Canon FD 50mm F2 Lens Value?

Discussion in 'Canon FD' started by ryan_zarra|1, Apr 12, 2010.

  1. I just recently acquired a FD 50mm F2 Lens at a thrift store. It's in amazing condition.
    I've been searching the internet and found no information on it? I am curious to what is it's value.
    Supposedly it is very very rare.
    If anyone can tell me how much the value of this lens is worth I would appreciate it.
  3. SCL


    I can't tell you a value,because there seems to be little knowledge or demand. However it was mentioned some time ago in one of the main Canon FD sites:
    If you really want to know its value, put it up for sale on the big auction site...the market will determine its price.
  4. I got a minty example of this lens a few weeks ago for about $10, and there was a clean and functional AE-1 attached to it. The lens has very little monetary value, but that doesn't mean it isn't any good.
  5. awahlster

    awahlster Moderator

    It was a cheapened down F1.8 sold as a kit lens on the AV-1 for a year or two. A way to peddle some cameras in discount stores I believe.
    Image quality on it would be the same as the F1.8 but as to value WHY?
  6. I'm not sure. It just seems that it's very rare, so I was assuming it would have a high marked value. I guess I'll just e-bay it and see what it goes for.
    PS: FD Primes look amazing on the Video!
  7. I've been trying to get a 50/2 for a bit and I can tell you that they are certainly quite scarce in the UK. A nice one will go for a little bit more than a 50/1.8. which means a little bit more than not very much at all...
  8. Konica had a similar situation. Its last standard lens was the 50/1.8 which think was made for them by Tokina. It had a barrel with metal parts and a rubber cover around the focusing ring with the standard diamond pattern. At a camera show I found what looked like and was a cheaper version of this same lens. It was still a 50/1.8 but the barrel was all plastic and the diamond pattern on the focusing ring was molded when the piece was made. I later learned that this version of the lens was sold in overseas markets and was paired with the Cosina-made TC-X. It seems to take the same pictures as the metal barrel version. Pentax had a different situation. It wanted a sheaper standard lens to sell with its less expensive models. From what I can tell, the 55/2 S-M-C-T and SMC lenses are identical to the 55/1.8 versions of the same lens but have a f/2 marking. The same is true of the 55/2 SMC Pentax K mount lens.
  9. The usual 50mm/1.8 version is readily available, inexpensive, and very good. Except maybe for the collector interested in completeness for its own sake, there would be little demand for the 50mm/2.0 lens.
    On the other hand, there is some evidence on this forum that completeness for its own sake might appeal to many enthusiasts!
  10. I resemble that remark! Well, not quite. I too once read that this lens is a 50/1.8 whose maximum aperture was limited by the diaphragm, sold as a kit with one of the automatic bodies.
    It has no particular virtue beyond scarcity; beware of those who would bill it as something spectacularly valuable. I once saw one hyped as a "50mm f1 2: lens--note the space. Its aperture ratio is of course 1:2, but the seller was clearly hoping people would read it as "1.2". Apparently someone did. The lens eventually sold for several hundred dollars, about as much as a 50/1.2L. Caveat emptor.
  11. These days even the 50mm f/1.4 is cheap enough that I suspect there's little value for slower 50mm lenses except for "completionist" collectors. "Rarity" translates into "valuable" only when there is a demand for the item.
  12. Slower Canon and Nikon F1.8 or F2 lenses are usually alot better than their faster F1.4 brothers/sisters for closeups with extension tubes; macro; bellows usage for copying slides
  13. awahlster

    awahlster Moderator

    The Canon 50mm f1.8 was one of the best lenses Canon had in the S mount, R mount, FL mount, and FD mount. They made damn sure of it cause in about 80% of the time it was the first lens a photographer would be using. AND that judgement would set the stage for the photographer to decide if they would buy more lenses.
    I have a pair of Black and Chrome Canon 50mm f1.8's made in the late 50's and they can shoot head to head with any prime lens in the business. Cute little buggers they are. It takes a lens like my 50mm f1.2L to out class them for IQ. And compared to my 5cm f2.8 Elamr and 5cm f1.5 Summarit they are sharper and have a MUCH better coating. IMHO
    So a Sharp Contrasty well built good 50mm f1.8 was the salesman for the companies Lens line up from the time Canon quit using Nikon lenses after WW II when they got access to the the German lens formulas (brought to them by the British and Americans). Canon Knew that if they wanted to sell more lenses they better have a damn good sample to set the hook.
  14. Here's the #1 rule of any collectible: Rarity does not(by itself) make something valuable.
    The main determinant of collectible value is something called desirability: whether or not collectors want it. Rarity can(and often does) make something desirable. More important, though, is generally both the perceived quality-as with L series lenses-or uniqueness, such as the 80mm 2.8 Soft Focus. Any way you cut it, collectors(and most photographers on here are that-whether or not we want to admit it) just aren't really interested in a lens that's perceived to be a cheaper version of an already inexpensive lens.
    I could sit here all day and give you examples of rare items that aren't valuable. I collect old American-made pocket watches. Right beside me at the moment, I have two watches, both of fairly high quality. One is a Hamilton "Railway Special" 992B, a very common(total production of over 500,000) made from 1940-1969. The other is 21-jewel, 12 size Hampden "John Hancock" in an unusual variation(button setting). This particular watch was made around the turn of the century. The total production of the 21-jewel, 12 size John Hancock was 4,000. Only 500 of those were button set, like mine.
    The common Hamilton currently has a market value of anywhere from $300-400. I'd be lucky to get $150 for the rare Hampden, simply because there's basically no collector interest in them.
  15. Perception is a huge part of the value deal. I still own several versions of the FD 50 f/1.8 lenses, and several iterations of the FD 50 f/1.4 lenses. To me, the f/1.8 versions are fine lenses for their bargain basement price, but compared to the 50 f/1.4 versions (all things considered), they are pretty much door stops, and not so much cheaper in price to even consider. That's the way the world turns, I guess....
  16. The Canon FL 50mm/1.8 lens has a front element well-recessed into the lens body, so a lens hood is pretty unnecessary. Also, this lens can be easily set to manual aperture, which helps in doing macro work when the lens is reversed and/or mounted on non-automatic extension tubes or bellows.
    The FD "chrome nose" and the earliest FD S.C. 50mm/1.8 version also feature a recessed front element, but are less easily set to manual aperture.
  17. I've owned and tried a number of FD 50 f/1.8, 1.4 and SSC versions, and consider the f/2 version to be as good and sometimes better than the others -- based on informal subjective judgment. The f/2 version is the smallest, lightest, least sensitive to flare, and also the cheapest. IMO it's worth keeping and actually using, although I wouldn't pay much money for one.

Share This Page