That's correct. It was an engineering driven choice. On the Canon breech lock there was no frictional wear between the mating surfaces that determined the registration of the film-to-flange distance. I also very much liked the spring loaded release on the breech lock. Once you placed the lens properly against the body, the locking ring rotated itself automatically, enough to hold the lens on the body securely. I wasn't thrilled by the change in mount and subsequent plastic lens parts, even though Canon was smart enough to make the fit and function of the new bayonet mount 100% compatible with the breech lock. But I moved away from the brand for other reasons about that time anyway.Bentley Boyd said:I have an older breech lock 50mm 1.8 lens as well as the 50mm 1.4 FDn, and I agree Peter the older lenses handle better, and feel better made. As far as I remember I was once speaking to a Canon rep who told me that the idea of the breach lock was that any wear in the lens mount due to prolonged use would be taken up by the breach.
Willie Jan said:there was a (dutch) magazine test a couple of years ago for 50mm 1.4 FA lenses. The pentax came out best!
Hmm. I suppose that wearing clogs and eating Gouda beats wearing Gouda and eating clogs.siorai said:But what do the Dutch know about anything other than clogs and Gouda?
Just kidding. I couldn't resist. It's ingrained ever since having a Dutch roommate. It was hilarious one night, we were watching a standup comic on tv. The comic was doing a typical standup routine, then for no reason at all, he basically interupts his own routine with "And you know what? I hate those damn Dutch people! They're nothing but clog-wearing Gouda-heads!" My roommate (his name is Raimi and was born in Skavening (probably butchered that one, but it's how it sounds) almost blew a gasket. So did I, but just because it was so unexpected and made all the more hilarious by sitting next to the only Dutch person I've known. From that point on, Raimi was a "clog-wearing Gouda-head." It was only reinforced by his penchant to actually wear clogs and eat Gouda (not necessarily at the same time though).
Back on topic though, I love my Canon 50mm 1.4 FD. I'm constantly amazed at the clarity and sharpness of it.
I was taking the Canon rep. to task, about the companys plastic lens barrels ( I was a Nikon user at the time ) he said that to say " plastic" was an over simplification the material had been specially developed, was lighter, and enabled them to fix some of the lens elements in the molten plastic during manufacture making them less prone to shock damage.Lee L said:That's correct. It was an engineering driven choice. On the Canon breech lock there was no frictional wear between the mating surfaces that determined the registration of the film-to-flange distance. I also very much liked the spring loaded release on the breech lock. Once you placed the lens properly against the body, the locking ring rotated itself automatically, enough to hold the lens on the body securely. I wasn't thrilled by the change in mount and subsequent plastic lens parts, even though Canon was smart enough to make the fit and function of the new bayonet mount 100% compatible with the breech lock. But I moved away from the brand for other reasons about that time anyway.
Lee
Bentley Boyd said:...I was just looking at my old Breach lock Canon 50mm 1.8 ssc, and I'm not sure if the lens barrel on that is plastic , does anybody know ?
The term plastic is pretty generic, and in that sense is always an oversimplification. The camera plastics are chosen for a specific task, and the polycarbonate used for many of the body shells is related to the bulletproof canopies used in jet fighters. That said, I still prefer metal bodies and lens construction. I would think that setting the lens elements in plastic would also make them unrepairable. I'm not a big fan of "disposable" construction, and I like to buy for the long term, but I do understand that cheaper construction methods keep prices down somewhere near affordable.Bentley Boyd said:I was taking the Canon rep. to task, about the companys plastic lens barrels ( I was a Nikon user at the time ) he said that to say " plastic" was an over simplification the material had been specially developed, was lighter, and enabled them to fix some of the lens elements in the molten plastic during manufacture making them less prone to shock damage.
I was just looking at my old Breach lock Canon 50mm 1.8 ssc, and I'm not sure if the lens barrel on that is plastic , does anybody know ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?