on these forums but I'm interested in opinions on the following specific options for a Leica IIIf:
- Canon Serenar 50/1.8
- Canon 50/1.4 (black & chrome)
- Super Rokkor 50/2 (chrome)
I've seen samples that show the Super Rokkor having very "swirly" bokeh (which is fine by me), and people do seem to rate it highly (though not as much as the 1.8 Super Rokkor, which is also a lot
more expensive). Plus, I have a soft spot for Minolta gear as I have a couple of old SLRs and a small lens collection I'm very attached to
I like the look of the early chrome Serenar too as I think it would suit the III's styling (shallow and superficial, I know
) but I wonder if the extra cost/speed of the 1.4 Canon is worth it i.e. is it really usable? The 1.4 also looks a lot fatter and I wonder if it'd block the VF and/or RF window... I wouldn't buy a 50mm for this camera if I had to use an external VF (and if the RF was blocked that would be pretty useless).
Finally, I already have a Nikkor 50/1.4 Millenium and an Amadeo S-LTM adapter. I know this is probably the best of the bunch optically but for various reasons I'd prefer a more "period" lens (or I could use a shimmed Helios-103, but that somehow just doesn't seem right...)
Any info on finder blockage, and any other usability or image quality issues for the Canons or the Super Rokkor/s would be greatly appreciated!