Canon Lens Hood

[wheelie52]

I have just bought a Canon f1.4 50mm screwmount lens #42149 and I need a lens

hood and a cap. Could someone guide me as to where would be the best place to

source these items. It's my first Canon lens and looks great on my IIIg.<div></div>

[raymond_tai]

You can get a generic hood and cap from B&H. The size is 48mm. If you want the original it would be best to try the auction site.

[stuart_richardson]

That's the kind of thing that Kevin Cameras might just have. He is good for collectible pieces.

Don't expect it to be cheap. Do you know the filter size? Chances are that there are some

modern equivalents that would be much cheaper...for the lens cap in particular. Kevin

Cameras is www.kevincameras.com.

[stuart_richardson]

I just checked he does have one (a hood), it is like new and 85 dollars...I told you it wasn't

cheap...

[luis triguez]

Keith: Very good lens you got�

 

If you lucky and find the beautiful one for Serenar you can use it on your lens. It is a series VI 40 mm. I use it with the Canon 35 mm too.<div></div>

[luis triguez]

Here with a Canon 50 f 1.8<div></div>

[luis triguez]

Keith: Very good lens you got -here an admiration mark-

[ronald_moravec1]

I never saw pics of Canon lenses up close before. Externally they look just like a Summitar and Summarit ( not the 1.2).

[christopher_a._junker1]

The late Canon 50 1.4 LTM is a super lens. It is worth the effort and expense to get a hood. As the front element is large and not recessed in the lens mount I use a Canon UV filter for protection and screw the hood into it. I've used the 1.4 Canon since the late 70's with great results, the only problem is the aluminum mount has worn to the point where it is noticeable. Not as sturdy a lens as the 1.4 Summilux but I like the results better. Great lens on the IIIg and even nicer to use on an M body with the LTM/bayonet adapter. Hope you really like it

[billy_da_kid]

I have one brand new (NOS) complete with leather case and box.

It's an all black rare version (no chrome clamp-on ring). Please contact me if you are interested.

[wheelie52]

I had heard they were a good lens .... cost me close to $300.00 US but is like new with no marks on the glass at all! Have sent you an email Billy Da Kid.

[frederick_muller]

Christopher, what is it about the Canon you prefer over the lux?

[christopher_a._junker1]

Frederick, I neglected to mention that my Lux is version 1. I've only shot one roll each of color print and Extachrome in direct comparison with a UV filter and lens hood in place. Stopped down, on prints no larger than 8 X 10 I could see very little difference. On projected slides, the Canon seemed to have a bit more contrast and appeared a bit warmer than the Lux. Wide open on print/slide, I couldn't see any noticable difference. Both are great 50 lenses. My marked prefernce for the Canon, the images being equal, is based on handling. The large barrel and deeper focusing ridges on the Canon make it much easier to focus, especially on the M4-2 when using a Rapidwinder. Using the Canon on the IIIg with Leicavit is a nicely balanced setup. My Lux is not the ultra rare LTM Lux, so a IIIg usage comparison isn't possible. Perhaps someone out on the forum has used both lenses extensively and can add more to this post.