Common issues with Canon FD 50/1.4 SSC or bad luck?

[DaveNJ]

Hello everyone,

Digital shooter (and relatively new to the art of photography) that has found an interest in adapting and using older manual lenses. Long story, short...I've bought 3 of these lenses from reputable sellers/retailers and they've all had oily blades and considerable haze. I wasn't fishing at the bottom of the barrel either. Two were so bad the blades were locked up. The other was leaking more than a BMW but functional. Is this just a common issue of this generation of FD 50/1.4 or a string of bad luck? I've had much more success with Konica lenses for example.

Thank you.

 

[koraks]

Welcome to Photrio!
I'm not sure whether this is a notorious problem with this particular lens, but I do know that it's quite common in general with lenses of this age. Especially if lenses have sat around for an extended period of time in a warm place it's common for lubricants (esp. from the focus helicoid) to become runny and the more volatile fractions to find their way onto aperture blades. In lenses of this age it doesn't really freak me out if that's all that's going on; just open them up and clean them out.

 

[DaveNJ]

Welcome to Photrio!
I'm not sure whether this is a notorious problem with this particular lens, but I do know that it's quite common in general with lenses of this age. Especially if lenses have sat around for an extended period of time in a warm place it's common for lubricants (esp. from the focus helicoid) to become runny and the more volatile fractions to find their way onto aperture blades. In lenses of this age it doesn't really freak me out if that's all that's going on; just open them up and clean them out.

Thank you for the welcome and that does seem logical. I was curious if someone took them apart and noticed the "wrong" type of lubrication used or something along those lines. I know for some Helios lenses this was the case but that is a whole different beast.

Taking them apart is above my skill level based on the Youtube videos I've seen. I have taken apart the Konica lenses but those were simpler to work on.

 

[MattKing]

There were a lot of these sold, and a lot of the purchasers were probably low volume users. Their era coincided with the AE-1, which had a huge effect on the market for enthusiastic amateurs.
This and the f/1.8 standard 50mm lens from the same era may have been one of the most common lenses, which probably means there are a lot out there that have spent too much time unused, on a shelf, and often in a camera case - all of which is not good for a lens.

 

[DaveNJ]

There were a lot of these sold, and a lot of the purchasers were probably low volume users. Their era coincided with the AE-1, which had a huge effect on the market for enthusiastic amateurs.
This and the f/1.8 standard 50mm lens from the same era may have been one of the most common lenses, which probably means there are a lot out there that have spent too much time unused, on a shelf, and often in a camera case - all of which is not good for a lens.

Thank you for the background information. I assumed (wasn't around then) f1.4 and faster were aspirational lenses in those times; reserved for the more serious photographers or pros. Meaning better kept...though that doesn't account for all the years since then.

 

[mtnbkr]

Thank you for the background information. I assumed (wasn't around then) f1.4 and faster were aspirational lenses in those times; reserved for the more serious photographers or pros. Meaning better kept...though that doesn't account for all the years since then.

Heh. Pro gear tends to be used harder and treated less well. Pros *used* their stuff...hard.

Shame you weren't a member this summer. I had a near pristine (some minor cosmetic marking on the body, but operationally perfect) FD 50/1.4 SSC listed here and ended up selling it elsewhere.

I think I've owned an example of just about every Canon 50/1.4 lens (rangefinder, FL, FD, and nFD). All purchased used from Facebook Marketplace or eBay and all optically and operationally perfect. Good ones are out there.

Chris

 

[DaveNJ]

Heh. Pro gear tends to be used harder and treated less well. Pros *used* their stuff...hard.

Shame you weren't a member this summer. I had a near pristine (some minor cosmetic marking on the body, but operationally perfect) FD 50/1.4 SSC listed here and ended up selling it elsewhere.

I think I've owned an example of just about every Canon 50/1.4 lens (rangefinder, FL, FD, and nFD). All purchased used from Facebook Marketplace or eBay and all optically and operationally perfect. Good ones are out there.

Chris

I think a lot of the problems stem from sellers not fully testing SSC lenses. Seeing as you have to mount them on a body or adapter for the aperture to function. Either way I'm sticking to buying locally, there should be plenty around these parts....just a waiting game.

 

[lobitar]

I've had to contend with Canon stuff since abt. 'the early middle ages' as I didn't then have the budget to buy Nikon stuff. It's not uncommon for Canon FD lenses to get oily blades, in my experience. I myself have long since given up to try and clean aperture blades by my own devices; rarely stay clean in mho. My advice - return the lenses and try and find a reputable dealer or buy locally.

 

[Andreas Thaler]

Oily aperture blades are a common occurrence, regardless of the manufacturer. The lubricating grease on the helicoids decomposes into oil over the decades.

Temporary cleaning of the aperture blades or complete cleaning of the inner lens tube with new lubrication are the solutions.

 

[DaveNJ]

I've had to contend with Canon stuff since abt. 'the early middle ages' as I didn't then have the budget to buy Nikon stuff. It's not uncommon for Canon FD lenses to get oily blades, in my experience. I myself have long since given up to try and clean aperture blades by my own devices; rarely stay clean in mho. My advice - return the lenses and try and find a reputable dealer or buy locally.

That is indeed the plan. I was told it would cost ~$70-100 US to clean the blades (and relubricate, full CLA) and haze (if possible at all).

Here's the haze on one of the lens. It fully encapsulates the whole element inside the lens, only the middle is clear. Also the rear element has it too.

 

[flavio81]

Hello everyone,

Digital shooter (and relatively new to the art of photography) that has found an interest in adapting and using older manual lenses. Long story, short...I've bought 3 of these lenses from reputable sellers/retailers and they've all had oily blades and considerable haze. I wasn't fishing at the bottom of the barrel either. Two were so bad the blades were locked up. The other was leaking more than a BMW but functional. Is this just a common issue of this generation of FD 50/1.4 or a string of bad luck? I've had much more success with Konica lenses for example.

Thank you.

It is common with this model. You just need to hunt for one without haze. Personally i prefer the New FD version.

The other 50/1.4 lens that tends to suffer from haze is the Pentax-M and Pentax-A 50/1.4. Many, many lenses with haze.

 

[DaveNJ]

It is common with this model. You just need to hunt for one without haze. Personally i prefer the New FD version.

The other 50/1.4 lens that tends to suffer from haze is the Pentax-M and Pentax-A 50/1.4. Many, many lenses with haze.

Sorry for the late reply, thank you for posting this. The Pentax-M was another lens I was considering.

 

[forest bagger]

Sorry for the late reply, thank you for posting this. The Pentax-M was another lens I was considering.

I have to repair such old lenses about two items a week - and about 40% of them have only oily aperture blades, about 30% of them have only hazy lenses, and about 30% of them have both issues.