Possibly Canon's Earliest Zoom

As promised (or threatened) in an earlier thread, I thought I might try to post some information this year on some of the more notable Classic Manual Focus lenses I seem to have accumulated. I spend many photographic hours using these old lenses on a digital platform, having found that the advent of Mirrorless Digital Cameras opened up a whole new world of experimentation and creativity. Some of the old lenses perform well under the scrutiny of a digital sensor, while others display their failings to a pitiful degree, but they all have their own "character", and very few are totally unusable.

 

An interesting lens arrived a couple of weeks ago, a Canon FL 55-135mm f/3.5 zoom. Here it is in all it's beauty.

 

Canon FL 55-135mm f/3.5

 

As legend has it, this is the very first zoom lens that Canon released commercially for use on SLR cameras, back in March 1964. With a price tag of around $400, it wasn't a cheap item. The company has previously featured a zoom lens for their movie cameras, and I suspect that this lens, in the short-lived Canonmatic R mount, was actually in use a little earlier than it's release in the FL mount, but there's very little information I can find relating to this surmise. It's a very solidly constructed lens, a true two-touch (parfocal) zoom that holds it's focus with changes of focal length. It's construction consists of 13 elements in 10 groups, with a magenta/amber coating.

Front

 

It features a tripod mounting collar, a nicely positive aperture adjustment ring clicked at full stops, and silky-smooth zoom and focus rings, both with a very short throw. It has the old Canon stop-down button at the rear of the lens, and and came packed in a rather nifty little case.

Cased

 

 

The lens didn't survive into the Canon FD era. One commentator has suggested that the quality of components and construction had made it impossible to continue production at a price that consumers were prepared to pay, especially in light of the market explosion of cheap zooms in the 1970's. In use, it's ergonomically delightful, but it's optical qualities are fairly typical of early zooms, with some frightening red/cyan CA's in some situations, and a slight barrel distortion throughout most of the zoom range. It produces very pleasant OOF backgrounds, better than many zoom lenses of the era, but it lacks the sharpness and micro-contrast we expect from modern lenses, naturally enough. However, I like the softer "filmic" look, and I'll post some samples below. The camera involved was a Sony IL-CE 7R.

 

First image I took with the lens, after partial-disassembly and cleaning, using the hand view from my front drive.

Test

 

 

Electric Bike

 

 

We Won!

 

 

Geranium

 

 

Just love the "watercolour" backgrounds these old lenses create. Guess I must be a romantic, at heart. f/3.5 @ 135mm

 

As for the Bokeh...

 

 

The Abandoned Gate

 

 

Thunder Ahead

 

 

Christmas Lingers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Look at the Canon Museum website. Canon's first 35mm zoom was the R55-135mm/3.5 introduced in December, 1963. 15 elements in 10 groups. Cost 49,000 yen.

Thanks, Jim, that's the R mount lens I alluded to, but I couldn't find it on the Museum site. I can't determine if that is the same lens as this, but one would have suspect that it is, though the construction does appears to differ. It would seem unlikely that Canon would have created two 55-135mm f/3.5 zooms in the space of less than a year...Though I suppose inherent differences in the two mounts may have demanded variations. Edited January 14, 2018 by rick_drawbridge

Nice find, Rick. This one seems to get along nicely with the sensors. Thanks for sharing.

Here is the museum page for the R version

 

R55-135mm f/3.5 - Canon Camera Museum

 

Here is the museum page for the FL version. They were marketed only 4 months apart.

 

FL55-135mm f/3.5 - Canon Camera Museum

 

Tomorrow I will look through my magazines to find any info on these lenses.

Thanks Marc! A big help, as usual.

Someplace around here I have an old Modern Photography test of the FL 55-135/3.5 lens. At almost all apertures, it was rated as "adequate."

These old zooms remind us that quality construction was normal at one time. (For a price of course.) I have a Zuiko 50~90 f3.5 for my Pen F, considerably more ratty looking than your Canon lens. Massive and heavy it's not a lens I like to walk around with but sometimes, when you just cannot stand where you need to stand to frame the shot, then I'll mount it up. (With half frame you tend not to frame loose and then crop.)

I'm quite amazed at the complexity of the lens - 13 elements, in 1964.... if I am not mistaken, its contemporary Nikon 43-86 is quite a bit less complex. Then again, this Canon looks to perform a whole lot nicer too :-)

FWIW The lens from Wall Street Camera in 1964 was listed at

55-135mm Zoom Canomatic - ------239.50 new

Here is the Modern Photography test that Jim mentioned.

 

The Canon ad that I found was part of the introduction to the Canon FX camera.

 

Thanks, Marc, these old tests are always fascinating. The accompanying text seems to emphasize just how novel zoom lenses were, at that point in time. The test pretty much confirms my opinion of the lens, especially the "considerable barrel distortion" at minimum zoom! At $327.50 this was an expensive piece of kit, back in 1965, with the accompanying ad showing the Canon FX itself available for "under $250".

Rick, I dunno how much stock one can place in such incidentals, but looking at the photos for the R-series and FL-mount lenses, I see one difference. On the distance scale, the R lens has feet in white and meters in orange -- same as yours. The FL lens has both feet and meters in white. So, are you sure yours is an FL lens? As I mentioned, I dunno how reliable of an indicator scale colors are -- this could be something that was changed during the production run with nobody the wiser. Still, since it was a difference I found, I thought it might be worth mentioning.

Rick, I dunno how much stock one can place in such incidentals, but looking at the photos for the R-series and FL-mount lenses, I see one difference. On the distance scale, the R lens has feet in white and meters in orange -- same as yours. The FL lens has both feet and meters in white. So, are you sure yours is an FL lens? As I mentioned, I dunno how reliable of an indicator scale colors are -- this could be something that was changed during the production run with nobody the wiser. Still, since it was a difference I found, I thought it might be worth mentioning.

 

Well, it certainly has "FL" included in the description on the beauty ring (see pic above) and it's a FL mount ( see pic above of the lens mounted on a Canon A1), so I guess the variations in lettering may simply have happened during the production run.

Ah yes, I missed the FL on the "beauty ring." Many years ago (like about 27) I had one of those zooms for a brief time before a guy who loved FL lenses more than I did bought it from me. At the time I also owned a fairly heavily worn FL 85-300 f/5 zoom, a real bazooka, which I also ended up selling. Never got that big lens out of my head, though. About a year ago or so, I ended up buying another, this one in its original case -- both the zoom and case are in excellent condition. I think it's a really cool lens, and I love the craftsmanship that went into building it. (same goes for your lens too) But one of the cool things I discovered was about the case. It's kinda narrow at the bottom and wide at the top. I got to looking at it one day when I had the lens mounted to an old FTb. So, I got to looking at the width of the case at the top and then looked at the FTb mounted to the lens, then looked at the case again, noticing how far down into the case the lens rested. Then I just dropped it into the case, and sure enough, both the lens and the camera fit perfectly. Now that was cool. The earliest camera with lens case I've ever come across. And that's the way it gets stored even now. There's an FTb more or less permanently mounted to that old 85-300.

Your ‘Thunder ahead’ shot is a cracker!

Really nice report.

Thanks, Stuart and JDM, nice to get a little praise!

Hi Rick

 

This same lens (Serial 17385) was gifted to me. It is in lovely cosmetic and optical condition, with the case and hood.

I would love to take it out for a spin but unfortunately this lens won't stop down.

You mention you took yours apart for cleaning. Is there a guide somewhere that shows how to get at the aperture mechanism for inspection and repair?

 

Gary

Gary, as I recall I went only so far as to remove a couple of front elements, but went no further into the depths of the lens, so I'm sorry I can't be of much help.I think your chances of finding much practical advice on the repair of the lens are rather slim, as it's fairly uncommon, but an hour or so with Google may turn something up. But then, you've probably been there... Good luck, anyway. A professional CLA might be possible, if you feel it's worth the expense.

 

I assume you've tested it when mounted on a camera or adapter? It's hard to get FD lenses to do much of anything when dismounted!