Canon SSC FD lens question / confusion

[5stringdeath]

So I understand that the SSC lenses are good, because of the coating process. I also understand that past 1976 or so, the lettering was dropped because all lenses were being coated ...

So my question is, when buying FD lenses, how does one differentiate between a pre-SSC lens and a post-SSC lens if no SSC imprint is present?

Thanks!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

By the time the dropped the SSC lettering, they switched to the new FD bayonet style mount, instead of the earlier breech lock, so any bayonet mount lens except the 50/1.8 is SSC. The 50/1.8 is SC.

 

[5stringdeath]

Ah yea, I just read that somewhere online right before you posted ... thanks for the info!

 

[2F/2F]

AFAIK, all FL and FD lenses with the silver breech lock collar are marked if they are S.C. or S.S.C., even though I believe that by the late 1970s, all FD lenses were one of the two. When the FDn lenses came out, multicoating was such a given that they stopped marking the lenses.

So, if it is a silver breech lock lens, it should be marked, but none of the FDn lenses are marked, even though they all have it.

 

[Jeff Kubach]

What ever the case may be I had good luck with the Canon FD lenses!

Jeff

 

[Yeeski]

Canon did not begin labeling their lenses with the S.C. and S.S.C. designations until March 1973 when the second generation of the FD breech lock lenses began appearing. None of the FL lenses and none of the first generation FD lenses (sometimes referred to as the "chromed-nose" lenses) carried the coating designations. Most of the first generation FD lenses had S.C. coating, but a few had the S.S.C. multicoating from the start. As David noted, Canon deleted the S.C. and S.S.C. markings on the New FD lenses which have the breech-bayonet style mount. While it's true that the FD 50mm f/1.8 lens never received the full S.S.C. treatment, some of the elements in the S.C. and breech-bayonet versions are multicoated. Flare was very well controlled on this lens so it didn't need multicoating on every lens element.

My understanding is that nearly all high quality lenses manufactured after WWII have coated lenses.

 

[benjiboy]

What ever the case may be I had good luck with the Canon FD lenses!

Jeff

It ain't luck Jeff I've been using them for more than thirty years, they were all bought second hand and I have never been disappointed with them, they are better lenses than I'm a photographer .

 

[Jeff Kubach]

Ben, most of my FD lenses were second hand also and like you they are better lenses than I'm a photographer! I enjoy using them.

Jeff

 

[Dennis S]

In my collecting so far I only getting Canon FD-FL glass. I have a few Vivitar series 1 lenses which are choice lenses. I gave away a few of the Non Canon and I haven't regretted it.

 

[benjiboy]

The only none Canon FD lens I own is Vivitar Series 1 70-210 f3.5, it's a great zoom that gives the FD ones a run for their money.

 

[benjiboy]

Canon did not begin labeling their lenses with the S.C. and S.S.C. designations until March 1973 when the second generation of the FD breech lock lenses began appearing. None of the FL lenses and none of the first generation FD lenses (sometimes referred to as the "chromed-nose" lenses) carried the coating designations. Most of the first generation FD lenses had S.C. coating, but a few had the S.S.C. multicoating from the start. As David noted, Canon deleted the S.C. and S.S.C. markings on the New FD lenses which have the breech-bayonet style mount. While it's true that the FD 50mm f/1.8 lens never received the full S.S.C. treatment, some of the elements in the S.C. and breech-bayonet versions are multicoated. Flare was very well controlled on this lens so it didn't need multicoating on every lens element.

My understanding is that nearly all high quality lenses manufactured after WWII have coated lenses.

I can verify this my chrome nosed FD breech lock 35mm f2 Thorium lens which was made in November 1971 isn't marked with SC or SSC.