Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Canon Leica Screw Mount Film Rangefinders

Canon Leica Screw Mount Film Rangefinders For classic Leica Screw Mount Canon Rangefinders.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 01-01-2017   #41
kb244
Registered User
 
kb244's Avatar
 
kb244 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Age: 36
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by 02Pilot View Post
Isn't the Helios-44 an M39 Zenit mount? If so, it won't focus correctly on an LTM body.

The Jupiter-8 is a fine lens, but very different from the choices the OP mentioned initially. All three of the lenses mentioned in the first post are double Gauss designs, whereas the Jupiter is a Sonnar type. I like mine, but the ergonomics are not ideal, particularly the fact that the aperture rotates in the opposite direction to Leica and Canon LTM lenses.
I'm not sure what the major difference is between the gauss/planar/etc design and sonnar style of element arrangement. (Edit: My brief looking around seems to suggest the Gauss design gave better performance at closer focusing distances than the sonnar types).

It seemed like there was a couple Helios-44 out there made for an LTM mount but they seem to be more expensive than the M42 version.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kb244 View Post
Seems I can get a Jupiter-8 that's been CLA'd domestically, but only if I want to get it along with a Canon P for 200 total ... which might not be a bad idea ... I'm assuming if it's been CLA'd then it's been adjusted/aligned in spec with LTM/L39 if it's going to be on a Canon P.
Seems the seller cannot assure that the Jupiter-8 correctly focuses with the Canon P (or any non-FSU body that is) because the lens was CLA'd before the seller acquired it and they just paired it with the P to sell it.
__________________
Karl Blessing
Film (Working RF): Canon 7, Fed-2A, Argus C3, Mercury II
Digital: Olympus E-M5, E-P3
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2017   #42
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 50
Posts: 4,736
What is the S/N?
I've had all three versions on Juipter-8. I think. Lost my count. One with focus collar, pin was great ergonomically and served me well without re-shimming or CLA on Bessa R. Those are worth 60, 80 USD maximum. I have let go to all of them.
Black ones are most easiest to align, cheapest one, but often good.

Jupiters-3, if aligned properly they are sharp and not so dreamy wide open on film. I have one which I did first for M and then reshimmed it for FED-2. It is sharp, not Planar sharp, but it is one of those lenses which are just about right for portraits and bokeh. To me Jupiter-8 is low price lens, if Jupiter-3 is not affordable. Everything J-8 does, J-3 does slightly better.

Where are used LTM Noktons for slightly above 400USD. If color film is in use.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2017   #43
kb244
Registered User
 
kb244's Avatar
 
kb244 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Age: 36
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
What is the S/N?
I've had all three versions on Juipter-8. I think. Lost my count. One with focus collar, pin was great ergonomically and served me well without re-shimming or CLA on Bessa R. Those are worth 60, 80 USD maximum. I have let go to all of them.

Jupiters-3, if aligned properly they are sharp and not so dreamy wide open on film. I have one which I did first for M and then reshimmed it for FED-2. It is sharp, not Planar sharp, but it is one of those lenses which are just about right for portraits and bokeh. To me Jupiter-8 is low price lens, if Jupiter-3 is not affordable. Everything J-8 does, J-3 does slightly better.

Where are used LTM Noktons for slightly above 400USD. If color film is in use.
From what I can tell in the picture the J-8's serial number is 5751867, which I assume means it was manufactured in 1957. (it has the infinity locking pin)

But yea I'm trying not to go above 200. Got my eye on a canon domestically. Just not sure if I should bite at it's BIN or risk a wait (the cleanest 50/1.8 I see listed so far and it's a 8-bladed version which would have more of a pinched corner on it's bokeh shape compared to the 9 or 10 blade version).
__________________
Karl Blessing
Film (Working RF): Canon 7, Fed-2A, Argus C3, Mercury II
Digital: Olympus E-M5, E-P3
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2017   #44
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 60
Posts: 19,434
The ad calls the eight bladed version rare. Is this so? I just checked my Canon 50f1.8 and it is also this rare version.
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2017   #45
kb244
Registered User
 
kb244's Avatar
 
kb244 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Age: 36
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankS View Post
The ad calls the eight bladed version rare. Is this so? I just checked my Canon 50f1.8 and it is also this rare version.
I dunno about 'rare', but when I saw the first listing he called it a Serenar, then I messaged him bout it, and then suddenly it's relisted as a 'rare'. Maybe he's going with 'rare' because it's not listed as one of the three types on the Canon Museum website? *shrug*, I just kind of curious how that bokeh shape would look seeing as it's not round, but it's not a flat-edged polygon.

But basically that's a Type 6. (there were 8 types all together from what someone informed me of in my Canon 7 thread).
Edit: The Type 6 is still a serenar optically, but has the alloy change like the 50/1.4 that makes it lighter.

But for under 200 (well ish, shipping bumps it over), it's the cleanest US-sold sample of a 50/1.8 I can find. So I'm tempted to have it sooner than wait for the offer to go thru (I already lost a couple temptations due to others grabbing them).
__________________
Karl Blessing
Film (Working RF): Canon 7, Fed-2A, Argus C3, Mercury II
Digital: Olympus E-M5, E-P3
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2017   #46
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 60
Posts: 19,434
Years ago they were going for 175, so it seems a good deal.
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2017   #47
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 50
Posts: 4,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by kb244 View Post
From what I can tell in the picture the J-8's serial number is 5751867, which I assume means it was manufactured in 1957. (it has the infinity locking pin)

But yea I'm trying not to go above 200. Got my eye on a canon domestically. Just not sure if I should bite at it's BIN or risk a wait (the cleanest 50/1.8 I see listed so far and it's a 8-bladed version which would have more of a pinched corner on it's bokeh shape compared to the 9 or 10 blade version).
8 blades are still OK for fine bokeh, IMO.
I was reading about 50 1.8, 1.4 and some users have mentioned what those are not very difficult to clean, re-lube.

If I remember correct, J-8 with focus pin has no infinity lock.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2017   #48
kb244
Registered User
 
kb244's Avatar
 
kb244 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Age: 36
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankS View Post
Years ago they were going for 175, so it seems a good deal.
You know what, screw it, I'm getting it. Now I just gotta sell one of my fountain pens to make myself feel better about it. LoL.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
8 blades are still OK for fine bokeh, IMO.
I was reading about 50 1.8, 1.4 and some users have mentioned what those are not very difficult to clean, re-lube.

If I remember correct, J-8 with focus pin has no infinity lock.
The P + J8 listing http://www.ebay.com/itm/182398200457
(you'll notice the seller did not post my questions down below the description in regards to there being no guarantee that the lens would focus correctly with the P)

Has a knob, I just assumed it was a lock.

This is the one I just pulled the trigger on.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/132051572704

You can see what I mean about the aperture shape here.

__________________
Karl Blessing
Film (Working RF): Canon 7, Fed-2A, Argus C3, Mercury II
Digital: Olympus E-M5, E-P3
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2017   #49
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 60
Posts: 19,434
We're just a bunch of enablers.
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-01-2017   #50
kb244
Registered User
 
kb244's Avatar
 
kb244 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Age: 36
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankS View Post
We're just a bunch of enablers.
I don't blame you guys, I really don't, I blame myself mostly because I do most of the hype myself.

And having owned the Serenar 50/1.8 on my P, I know optically what to expect.

This was my P with the Canon 50/1.8 ... which I had painted over the lens's text with black enamel...(not sure why I did that exactly) but still managed to sell the kit for almost $400 when I needed to sell off a bunch of my stuff. (mainly because the lens was still good, and the P had been professionally CLA'd locally by Peter's Camera repair before he folded the business)



I can't seem to find too many scans of when I shot with the 50/1.8, probably because I was too engrossed with the CV Color Skopar 21/4 and Super-wide Heliar 15/4.5 at the time. I didn't really have the appreciation for a good 50mm 10-12 years ago.

Might sell this guy off... haven't used it in a while, and it's about how much I paid for the lens.

__________________
Karl Blessing
Film (Working RF): Canon 7, Fed-2A, Argus C3, Mercury II
Digital: Olympus E-M5, E-P3
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #51
David Hughes
Registered User
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,978
I sometimes wonder if there are forums out there where Parker 51 owners ask if the caps from MB will fit them or are the nibs interchangeable...

FWIW, I try not to mix makes, when I can afford these things, and it does make life simple.

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #52
kb244
Registered User
 
kb244's Avatar
 
kb244 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Age: 36
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
I sometimes wonder if there are forums out there where Parker 51 owners ask if the caps from MB will fit them or are the nibs interchangeable...

FWIW, I try not to mix makes, when I can afford these things, and it does make life simple.

Regards, David
Actually in all the FP Groups I never heard of anyone asking such (and not aware of any Montblanc that have tubular nibs).

In regards to Parker 21/45/51/etc. I have heard of people asking if their Hero 616 and similar model chinese clones would fit. Much like how the Hero Safari clones can be swapped even down to the nibs, but not so much with the Jinhao clones of the Lamy Safari.

But yea every pen I have, short of maybe the ink cartridge or converter if it's a c/c is original brand from top to bottom, you usually can't make a fraken pen that easily except by hacking up some store-brand/third-party kind of pen (usually lever fillers).

Most of the time when someone asks about interchangeable nibs it's usually on moderns that use Jowo-Made #5 or #6 which a lot of modern pen companies use.

The correlation between fountain pens and photography for me, is both can be very fine tuned instruments, and the pens are very photogenic.

My current set of pens, minus the Pilot Murex ("MR") and Visconti Homo Sapiens Maxi (as both were either traded or sold), and not shown being a cheaper Lamy Al-Star in matte black.



All working, and oldest one up there is from 1910s.
__________________
Karl Blessing
Film (Working RF): Canon 7, Fed-2A, Argus C3, Mercury II
Digital: Olympus E-M5, E-P3
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #53
lundrog
Registered User
 
lundrog's Avatar
 
lundrog is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MN, Sartell
Posts: 75
Some with my Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM No Processing done.

http://photography.rogerlund.net/Gal...n-50mm-18-LTM/

Jupiter 3

http://photography.rogerlund.net/Gal...ter-3-50mm-F15


Both Taken wtih my Fuji X-E2.
__________________
Roger Lund
Canon EOS-M, Fuji X-E2, Helois 44-0 Vintage, Helois 44-4, Canon FD 50mm 1.8, Jupiter 8 50mm F2, Jupiter 3 50mm F1.5, Canon Serenar 50mm 1.9, Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM, Canon Serenar 85mm F2, Leica 50mm f2 summar, E.Ludwig 50mm F2.9, Rekagon will.wetzlar 50mm 2.8,, a.schacht ulm travenar 135mm F3.5, CZJ 29mm 2.8 Hoya 28mm 2.8, CZ Tessar 50mm 2.8, MIR 37mm. 2.8, Porst Color Reflex MC 50mm 1.7, Vivitar 28mm 2.8 mc cf
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #54
kb244
Registered User
 
kb244's Avatar
 
kb244 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Age: 36
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by lundrog View Post
Some with my Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM No Processing done.

http://photography.rogerlund.net/Gal...n-50mm-18-LTM/

Jupiter 3

http://photography.rogerlund.net/Gal...ter-3-50mm-F15


Both Taken wtih my Fuji X-E2.
X-E2 is APS-C right? so 1.5x crop factor? (my Olympus E-M5 going to be 2.0x crop factor if adapted).
__________________
Karl Blessing
Film (Working RF): Canon 7, Fed-2A, Argus C3, Mercury II
Digital: Olympus E-M5, E-P3
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #55
lundrog
Registered User
 
lundrog's Avatar
 
lundrog is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MN, Sartell
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by kb244 View Post
X-E2 is APS-C right? so 1.5x crop factor? (my Olympus E-M5 going to be 2.0x crop factor if adapted).
Yes. 1.5x crop factor.
__________________
Roger Lund
Canon EOS-M, Fuji X-E2, Helois 44-0 Vintage, Helois 44-4, Canon FD 50mm 1.8, Jupiter 8 50mm F2, Jupiter 3 50mm F1.5, Canon Serenar 50mm 1.9, Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM, Canon Serenar 85mm F2, Leica 50mm f2 summar, E.Ludwig 50mm F2.9, Rekagon will.wetzlar 50mm 2.8,, a.schacht ulm travenar 135mm F3.5, CZJ 29mm 2.8 Hoya 28mm 2.8, CZ Tessar 50mm 2.8, MIR 37mm. 2.8, Porst Color Reflex MC 50mm 1.7, Vivitar 28mm 2.8 mc cf
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #56
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 60
Posts: 19,434
Much of a lens' character is seen around the periphery which is lost by a cropped sensor.
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #57
lundrog
Registered User
 
lundrog's Avatar
 
lundrog is offline
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MN, Sartell
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankS View Post
Much of a lens' character is seen around the periphery which is lost by a cropped sensor.
Perhaps, I think aa filter has a larger impact.

By all means ; if I could find a digital mirrorless full frame camera , used for the $275 I paid for this ; I'm in!
__________________
Roger Lund
Canon EOS-M, Fuji X-E2, Helois 44-0 Vintage, Helois 44-4, Canon FD 50mm 1.8, Jupiter 8 50mm F2, Jupiter 3 50mm F1.5, Canon Serenar 50mm 1.9, Canon 50mm 1.8 LTM, Canon Serenar 85mm F2, Leica 50mm f2 summar, E.Ludwig 50mm F2.9, Rekagon will.wetzlar 50mm 2.8,, a.schacht ulm travenar 135mm F3.5, CZJ 29mm 2.8 Hoya 28mm 2.8, CZ Tessar 50mm 2.8, MIR 37mm. 2.8, Porst Color Reflex MC 50mm 1.7, Vivitar 28mm 2.8 mc cf
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #58
kb244
Registered User
 
kb244's Avatar
 
kb244 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Age: 36
Posts: 623
Quote:
Originally Posted by lundrog View Post
Perhaps, I think aa filter has a larger impact.

By all means ; if I could find a digital mirrorless full frame camera , used for the $275 I paid for this ; I'm in!
Depending on the camera, I would agree with the antialiasing filter having an impact on the 'look' of the lens.

But clearly crop factor is going to have an impact on its perceived overall edge-to-edge sharpness, as well as its depth of field (with more of the frame it's going to seem shallower).

The AA filter would of course sacrifice the lens resolution, but not necessarily distort that "look".

What I'm curious to see once I get a roll finished in the 7 on some decent B&W (thinking maybe TMax 100, or FP4+, if I don't just grab a roll of Neopan Arcos), is the edge resolution of my Canon 35/2.8, since on the digital cropped it's already distorted at the edge.

But film handles light falloff differently than the more critically-picky photosites on a sensor. The edge distortion may appear more pleasant than what I see on digital.

(On the note of price, ~300 is about what I paid for my second E-M5 mk1 used, same as the first one I had, along with accessories that were included, I'm quite happy with it, but I understand what limitations I may have in getting a specific 'look').
__________________
Karl Blessing
Film (Working RF): Canon 7, Fed-2A, Argus C3, Mercury II
Digital: Olympus E-M5, E-P3
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2017   #59
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 60
Posts: 19,434
Lundrog: 35mm film camera.
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 19:01.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.