Canon 0.95/50 Converted to Leica M-mount...

<p>(This Canon "TV" lens was converted to a Leica M-mount. I think it has a pleasing 'OOF' and it is quite 'sharp' @ ~ f/2.8. Do others have example photos from this conversion?)</p><div></div>

<p>(next)</p><div></div>

<p>I have 2 - the first is at f0.95 (cat) really pretty soft, by f1.4 (dog) things sharpen up at the point of focus while still pretty well blurring the background, by f8 it was razor sharp across the field. Sold the lens for a Noctilux, but really have to say I didn't like it either for the work I do - much prefer a Summilux or Summicron.</p><div></div>

<p>Here's the second one.</p><div></div>

<p>I have this lens, though not M-converted. I use it on Canon Model 7's and like the results. You have to have the rangefinder calibrated exactly if you want to use it wide open. </p>

<p>I must say f2.8 covers a lot of focusing error.</p>

<p>The shot of the dog at f1.4 is excellent.</p>

<p>I think the "softness" in the cat shot at f0.95 is an impression that comes from the lighting. Raise the contrast a bit and I think you will find the cat's whiskers quite sharp. The cat's eyes, on the other hand, look outside the plane of focus. So what were you focusing on? If you were focused on the whiskers, tres cool, but if you were focusing on the eyes, your rangefinder might be a "hair" out of alignment.</p>

<p>With fast lenses like this, "impressions" created by the background, flare, and general lighting conditions can mislead one about the true resolving power of the lens. For example, if you have a cluttered background that is oof and distracts from a small subject in the center, the impression of the photograph will be soft even thugh the subject is razor sharp.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>This was shot at f.95 from 3 feet or so. Around minimum focusing distance. I think it looks soft ...</p><div></div>

<p>But there is nothing wrong with the focus. I had focused on the the eye of the figurine on the waterspout ...</p><div></div>

<p>I'm not happy with the shot because the background is busy and overwhelms the main subject. The lens' minimum focus distance kept me from going in close and framing as tightly as I wanted. But it's an impression and an effect ... not a deficiency of lens quality.</p>

<p>Taken with a converted TV 50/0.95. Job by Ken Ruth. Probably wide-open (or near it).</p>

<p><img src="http://gallery.leica-users.org/d/220684-2/Civil+War_0_95.jpg" alt="" width="640" height="497" /></p>

<p>Jim B.</p>

<p>the militia shot stunning.Lens way better than i remember..i had a special adapted Canon f1.2.Friend borrowed it and returned with front element totally ruined. Sold it to a guy who had a good front element and lousy helicoid unit. it was soft. it was equal to Noctilux except in contrast. the militia shot could do with more contrast.my opinion.TY for sharing.</p>

<p>The American Civil War (?) 'renenactment' is a good photograph.<br>

I just don't like the appearance of the OOF point-light sources. <br />It is 'personal taste.' I do own and use, possibly too many, 'hi-speed' lenses that perform similarly. For me, all of them 'abrade' the otherwise gentle background blur. It is for this principle reason that my '~F/1' lens is not my day-to-day 'go-to' lens even though it is very sharp at smaller f/stops.<br>

Does anyone else share this broad perspective? i.e., 'high-speed' lenses are not satisfactory, wide-open, where there are OOF point light sources.<br>

(Unless, of course, the 'donuts' are part of a 'pleasing' composition. Personally, I am still trying... smile...)<br>

So, early morning or cloudy or overcast days are fine but 'wide-open' in bright sun doesn't 'work.' I haven't take a photograph by the light of a 'single candle' in years.</p>

 

<p>Yes the picture was at a Civil War reenactment. The Canon 50/0.95 is really not that bad of a lens. I too believed the somewhat negative internet chatter about this lens until I bought one myself and had it modified to fit the M mount. I'm more than pleased with it's performance, especially wide-open.</p>

<p>As for the bokeh, you are right that bokeh is personal taste. I like bizzare bokeh so have no problem with what I see in the photo.</p>

<p>Jim B.</p>

<p>Hello all,<br /><br /> I want to sell my dream lens, great condition, no fungus, no scratches, just e few specks of dust (not visible in the pictures). The lens does not have caps.<br /> I also include two adapters: C-mount and EOS-M mount.<br /> The lens can be viewed/tested in Bucharest/Romania or London/UK.<br /> My price: Euro 2,500 (including a mirrorless Canon EOS-M, brand new, less than 100 shots) negotiable.<br /><br /> If anyone interested, please let me know and I'll send some pictures with the lens.<br /><br /> All the best and a 2014 full of great pictures!<br /> Alex</p>