Canon Fdn 35 -70 mm, f 3.5/4.5

[ronwhit]

I recently purchased a Canon Fdn 35-70 mm, f 3.5/4.5 lens at a flea market for $7.00, complete w/ a nice skylight filter. The lens still sported its JCII inspection sticker, and appeared to have been lightly used, if at all. With a "plastic" (polycarbonate?) mount and light weight, it probably was a kit lens for Canon A or T series cameras. I won't be using it to produce 11 x 14's, but expect it will make a good "walking around"/snapshot lens. I've looked for on-line reviews, and those that I have found all note a 52 mm filter size. This one takes a 55 mm filter, which seems to make it a strange exception. Do any of you fine folks own/use this lens, and can you comment on its performance and usefulness? Thanks, ronwhit

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Hmm... 52mm seems right. I don't have that lens, but there is this description at the bottom of the page (as well as other variations):

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/fdzooms/3570.htm#compact

 

[Ozxplorer]

Ron, Theo is correct! The filer size is 52mm. I own this lens and have used it mainly for slide film projection. I think you will be pleasantly surprised to find that it will produce very acceptable 11x14s. A handy “go to” lens... used with auto exposure settings does away with the need for variable exposure readings being necessary because of the zooming aperture changes.

 

[DWThomas]

I also own one, but it's 52mm. I find it great for a walk-around lens as it's light and compact and the performance is quite respectable. The version I have, the attached filter nearly sucks inside the lens barrel at some zoom settings, so I suspect a a 55mm could be iffy. That said, a 52 to 55 step-up ring would be a pretty inconspicuous item -- any chance there is one on your filter? I bought mine second hand from a friend 20 years or more ago, so I have no idea as to its manufacture date.

 

[vlasta]

Canon lenses and cameras has a date code, till now, so manufacturing date is easy to decode.

 

[ronwhit]

Thank you all for your enlightening replies. Indeed, this lens does take a 52 mm filter. It looks like the previous owner had somehow managed to engage just enough threads on a 55 mm to have it catch on the inner lens diameter. Once removed, I could not get it to thread properly to put it back on. (It seems metal filter threads can engage plastic lens bodies if one tries hard enough.) I tried a 52 mm and it worked fine. As DWThomas said, the filter kind of disappears into the lens barrel at some zoom settings, most notably at about 65 mm or so. A 52-55 mm step-up ring would probably make it easier to use a polarizing filter. Thanks! ronwhit

 

[Ozxplorer]

Canon lenses and cameras has a date code, till now, so manufacturing date is easy to decode.

Ron, to find out about Canon lens manufacture dates I suggest you visit this site - https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Lens-Aging.aspx

 

[DWThomas]

Ron, to find out about Canon lens manufacture dates I suggest you visit this site - https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-Lens-Aging.aspx

Thanks - mine has a Y*** number on it which suggests 1984, that sounds reasonable, since I think the EF lenses took over circa 1987. I did do tests on mine that showed some barrel distortion, especially at the wide end, but for shots of mountain scenery, cityscapes, and other vacation topics, it's quite adequate. (I do own the classic 35-105, but wearing that on a strap that canabout cut off the circulation in my neck after half a day!)

 

[vlasta]

How the OP lens compare with FDn 35-70mm / f4.0 ?

 

[DWThomas]

How the OP lens compare with FDn 35-70mm / f4.0 ?

I recall turning up some comments on that with a Google search. The comments said the earlier lens was better optically and perhaps stronger mechanically, but notably larger and heavier.

 

[ronwhit]

Ozxplorer, thanks for the link to determine the manufacturing date for Canon lenses. This particular lens has a 7 digit s/n, 1716150, and a date code of A310, so it doesn't seem to fall into the format outlined on that site. Perhaps the A in the date code refers to 1986, which does make some sense. And the front does say "lens made in Japan". ronwhit

 

[DWThomas]

Perhaps the A in the date code refers to 1986, which does make some sense. And the front does say "lens made in Japan".

Yes somewhere on one of those sites there was a comment that sometimes the leading digit was omitted on the month, if a '0', and they also recycled the letters. "And no one knows what the last two digits mean." Enh, close enough!

 

[Ozxplorer]

Perhaps the A in the date code refers to 1986, which does make some sense. ronwhit

I agree, March 1986 is a possibility as this lens may have been manufactured & sold to support the Canon T90 which started production in 1986.

 

[Craig]

It was introduced in late 1982. They said it was their first zoom to use 3 group zoom, so I think this must have been one of their first computer designed lenses. I had one, as well as the earlier 35-70 F4, and it is quite a bit smaller and lighter than the F4 version. It makes for a great travel lens, and I got some very nice images from it.

 

[benjiboy]

Contrary to popular opinion, largely because the barrels of these lenses are all polymer people discounted them, but these very useful little lenses aren't crap and optically they can produce some very good results, are a useful addition to any Canon FD lens collection.that can be bought for pocket change.

 

[CMoore]

Contrary to popular opinion, largely because the barrels of these lenses are all polymer people discounted them, but these very useful little lenses aren't crap and optically they can produce some very good results, are a useful addition to any Canon FD lens collection.that can be bought for pocket change.

Yeah, i have the older one. It is metal, and 2x the size of the smaller Zooms.

 

[flavio81]

It was introduced in late 1982. They said it was their first zoom to use 3 group zoom, so I think this must have been one of their first computer designed lenses.

Canon used computer for lens design since at least 1968, possibly as early as 1965.

 

[flavio81]

How the OP lens compare with FDn 35-70mm / f4.0 ?

I have a german magazine scan where the 35-70/4 comes out on top of a lot of comparablr zoom lenses of many brands (including the most expebsive ones).

I had the 35-40/4 but mine was worn - basixally the zoom groups rattle and optical performance goes to hell. This is a 2-moving-group zoom which was something that apparently Canon released way before Nikon did (early 1970s, FD 35-70/2.8-3.5).

Thr 35-70/3.5-4.5, which I own in mint shape, is much more compact and lighter. Here Canon lags Nikon - apparently Nikon released a compact 3-group 35-70 before Canon, and this FD followed.

The 3.5-4.5 has good sharpness and high contrast, but it has a bit of distortion at the long side. The f4 had much less distortion!