Thread: Has anyone used Canon LTM lenses?

Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1 Has anyone used Canon LTM lenses? 
    I've seen the Canon LTM 50mm 0.95 Dream lens arise on social media recently. Zero Optik do a rehouse but unfortunately for Leica M mount only.

    I was wondering if anyone has used these lenses for any projects and what the results were like?

    I've seen that theres a variety of focal lengths and generally speaking they're quite fast too! So a set can be built and not too expensively either, which could be a cool quirky option for certain projects.

    Curious to know if I'm the only one thats gotten curious!


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Athens & NYC
    Posts
    207
    I'm curious too :) Are these single coated?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Michael Lindsay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    2,669
    Matthew

    No you are not the only curious one..

    I have some LTM lenses and the 1st one 'the Canon Dream lens (TV/Cine version) is at the begining of being rehoused into LPL by TLS. Even LPL is difficult for the lens as it protudes out the back a little. I have all the dimensions written down at work and can up date you if you like later?

    The OLPF frame will need a tiny tweak to alow the lens to work in LPL with the Monstro but the Venice will be cool and unless you insert the removable ND filters in the LF it should be fine.... I am waiting to hear if the mini LF will be def be cool..

    The same lens designer also did the 35 f1.5 and it is a ok match but I am looking at the possibility of some fairly standard 'detunes' on some later but early FD lens to perhaps create a more complimentary set..

    but I think the 0.95 is probably the one to rehouse and TLS are also (if the project works out) going to improve the min focus and as always TLS do great work!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Lindsay View Post
    Matthew

    The same lens designer also did the 35 f1.5 and it is a ok match but I am looking at the possibility of some fairly standard 'detunes' on some later but early FD lens to perhaps create a more complimentary set..
    Would love to hear where your head's at as far as what FD lenses you're considering.
    Nathan Nichols
    Motion + Edit + Color
    Raleigh, NC

    natype.com / @mynam3isnathan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member Karim D. Ghantous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Melbourne AU
    Posts
    1,741
    As usual, be careful with focus shift. It might not matter to people (mainly photographers) who determine focus of the LCD, but some RF lenses (and no doubt a lot of SLR lenses) are prone to focus shift. It's worse with digital, due to the extremely thin plane of focus.

    For example, the Leica 50mm Summicron M has focus shift from wide-open to f/2.8, but fairly consistent focus from f/2.8 onwards. The solution is to not shoot at f/2, which would be wise anyway:

    https://www.opticallimits.com/leicam...cron50?start=1
    Good production values may not be noticed. Bad production values will be.
    Pinterest
    | Flickr | Instagram | Martini Ultra (blog)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    I researched the Canon "Dream lens" a bit and the knock on it from both stills shooters and video shooters is that when wide open the image is so edge-soft as to be near unusable. Maybe an owner of one can chime in here and let us know if that is indeed the case or exaggeration. But you don't acquire this lens for sharp images. It is said to have a huge focus throw for a still photography based lens. It has a cult following, for sure. The asking price for a copy reflects that cult following, although the prices haven't gone as nuts as for the Leica 50mm f/0.95 Noctilux-M ASPH.

    I believe it is single-coated. There are two versions, the "standard" and the "tv" version. It is claimed that the tv-version has different coatings than the standard version. The tv-version coatings producing a more "cinematic" result, whatever is meant by "more cinematic".

    The standard version was produced in M-mount ( and also L-mount? ), the "TV" version that had a removable c-mount. ( a "removable" c-mount that when removed revealed an M-mount? That, I do not know ). There was never a "Cine" version. Some erroneously call the "TV" version a "Cine" version. I've seen it claimed that the coatings on the standard Dream Lens are different from those on the TV version. If indeed the case, the TV-version isn't just the standard version with a removable c-mount adaptation. The TV-version actually says "TV Lens" on the front:





    This reduser member produced some nice results:




    Dreamy, eh? Here is the reduser thread where I found that sample:

    https://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...ed-Epic-Dragon

    Adapting the lens is difficult because of the size of its rear element and because of how the rear element is mounted-




    still photos using the Dream Lens:



    Last edited by John David Pope; 10-03-2019 at 12:06 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    I had one of these for a while

    As in : https://www.keh.com/blog/living-the-...and-the-eos-r/

    Not on my Red but on a Sony A7s at that point. It's a funky lens, nice, weird swirly bokeh. Quite a long MFD if i remember rightly.

    It made some nice stills but i doubt i'd ever shoot wide open any motion. I think the difference between 0.95 and say, the f1.2 you see these days isn't that great. And with a closer MFD of a different lens you'd get more OOF.

    I've had that, the Nokton f1 and a few other super open and weird and wonderful lenses.

    cheers
    Paul
    -------------------
    insta: @paul.inventome
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    It might be that the look of the lens lends itself totally to Cinematography while being pretty difficult nowadays for photography. I have the Canon LTM 'Japan-Summilux' (so the f/1.4) with an Adapter on my Leica M6 but never seemed to use it more towards digital photography because it's just extremely soft at anything below f/2.8. Which - in my opinion can be an issue with photography - because still frames might demand more sharpness while certain lifelike aspect (like a lens not being overly sharp) lend itself better to cinematography.

    So interesting, I'm wondering what results the 'Japan-Summilux' would produce on a VV/FF-E-Mount camera, adaption to E-Mount for starters is the least of problems...

    With VV angle of view, I guess this is even the type of lens one could should an entire project on.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member Michael Lindsay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    2,669
    Re motion...Yes wide open + close up on a FF sensor is def tricky and pretty niche but wide open slighly further away from the subject is an interesting option...

    There is a Canon book that claims there are 4 versions of the lens witin the 20000 (coupled) + 7000 (TV/CINE) run... been trying to undertand what difference there are other than the couplings etc but it is unclear. Re coatings I held 2 Dreamlenses in my hand once and they definitely looked differently coated but that could just be age...

    PS Jason's test film was instrumental in me investigating this lens
    Reply With Quote  
     

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