FD 50 1.8 "optimized" construction. Shame on Canon.

I agreed to put up for sale on eprey, on behalf of an acquaintance, a Canon AE-1. Checking out in paranoid mode (on eprey the buyer is always right). Noticed a small fungus on the edge of the lens, apparently on the rear side of the front element.

Proceeded to reach that optical surface. Remove name ring? Friction with large rubber stopper did not work. Drilled two small holes inside the "O" of "CANON" conveniently located at 180° from each other. And after significant torque applied with the spanner, the ring moved. Turns out is was not screwed in the filter ring, but just pressed and glued. Next to remove the front group. According to this blog,
it should have two slots for a spanner. No. The front groups just slide out inside their polymer housing. Looks like polycarbonate. And the front element and second group (two lenses) are just sealed in that housing. With the fungus inside.


So at some point Canon must have optimized the construction of the FD 50/1.8. For reference, the S/N:

The succcessor doesn't make you happy in this regard either:

I recently rolled the dice on a 50mm f/1.4 breach lock S.S.C on eBay. Buyer didn't know much about it, but I got assurances in writing that there was no haze, fungus, scratches, or significant dust on any of the glass elements. When it arrived it had fungus. Just a little. I started trying to take it apart, very quickly realized that the fungus was somewhere in between middle elements, and called it good and returned it.

There are enough 50mm f/1.4s out there without fungus that I think my time is better spent locating one of those than trying to resurrect one.

I would imagine that in the mind of the designer, the revised design means that the elements can be placed perfectly at the factoy and they can't get out of Position.

More importantly: cheaper to manufacture, especially within the right tolerances required.