(slightly OT?) Canon 7 with 50mm f/0.95

[eric_.]

Hello forum,

 

This maybe slightly off topic, but here goes: is there any of you

that has/had such a camera with this lens? How does the quality of

the combo relate to Leica quality? Is a Leica M3 with Noctilux a

better combination? What would be a fair price for this set in exc++

condition?

 

Thanks!

[m_.]

I had a Canon P with the lens before but sold them about 3 months ago to a friend. The combo worked well and I would not think M3 with the lens is a better match. As a matter of fact, since the lens is a screw mount, I would like to think it is more natural to be mated with a screw mount camera such as Canon 7. The lens is not the sharpest, I was told, but it always worked well for me, given the fact that I never really know much about the lens testing.

[m_.]

And I think the combo in good condition is about $500 - $700.

 

Now when I read your posting again, I think given two combos, ignoring the price difference, I would personally pick M3 + Noctilux. It's a no brainer.

[andrew_hall1]

A quick search yields the following threads, among others:<P>

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=0007aX<P>

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=002efS<P>

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00369y

[dan flanders]

The 0.95 Cannon was a novelty sensation when it was introduced years ago, but the Nocticlux surpasses it by leaps and bounds if you can justify the additional cost. Unless you can find one at a bargain price I would suggest that the extra stop is hardly worth its cost. I ran across one with its diaphragm jammed open at maximum aperture which I bought for peanuts. I had no pressing use for the speed but I wanted to see just how goo it was. It is just does not approach the quality of the Noctilux. Originally I intended to have it repaired but never got around to it. I keep it on hand and occasionally use it when available darkness demands the extra stop. I never bought a Noctilux because for its price I could buy a lot more other goodies that I could have more fun with. Nevertheless, if you can justify its cost the Nocti is a superb performer.

[Alex_Es]

Wentong, I'd like to hear more about the 50/0.95 in screw mount. The only ones I have seen have been in the special bayonet mount that could only work with the Canon 7/7S. I had the impression that this was the only version of this lens made. I've seen one with a special adapter mounted on an M5. (The combo is for sale at Naniwa Camera in Shisaibashi, Osaka for just over $4000 if anyone is interested.)

[peter_evans4]

<p>WenTong, are you perhaps thinking of the <a href="http://www.davidde.com/articles/canon5012.html">Canon 50/1.2</a>?</p><p>I've never used any lens faster than f1.4 (or much wanted to), so can't add anything new. If you want the 50/0.95, make sure that it's rangefinder-coupled, I believe that many aren't, as they were made for TV cameras.</p><p>If I remember right, there's a fairly recent (1990s) Fujinon 50/1.2 and Hexanon 60/1.2; both are expensive by Japanese standards (circa <a href="http://www.xe.com/">¥120,000</a> I think) but surely a lot cheaper than the Noctilux.</p><p>Meanwhile, the Canon 7 is abundant and very cheap: between 20 and 25,000 yen here in Tokyo.</p><p>Jim Williams used a Canon 7s and 50/0.95 mostly wide open for this <a href="http://homepage.mac.com/jlw/drags/">photo essay</a>.</p>

[djl251]

I have a lot of very blurry pictures with this lens. At 0.95 - you can't

move, your subject can't move. The depth of field is razor thin and

the OOF area are frankly kind of ugly. Yeah, an M3 and noctilux is

better - and 10 times as expensive.

[m_.]

Alex and Peter:

 

hm...now you are getting me confused. I thought Canon 7/7s is screw mount, not bayonet. Your question challenges me to search for my own sake and that CameraQuest agrees with my memory. Here is what he says:

 

"50/.95 Canon: The fastest production 50mm lens yet made. Reputation for poor sharpness, special bayonet mount to fit only the Canon 7 and 7s, included here as a footnote. The rather small shade is also hard to find."

 

 

on <a href="http://www.cameraquest.com/ltmlens.htm">THIS PAGE</a>

[m_.]

What I meant was that the lens itself is a screw mount and I am pretty sure the lens I had was a 50/.95 unless my momery totally failed me. Human mind is a scary thing. :-)

[m_.]

Well, you two win. I called my friend and the lens is a Canon 50/1.2. Please disregard what I said above. Mind is still a dangerous thing. :-)

[djl251]

The 50mm 0.95 fits the bayonet on the 7 and 7s only. It is not a

screw mount.

[kevin_sarsfield]

Hi, all..

 

Just to clarify a couple of points. The Canon 7/7S/7Sz series were screw mount cameras, as were virtually all of their predecessors. However, since the Canon 50/0.95 was so big and heavy, there was concern that the screw mount was adequate for the job. So, Canon developed an EXTERNAL bayonet mount for that lens, specifically. As others have mentioned, there were LTM 0.95 lenses that were marked as TV lenses (no rangefinder coupling). Some others were modified to be used with RF coupling for Leica M cameras - and are a rarity - hence the price.

 

I owned a 7S and 0.95 back in the late 60's - it was quite heavy and quite soft for most tastes. However, it was also quite the conversation-starter. As others have suggested, the Noct is far superior - but, considering the price, finding a nice 50/1.2 might really be the "poor-man's" Noct. It's really not that bad - and for the price, a bargain.

[dan flanders]

BTW, Cannon called that mounting system �Breechlock� though for all practical purposes it worked the same as the bayonet. <p>

Because of the jammed diaphragm my .95 was sold as a junker. I could not discern any evidence that it had been altered � looked like it had always been screw mount. It is not the TV version as it is identical to the one in the Bell & Howell catalog and is RF coupled. I never use on one of my pre-IIIc Leicas � afraid its weight will distort the camera body.

[patrick_jelliffe]

In the early 80's, I bought a Mint 7s and a Canon .95 for $300 from a reputable dealer in Boston, (and sold it for the same for college tuition not long after ;^(. A fair price today would be $1,200++. For the same dough you can get a nice user M2/M3 and a Canon 50 f/1.2 AND a C/V lens. The 7/7s rangefinder isn't quite up to focusing the .95. You realy nead an M3 or a .85 M6/M7/MP. If it doesn't have the bayonet mount, forget it, as it is not RF coupled.

 

Cheers

[fabio b]

Harry, i think you cannot use the 0,95 on any camera except the Canon 7 - if it's only screw (without ext bayonet) it maybe is a C-mount TV lens, retrofitted, maybe. In my opinion a 0,95 has a so difficult focusing that the rangefinder coupling is not so useful, because, for practical use, in dim light you can only focus at infinite, expecially with a 40 y old rf. Anyway, i would like to have one, and it's not difficult to have it repaired in Italy (they've done a good job with my 1,2/50, so if you want to sell it...