Canon FD 35mm f2 lenses...?

Discussion in '35mm Cameras and Accessories' started by gnashings, Jan 28, 2006.

  1. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I know of 3 different variants of this (35mm f2 FD)lens, but would like to get the input of the resident Canon-ologists and FD gurus.
    What I would like to know is the following:
    -how many were there? (I know of the two locking ring, original FD era f2 and f2 SSC as well as the New FD version - is there more?).
    -what were the differences (I know some had the concave front element, for example).
    -which are more/less desireable (from a performance point of view)

    I just spend some time doing research on this lens - and found a lot conflicting reports (especially as to which lenses had the concave element, as well as the pros and cons of that). I would really appreciate it if any of you could clarify this for me or point me to a site that can help (I found the photography in Malaysia site to be a good stand by, but on this subject I found little info, and much contradiction).

    Thanks in advance for all and any help and information,

    Peter.
     
  2. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    18,421
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    I owned the last version--great lens, a real sleeper, and a good bargain now. A few years ago they were going for around $200, and now they're often under $100.

    The early chrome nose with the radioactive concave front element is considered to be excellent for B&W, but can have some problems with color, perhaps due to yellowing of the front element or perhaps due to the design of the lens.
     
  3. OP
    OP
    gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks for the info - so its the chrome nose (earliest version) that had the concave lens? Right there you helped me out - many sources say it was the SSC with the concave element... but I always questioned that as the ones I saw first hand and in pictures appeared to have a regular, convex lens. Thanks for clarifying that, too.

    Peter.
     
  4. cao

    cao Member

    Messages:
    188
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Does the UV bleaching trick work here?

    I know that some have had success bleaching the yellow out of the Pentax 50/1.4 (Super and SMC) Takumars by exposing them to ultraviolet light, and I wonder if that would work with these Canon lenses as well.
     
  5. OP
    OP
    gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Apparently most of the rare-earth glass will "bleach" if exposed to sunlight for a while. Never tried it myself.
     
  6. kunihiko

    kunihiko Member

    Messages:
    242
    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    As far as the Canon Camera Museusm lists, there are 3 versions of chrome nose 35mm f2, a concave s.s.c and a convex s.s.c.
     
  7. OP
    OP
    gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks for that info. See what I mean? Right there we have several versions, which is what I encountered with these lenses. Then there is the New FD version... oy!

    Peter.

    Edit:

    This just in: I went to museum site, and found the info you speak of. When I tried to access it before, on several occasions, I was unable...

    So i guess there is the 3 chrome nose, 2 ssc and 1 New FD.
    Now, I am unable to tell the differences between the 3 chrome lenses, which ssc lens is better (since the newer one is convex... and generally, they do get better as they develop)?
    The only significant difference I can find other than the front element is that the New FD lens has more lenses in more groups...

    So i guess it boils down to this: are the concave lens models worth pursuing for any reasons other than curiousity and the appeal of the unusual? And also, is the New FD model significantly better?

    I DO know that most of these differences will be of purely academic significance, and most likely, be lost on my meagre skills - not to mention the inherent limitations of hand-held, 35mm phtography. But I would still like to know:smile:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 30, 2006