lenses for Canon 7 camera

[spoolman]

I was given this camera last week without a lens. I've done research on the 50mm Canon lenses for it and they are out of my price range. I was looking to get an M42 to M39 adapter but it would not allow for the autodiaphram feature on the M42 thread lens to work. I was looking to get an Industar 61 lens with M39 thread but I don't know if it would work with this camera and what the quality of the images would be. Any opinions and suggestions would be appreciated.

Doug

 

[Mustafa Umut Sarac]

Uses any Leica thread mount (LTM, LSM, screw mount) lens including Canon, Nikon (yes there are Nikon screw mount lenses), Leica, and the new Voigtlander lenses

reference :http://photo.net/classic-cameras-forum/00WD8e

What can you pay ? Industar is one extremelly good lens but if you try to buy from west europe , you can buy better ones , IMHO.

 

[jimjm]

Doug -

I've got an Industar-22 lens I routinely use on my Canon P and IVSB bodies. Works perfectly fine and image quality is good. Mechanics are not up to par with Leica or Canon screwmount lenses, but hard to beat for under $100.

If you end up shooting with this camera a lot, you may eventually end up investing in some Canon glass. I have the chrome 50/1.8, 35/2.8 and 100/3.5. These are really good lenses for the price, easily the equal of the Leica lenses from the same era, IMHO.

 

[02Pilot]

If you're on a tight budget, the Soviet LTM lenses are the place to start. If you want a known good one (and I would argue that you do, especially just starting out), buy from a reputable supplier - Fedka in NY is one, but there are others. The Industar-61 or the Jupiter-8 are both quite good. The I-61 produces a bit more modern look and has click-stops for the aperture, but is a stop slower than the J-8; the Jupiter has a lovely signature and gives you some extra speed. Hard to go wrong with either.

 

[Fixcinater]

The M42 could be made to physically mount but it would not show focus in the rangefinder. You need "rangefinder coupled" lenses for it to work. No rangefinder lens is going to have auto-diaphragm, it isn't necessary since you aren't looking through the lens like with an SLR.

Either the J-8 or I-61 could work very well as a starting lens and give you more info for your next step into LTM (Leica Thread Mount) glass, or it could be all you ever want/really need.

 

[spoolman]

Thank you all for your advice and input. I noticed an Industar 61 on ebay that is very reasonable so I'll get it and give it a go. It will give me the opportunity to see how the camera handles and let me save up for a Canon or Leica 50mm lens.

Doug

 

[Brian Legge]

Also watch for Jupiter 8 (the ltm format version). They are cheap, plentiful and are excellent performers. The faster and much more expensive Jupiter 3s can be fantastic as well but the wider aperture often reveals the last of precision/consistency in FSU lens manufacturing; many don't focus where you expect. Jupiter 8s, being slightly slower, typically have fewer issues.

 

[mgb74]

Much has been discussed online - with no firm conclusion that I can tell - about the need for shimming FSU lenses to meet the Leica (and Canon) lens to film plane spec.

 

[Xmas]

Canon lenses were better than Leica lenses of the same era.
That is why Canon turned into a giant. The collectors hold up the Leica prices.

The Cosina LTM lenses offer modern lens performance.

The Canon 7 was a pro camera still is if you need a rangefinder.

 

[Lamar]

I use a Jupiter-8, Jupiter-12, and Jupiter-11 on my Canon 7. I've read some people have clearance issues with the edge of the rear element on the Jupiter-12 and the upper baffle in the Canon 7. Mine is very close but it doesn't touch. However it has marks where a previous owner my have tweaked the baffle up just a bit for clearance, or their lens did it.... At any rate the J-12 works fine for me. I've missed focus using the J-11 quite often (even after RF calibrations verified all is right on), mainly when I'm wide open and closer. Not sure if it's me or just the nature of the beast. I tend to use it for longer shots where I can stop down a good bit now.

Here is a link to some shots taken with the Canon 7: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lamarlamb/sets/72157643812720784/

Jupiter-11 PT8220 shots:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lamarlamb/sets/72157642948108493/

Jupiter-12 PT0820 shots:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lamarlamb/sets/72157642947882223/

Jupiter-8 PT3030 shots:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lamarlamb/sets/72157642947530033/

Jupiter-8 PT3100 shots:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/lamarlamb/sets/72157642948041264/

 

[Xmas]

I use a Jupiter-8, Jupiter-12, and Jupiter-11 on my Canon 7. I've read some people have clearance issues with the edge of the rear element on the Jupiter-12 and the upper baffle in the Canon 7. Mine is very close but it doesn't touch. However it has marks where a previous owner my have tweaked the baffle up just a bit for clearance, or their lens did it.... At any rate the J-12 works fine for me. I've missed focus using the J-11 quite often, mainly when I'm wide open and closer. Not sure if it's me or just the nature of the beast. I tend to use it for longer shots where I can stop down a good bit now.

Here is a link to some shots taken with the Canon 7: https://www.flickr.com/photos/lamarlamb/sets/72157643812720784/

Canons with baffle plates frequently have witness marks.
Try any J12 only with the shutter open on B, or risk using a sharpie afterwards.
The J12s have two major versions, early and late.

Note some of the Ja wides will foul the baffles.

I sold my J12 it was an excellent performer but did not clear any of the Canons I had.
YMMV.

My J11 is ok at infinity and close up.

 

[Lamar]

Let me qualify my J-12 then for those that may be interested: S/N is 590XXXX. That would make it a PT0820 according to sovietcams.com

Canons with baffle plates frequently have witness marks.
Try any J12 only with the shutter open on B, or risk using a sharpie afterwards.
The J12s have two major versions, early and late.

Note some of the Ja wides will foul the baffles.

I sold my J12 it was an excellent performer but did not clear any of the Canons I had.
YMMV.

My J11 is ok at infinity and close up.

 

[Xmas]

Let me qualify my J-12 then for those that may be interested: S/N is 590XXXX. That would make it a PT0820 according to sovietcams.com

Mine (j12) was a 73xxxxx from memory note I have six Canon LTM did not clear any... The J12 are ok on any other LTM bodies. A pry bar would have fixed.

Kobalux 21 and 28 mm (and clones) may foul as well.

My 21mm fouls.

The Orion 28mm is ok don't know about the Russar 20mm.

If you need a 35mm for a canon I'd suggest get a good user Cosina Voightlander.

 

[outwest]

I only use Nikon lenses on my Canon;-)

 

[bdial]

I only use Nikon lenses on my Canon;-)

​

A good choice, IMHO.
I have a LTM Nikkor 50 that came on a Nicca/Tower rangefinder. It's stunningly sharp.

 

[Xmas]

​

A good choice, IMHO.
I have a LTM Nikkor 50 that came on a Nicca/Tower rangefinder. It's stunningly sharp.

A Nikkor H in LTM is well expensive compared with the canon kit /1.8 5cm which may be lower contrast but is better off axis.

A late J8 in LTM is peanuts, an early chrome one not much more, both the last easy to find.