Any old time FD guys still around

<p>My question is, how many breechlock variations of the 55mm 1.2 lens are there? Looking on the Malaysia site shows only one but I think there might be more. Cheers.</p>

<p>According to the Canon Camera Museum website there were five different 55/1.2 Canon FD lenses. There was the original FD from 1971, the FD SSC from 1973 and three versions of the Aspherical.</p>

<p>Just two, as far as I know. The original FD55/1.2 and the FD 55/1.2 SSC (same optics and mechanicals, maybe a coating change). Look at the Canon Museum site for more info.</p>

<p>I considered the Aspherical versions as a different lens.</p>

<p>Thank you Jeff and Jim, I had forgotten all about the Canon Museum. The lens I am looking at can be identified as an early 71-73 f1.2 not SSC coated. So that poses more questions, any good optically and is it worth anything? </p>

<p>If you're talking about the standard (i.e., non-aspherical) breechlock FD 55mm f/1.2, there were two versions. On the first one released in 1971, the bayonet ring for mounting the BS-58 lens hood is chromed. On the updated SSC version released in 1973, the bayonet ring was painted black. While "S.S.C." only appears on the ID ring of the 1973 version, both lenses have the same SSC multi-coating and should essentially be the same optically.</p>

Graham, surf around for images taken with the earlier FL 55/1.2 and you'll find a substantial body of very pleasing work. I

believe the FD and FL are nearly identical and should give similar results. Neither one ranks amongst Canon's elite on

pure technical merit but if the "look" matches your photographic style they'll deliver!

<p>I have a 55/1.2 FL and two 57/1.2 Konica Hexanons. At or near wide open the Hexanons are better. At f/8 they would be about the same. If you can't get a 55/1.2 Aspherical or a 50/1.2L then you will be better off with either the 50/1.4 FD SSC or the 50/1.4 New FD. They are sharper wide open and better overall while being nearly as fast, lighter and less expensive. </p>

Here's a nice little selection of FD 55/1.2 images from a mirrorless camera:

 

 

I would not bring this lens to a test chart gunfight but it certainly renders artistically! Again, so much depends on your style and vision. Different strokes for different...brushes.

<p>i HAVE 4 EOS FILM BODIES and one eos lens<br>

but an a-1 aei al1 at-1 and a t50 and two t 70's and a selection of lenses.<br>

si I guess I qualify as an old ( i am that) fd mount guy.<br>

I also have a tx adapter and 25mm and 28 mm f?/2.5 lenses</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thank you for all the replies. This whole thing was sparked by a dealer here in the UK listing a near mint F1n with 55mm f1.2. GAS almost got me but common sense has kicked in. I really don't need another F1 and, already have a 1.2L and 1.4 new FD mount lenses. So I will pass on this one. </p>

<p>Which dealer Graham ?</p>

<p>http://vintageclassiccamera.com/index.php?main_page=products_new&disp_order=6&page=4<br>

Not cheap but still there.</p>

<p>Regarding the FL vs. the FD 55mm f/1.2 lenses, Rick Janes is on target. I own both of these lenses. The FD is the SSC, but I used to own the earlier "chrome nose" version. While I owned it, I did some extensive comparison tests between the chrome nose FD and the FL and I could not tell a bit of difference between the two. Now, I'd be willing to bet that the FL's coating is an older type than the coating found on the chrome nose FD, but it didn't carry any weight in the tests I performed.</p>

<p>As a result of these tests, I concluded that the FL 55mm f/1.2 and early FD 55mm f/1.2 have the same identical optical formula. After this, I learned of Canon's museum. Sure enough, the FL and both FD versions have 7 elements in 5 groups with 8 aperture blades, 0.6 meters closest focusing distance and a 0.109 maximum magnification. The FD lenses are physically larger and weigh more, but they all take the same 58mm filter size as well.</p>

<p>I agree that my 50mm f/1.4 SSC is sharper than the f/1.2s I own, but there isn't a big difference, and the f/1.2 lenses are capable of some pretty cool results.</p>

 

Does anyone the AA battery

sequence on Canon F-1 Motor Drive

MF model? I've tried several

variation but still does work.

I'm sure the math combition of +

- or ++, --, -+ are incredbly

large...so I help! The manual on

line from Canon is worthless.

Thanks in advance for your help.

<p>On the inside of the battery chamber just under the semi-circular "battery chamber lock" is an aluminum plate with a diagram of the loading sequence. The MF takes ten AA batteries, with three double rows on the side where the battery chamber attaches to the motor drive unit (for a total of six batteries) and two double rows on the side where the battery chamber lock is located. All six of the batteries in the three double rows should be inserted + side first (i.e., with the + side toward the top of the motor drive). The four batteries in the two double rows should be inserted - side first, or with the + side toward the bottom of the motor drive. The drive must be attached to the camera before it will operate in order to properly short the two switch pins next to the MF's tripod mounting screw. Also note that the drive will not run if the frame counter is reading zero.</p>