Soviet LTM lenses and a Canon LTM on a Canon VL2

<p>The other day I had tested a Canon T50 camera and had a spectacular failure (4 negatives on a roll of 24). So when I wanted to check out the Jupiter-8 lens so kindly sent to me by Kris Bochenek, I went back to an old favorite location where I had not shot for a long time.<br /> I decided to take the pictures with my whole "library" of LTM normal lenses:<br>

<br /> Jupiter-8 5cm f/2 from Kris (Thanks so much).<br />Industar-61 52mm f/2.8 FED 4b<br />Industar-26M 5cm f/2.8 FED-2<br />Canon 50mm f/1.8 from Japan on eBay</p>

<p><br /> I shot all of these on my 'new' Canon VL2 rangefinder, a camera I am coming to like more and more the more I use it.<br /> The location was a set of Illinois Central steam locomotive coaling towers that are actually quite famous, as a Google™ of "Illinois Central Coaling Towers Carbondale" will reveal.<br /><br />I had shot these a few years back as a part of a "Hopper in Carbondale" project (no pun intended).</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Here are my "Leica Thread Mount" cameras.</p>

<div></div>

<p>(I didn't try to use the "Elmar" on the gold "Swedish Army Leica" since I knew from earlier shooting that it abounded in "Leica glow" probably from oil on the inside lens surfaces. Must remember to clean that lens some day, or try to. )<br>

So here are the coaling towers with the Kris-provided Jupiter-8 on my Canon VL2</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

<p>Here the same with the Industar-61 (a 52mm f/2.8 lens)</p>

<div></div>

<p>Moving along, a shot with the Industar-26M from my red FED-2</p><div></div>

<p>Finally, the same towers taken with my Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens</p><div></div>

<p>I'm not sure I'd try to make too much of the color balance, the scanner seems to choose slightly different balances, and I should have, but didn't, turn off the AWB.</p>

<p>I then took some shots of the RR debris lying about (this is near the former site of the roundhouse, and still used for keeping track maintenance equipment)</p>

<div></div>

<p>More rails with the the Industar-61</p><div></div>

<p>and still more rails - Industar-26M from the red FED-2, but on the Canon VL2 here.</p><div></div>

<p>and not rail against you any longer - the rails with the Canon 50mm f/1.8 Type I (orig. Serenar)</p><div></div>

<p>Years ago (more than 50), I worked one whole summer with a Leica III in the field. It did not "scar me for life", but neither did it leave me with much desire to acquire and use Leica equipment. I am, however, beginning to think that maybe if I would jump ahead to the M3 model.... ? ? ?</p>

<p>Maybe next year in Wetzlar, eh?</p>

<p>That's more than enough, and even though the water tower didn't come into it, the coaling towers did.</p>

I enjoyed the photos, JDM, but your post begs the question.

 

Do you have a Leica screw mount body?

<p>Are you joking, or am I missing something? I am Swedish, you know<br /> All 4 of the cameras above are "Leica screw mount" bodies. All work as well as can be expected and the Canon VL2 works superbly. :)</p>

<p>I guess MY body is probably still Nikon F mount after so many years of twisting that one around.</p>

<p>Oh,</p>

<p>if the connection/URL will work, here is a picture taken in 1953 when all the parts of the towers were still intact and in use (IC was a late user of steam locomotives):<br /> http://flbtrain.smugmug.com/Railroads/FALLEN-FLAGS/Illinois-Central/23850418_qfdXsV/2056789191_k7bzMCn#!i=2056789191&k=k7bzMCn&lb=1&s=A</p>

<p>I tried it and it seems to work right now, anyhow.</p>

<p>Sweet, love that Canon, and a nice lineup of LTM lenses. Can't pick a winner here, you may be able to give us your impressions as they all look fine to me.<br>

I'm glad that you have a Leica screwmount body as mine is more Argus brick these days!<br>

That gold "Leica", what can I say...totally speechless! Also the "new" tower is a definite improvement over the old one!</p>

<p>JDM, you have a gold "Leica" but I saw some "original" Nazzi black ones for only 150 Washingtons. I'm glad the lens got there in one piece and I see you put it to good work.</p>

<p>Thanks Kris, it works just fine. I couldn't have done it without you.</p>

<p>That I wouldn't have done it without you, is a cross you just have to bear. ;)</p>

<p>The only thing "rare" about my golden (and rosewood cover too!) "Leica" is that it has the three Swedish crowns rather than Göring Luftwaffe presentation inscriptions. I think I got it for about US$125 from the FSU, and it's money that (unlike many other things) that I have never regretted. It was like that $2 red ringed 72mm UV filter, when I saw it, the magpie in me took over. ;)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Awwwk, shiny thing, GET</p>

</blockquote>

<blockquote>Awwwl. shiny thing, GET</blockquote>

<blockquote> </blockquote>

<p>Are you sure you have nothing from Eurasian Magpie?</p>

I should have been more specific, JDM. I intended made by Leitz Camera.

 

I grew up across the street from a steam engine repair facility of the New York Central, and I loved the huffing and

puffing. Railroads have a charm far exceeding aircraft despite having worked for Boeing for a quarter century.

 

My maternal grandfather was proud to have been a conductor on the Czar's railroad.

 

I now suspect your background is more SIU than U of I. I was stationed at Scott AFB on two occasions.

<p>Ah, I see. No, as I said, I'm thinking about jumping ahead to the M3 mount, if I can overcome the sticker shock, but doubt I will ever acquire a LTM Leica, proper.</p>

<p>Enjoyable post, JDM. I never got around to collecting any LTM gear, although I few times I almost went for an Canon 7 with the 50mm f1.8. All I have is M mount and not much: A Minolta CLE with M-Rokkor 40mm f2 and a 90mm f4 Elmar C. Good images, BTW. Thanks for posting.</p>

<p>For the record, all on Fujifilm 200.</p>

<p>Thanks for the view of Carbondale sights and the comparison. I lived in Thompsonville in the 70'sand 80's while in coal mining so it takes me back. I once had a Leica IIF with a horrible F2.0 lens (Summar) and quickly sold it-Had a new M3 with Summilux in 1960 but really was used to using a Contaflex so bnever saw the advantage of this marque. Currently have a decrepit old Zorki 1d with Jupiter 8 and the lens is superb. Also have a Fed 2. BUT I am an unregenerate SLR person and will remain so.</p>

<p>As for comparison of quality. Hmmm..<br>

Was hoping that everyone would see in the 700-pixel images what pleased them to see; and I wouldn't have to deal with it, BUT</p>

<p>I'd really like to think that the Canon 50mm f/1.8 is the best. Since it cost me 10X more than the next most expensive lens in this comparison, it would be pleasing if it [is,were].<br>

Honestly though, they are all pretty darn good. When I looked at the scans of the negatives at 100% there was nothing that I could see that made one or the other stand out. There are so many other variables including my accuracy of focus and the effects of diffraction at the small apertures that, well, this is not a scientific test, afterall.</p>

<p>If I were forced to rank them, I'd have to put the Canon first, followed very closely by the Industar-61. Then the Jupiter-8, and at the bottom, the Industar-26M.</p>

<p>I have a suspicion that if the interior lens surfaces were cleaned, they'd all be better. Don't know what was used in lubricants in them, but it may have vaporized and redeposited a little on some lens surfaces.</p>

<p>That's what is supposed to have happened to many of the Canon "Type II" lenses and their listings on eBay frequently have that flaw mentioned.</p>

<p>I just found a Canon 35mm f/2.8 LTM Type II (black and silver), so I am hoping it will be nice and clear.</p>