Chrome Nose Lenses

[david_thrower]

Hi Everyone,

 

I am a real fan of Canon FD kit and for all my "fun" photography (I

am a full time photographer and use digital capture for all my work)

I use my T90 and A1 - mainly for black and white stuff.

 

My real passion is for the old breech lock lenses, particularly the

SSC designated lenses. I have a couple of the really old chrome nose

lenses - a 50mm f1.4 and 35mm f2 that take really crisp images.

 

I would be very grateful for any feedback from anyone who has any of

these chrome nose lenses. There is something about these old lenses

that I really like and I would love to hear anyone elses experiences

of useing these.

 

Best regards,

 

Dave Thrower

[jim_murray2]

I have a 50mm SSC,28mm SC, and 135mm SC lenses that I use with an FTbn.

I bought the same focal length chrome nose lenses for my son, and shot film with each before turning them over to him. I did not a/b any of

the lenses but felt that the earlier chromes performed well enough that

I could have kept either set for myself. If there are differences, I

can't tell. Jim Murray

[dave_s]

Is your 35/2.0 the celebrated chrome-nose 35 with the concave front glass? Said to be a helluva lens, and has a bit of a cult following.

[pensacolaphoto]

Dave,

It's a "glowing cult", since the lens has radioactive material in it :-)

[david_thrower]

Hi everyone,

 

Thankyou all for your replies.

 

Yes my 35mm is the concave front element lens with the radioactive gas inside (although I haven't started to glow just yet!). T I picked this lens up for around 80 UK Pounds a couple of years ago and I bought it mail order from a magazine advert. When it arrived it had a lovely Canon Skylight filter on it (a chrome one) but the lens blades had some visible damage to them inside the glass and the lens had clearly been opened up and a repair had been attempted. Also there is a very visible yellow tinge to the image that I now know is common with this lens and apparantly can be cured by leaving the lens in full sun for a few weeks (which living in England is almost impossible). Having said all this I love this lens and I use it for black and white photography and I love to results which are sharp and contrasty.

 

I am always looking out for these chrome nose lenses as I love the feel of them. My 50mm 1.4 CN is pin sharp.

 

Best regards

 

Dave Thrower

[john_shepherd1]

I have used the 50mm f1.4 chrome nose on an A1 and have always been delighted with every aspect of the performance, except the weight! I now use a 50mm f1.4 nFD on the A1, considerably lighter.

 

To further enhance the retro experience, I have just bought a FTb (manufactured at around the same) to use the chrome nose lens on.

[robin_sibson1]

At the beginning of the 70's I bought the original F-1 and some chrome-nose pre-SC/SSC-labelling lenses. The 24/2.8 was not very good, but the new-style FD that I later repaced it with, which was a different optical design, was excellent. The 50/1.4 was not very good either; I think this was the last generation of mass-market relatively cheap 50/1.4 lenses. By the time my 50/1.4 was stolen, I had bought the (very good) breeech-lock (but black-nose) 50/3.5 macro, so I did not bother to replace the 50/1.4, but I believe there was a later design of breech-lock 50/1.4 that was much better. The 100/2.8 was a brilliant lens, and I kept it until I changed to EOS in 1990. I also had an early (1973) 200/4 contemporaneous with the chrome-nose lenses, and replaced it successively with the SSC version and later with the new-style FD version, and none of them were up to much.

[robin_sibson1]

Incidentally, I think it's radioactive glass (thorium), not gas! The idea of a lens full of radon is really scary!

[User_502260]

I have seven chrome front Canon FD lenses in my collection. One of these, the 24mm f/2.8, is an S.S.C. model even though it has the chrome front. I took it to Essex Camera Service and I was told that over the years they had seen several chrome front FD lenses with the S.S.C. marking. I mention this because I am skeptical about the claim that the early chrome front lenses were not multicoated. By examining the front element of chrome front vs. black front breech lock lenses I can't see a difference. Other camera manufacturers had fancy names for multicoating. Asahi used the famous Super Multi-Coated Takumar wording. Tamron has BBAR [broad Band Antireflective Coating]. Konica had Color Dynamic Coating. I think Canon wanted to jump on the banwagon with its own fancy name. I also have FL lenses and they definitely look different when it comes to the color of the coating.

 

I can't comment yet on the performance of the 24mm f/2.4 lens because it is being serviced and I haven't used it yet. According to the literature I have as well as camera magazine tests from the 1971/1972 period, the 24mm f/2.8 lens had floating elements and gave excellent performance. I have some of the chrome front lenses in versions which I do not also have in black front form. These include the 28mm f/3.5 and the 35mm f/3.5. I still find them to be very decent performers. The 50mm f/1.4 and 100mm f/2.8 lenses are models I have in both chrome front and black front. The chrome front and black front 50mm and 100mm lenses perform equally well. The 135mm f/3.5 chrome front lens is very heavy but I like it more than the black front model I have because it has an eight blade diaphragm. The black front breech lock 135mm f/3.5 lenses have six blades. You have to remember that the early chrome front lenses date from 1971. The 135mm f/3.5 chrome front lens dates to 1970 according to the Canon Camera Museum website. If you are using anything this old then condition will make a difference too.

[david_thrower]

Hi Jeff,

 

Sounds like a great collection of lenses you have.

 

Where do you find the chrome nose lenses to buy?.

 

I know this sounds daft but even though the image quality may be better on the newer FDn lenses and the EF lenses I just prefer to use the old breech lock kit - especially the chrome nose lenses.

 

Best regards

 

Dave Thrower

[User_502260]

The chrome front lenses turn up on eBay and at places like Cameta Camera and KEH. When FD lenses are on eBay some of the photos of them are done with flash. If the flash bounces off of the front of a lens at just the right angle then even a black front lens can look like a chrome front model. The chrome front lenses are chrome over brass. The later black front lenses not only looked different, they were different. The barrels were switched to aluminum. This saved weight and manufacturing costs. Most of the early black front breech lock lenses were identical optically to the chrome front ones. If you like lifting weights try carrying around an F-1 body with four or five chrome front lenses.

[dirk_dom]

Hi, Dave

 

It's fun to read of someone with a passion of lenses.

 

I have 22 FD lenses, from a 15 mm fish - eye to a 500 mm, and 7 camera bodies for FD lenses.

 

I discovered that there's no difference in quality between a chrome- nose lens and a lens with the new mount.

 

Let's review my chrome - nose lenses.

 

15mm F 2.8 S.S.C fish - eye

Has three built - in filters for B&W. A lens of exceptional quality. Focuses almost up to the front glass.

 

20 mm F2.8

A good lens, but I also have the 20 - 35 mm L zoom, which is a lot better. The 20 mm gives a lot of ghosts when used at night, the zoom none at all. Colour saturation is a lot better with the L zoom.

 

35 mm F2 S.S.C Bought this one at a flea market for 30 dollars. Focuses to I think 30 cm, a very fun lens to use. Mechanically of very high quality.

 

55 mm F 1.2 S.S.C. ASPHERICAL. Always dreamt of having this lens, and now I have it. Exceptionally beautiful lens. Lots of glass. Use it for portraits, pastel colours and sharpness are really exceptional. Indoors, with a 400 ASA film, I made shots at 1/500 with the lens wide open.

 

100 mm F4 S.C. macro. This lens has taken tens of thousands of shots, has taken a few falls, and is indestructible. Looks very worn, but optically perfect. Very good colours. Used it underwater for my macro shots. This lens shows that you don't need S.S.C. for very high quality

 

135 mm F 2.5 S.C. Bought it on Ebay for $ 60 or so, haven't really used it yet.Looks great, has a built - in sunshade. Used to have an 135 F 3.5 S.C., and that one wasn't a very good lens.

 

That's it,

 

Regards,

 

Dirk.

[User_502260]

You have a 135mm f/2.5 FD SC lens with a chrome front? I have never seen one of these. Mark Wahlster e-mailed me copies of some old Canon brochures and one of them does show a 135mm f/2.5 FD lens with a chrome front. From the angle that the lens is shown it is not possible to see whether the letters SC appear. If you can post a photo of this lens I would love to see it.

[dirk_dom]

Re: Chrome nose 135 F 2.5 S.C.

 

I'm sorry, but I don't have any digital equipment, so I can't show you a photo of this lens.

 

You can see one if you google "canon FD lens", then pick "Canon FD lenses - main index page" Then you are on the site. Pick "135 mm F3.5"

scroll to "older FD lenses"

 

There you see the chrome - nose 135 F 2.5, there is even a photo with sunshade extended.

 

As I said, I haven't tested this lens yet, but it looks really nice, and it's a lens with a lot of glass, especially the built - in sunshade is very good.

[g_rard_morris]

Hi Dave,

I have a chrome nose f1:1,4 50mm, and have recently purchased a chrome nosed f1:2 35mm which has not yet arrived.

I'm not too pleased with the 50mm, which does not have SC or SSC marking, albeit that the lens looks absolutely new. The results don't look good above 8x10 (inch) enlargements, and I was expecting better.

I've ordered the 35mm after reading so many great reviews, so let's see when it arrives.

That said I'm perhaps hard to please, because only one of my 50mm lenses seems to be sharper and that is the Color Yashinon on an old Yashica Electro GSN.

By the way can anyone tell me if all the chrome nosed 35mm lenses were made with thorium glass?

Regards Gérard