Lens for Canon F1

[steve_bellayr]

<p>Recently I picked up a Canon F1 (which will be going out for foam replacement) but it did not come with a lens. The camera is basically in pristine condition as it was never used. It still had the plastic protector in the film chamber protecting the shutter. I want to match the camera withe appropriate lens or lenses of the early 1970's that would have come with the camera. Since I have not really used Canons what lens would be recommended? Thanks.</p>

[mukul_dube]

<p>FD 50mm f/1.4 SSC. Plenty of other focal lengths to be had in the FD line.</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>I agree, the FD 50mm f1.4 is the best bang for your buck.</p>

[Keith S in Arizona USA]

<p>What Mukul said. The 50mm 1.4 SSC and 1.8 SC are both outstanding quality lenses as are most of the FD series. The nice thing about FD lenses is the market is pretty much glutted with these things now and you can get good deals on eBay. Please be aware that there is an <strong>early-issue 35mm f2.0</strong> that will have a <strong>badly</strong> <strong>yellowed slightly radioactive lens with a thorium-flouride glass element.</strong> <strong>A later 35mm f2.0 will not have that issue.</strong> The yellowed lens can be UV treated to bleach it clear, BUT that does nothing for the very minute amount of radiation. As far as I am aware, none of the other FD lenses have this issue.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>I assume you are talking about the early/first F-1 version. The Canon early 70's FD line are the breech lock (silver ring around the lens base) versions. Later FD lenses employed the bayonet mount (silver button) and dropped the coating type (S.S.C) indication on the lens front.</p>

[steve_bellayr]

<p>According to the serial number is was manufactured in 1974. I assume both versions will fit. Also, what is the model number of the shade/hood?</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>Both versions will fit. <a href="http://web.mit.edu/dennis/www/canon/fd-lens-info.html">THIS</a> chart will be useful.</p>

[paul_wheatland]

<p>1971-1975 some lenses had chrome nose with 55mm filter thread with silver colored breech ring. From 1976 to 1981 the chrome nose was discontinued, because of real or perceived glare. The lenses for 55mm breech mount lenses use w-55 for wide, s-55 for normal and t-55 for telephoto in the lens shade/ lens hood models and bayonet onto the front of the respective lens. The later lens are oFF, and lack the breaching ring and use 52mm filters. I hope this helps to identify the two systems although all lenses interchange with all Canon fd systems.</p>

[paul_wheatland]

<p>CORRECTION: later lenses are nFD and lack the silver BREECHING ring</p>

[jim_bielecki1]

<blockquote>

<p>Please be aware that there is an <strong>early-issue 35mm f2.0</strong> that will have a <strong>badly</strong> <strong>yellowed slightly radioactive lens with a thorium-flouride glass element.</strong> <strong>A later 35mm f2.0 will not have that issue.</strong> The yellowed lens can be UV treated to bleach it clear, BUT that does nothing for the very minute amount of radiation. As far as I am aware, none of the other FD lenses have this issue.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>It’s rumored that the FD 55mm 1.2 aspherical uses thorium (or some radioactive element). I tend to believe this, the view through the viewfinder of my 55mm aspherical is decidedly warm. Some of the earlier FL series lenses also used thorium (like the FL 58/1.2).</p>

<p>My thorium FD 35/2.0 is badly yellowed, but since I use it for only B&W, I don’t care. A superb lens. Image quality wide-open is outstanding. One of my favorite FD lenses.</p>

 

[rick_janes]

Steve, if you want to match the lens' year of manufacture with your F-1 look for a letter "O" prefix on its date code

(typically stenciled in white on a black painted area near the rear element). I concur with the FD 50mm f1.4 S.S.C.

suggestions, an excellent optic!

[mukul_dube]

<p>Further to what Paul said. The names of the bayonet lens hoods begin with "B". Thus we have, for the FD 50/1.4, the BS-55 hood.</p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Another vote for the FD 50/1.4. There are many great FD lenses, but this one probably has the best IQ to cost ratio.</p>

[michael_linn]

<p>Ah, the memories!</p>

<p>I owned a lot of Canon stuff in the 70's, starting with an EF, and Canon lenses from 20mm to 300mm.</p>

<p>The most used lens, by far, was the 28mm 2.0.</p>

[gary_d1]

Just throwing this out to be different from the

50mm crowd. The canon fd 35-105mm f 3.5 lens.

That was my only lens for many years on my F1.

Not bad for a cheapo lens....

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Yes, the 35-105/3.5 is a fine zoom. But the 80-200/4 L is even finer, and probably the least expensive L zoom Canon has ever made. Clean copies of it can be had for $200.</p>

[gary_d1]

Mark. Yes it is. I just picked one up a few months

ago. A bit more than $200., but not that

much....Bill C has posted some nice shots with his sony/80-200 combo. Very nice lens

[mwmcbroom]

<p>I've been a big fan of the original Canon F-1 ever since I bought a well-used one back in 1984. It was the earlier model with the all-metal film advance lever. Steve, if yours was built in 1974, it should be the later model of the original F-1. It has the plastic tip on the film advance lever and a film memo holder on the back. There were other changes/improvements as well, but they're both basically the same camera and they take the same accessories. This later version is my favorite of all Canon cameras. It is a superb photographic tool. You are quite fortunate to have received one in basically unused condition.</p>

<p>Regarding accessories, one thing you should be aware of is that the F-1 was Canon's first system camera. Canon made many accessories for it. Replacement/alternate finders and focusing screens, motor drives and a winder, flash adapters, replacement backs, etc. Diligent internet searching will uncover most of the information you might want or need about this camera, but if you happen to run across one of the Guides Canon produced for it, you'd be well advised to pick it up. I have two of them, with different print dates a few years apart. They're basically the same, but the later one does contain updates. I can't give you the exact titles of the guides because almost all my books are boxed up from a recent move and I've yet to get everything unboxed. But I think they're just called the Canon F-1 Guide.</p>

<p>All FD lenses and most FL lenses (the earlier breechlock style of lens, which preceded the FDs) will fit your F-1. One thing to note, even though a FD lens will mount to the F-1 with it set to "A" (or "O" with some lenses), the F-1 will not function properly with your lens set to that setting. It must be taken off the "A" setting so you can manually change the aperture. Well, this isn't entirely true. If you mount the rather ungainly Servo EE finder to your F-1, you can get it to operate in shutter-priority automation, in which case you would want to set the lens to "A". But since almost nobody actually uses the Servo EE finder, it's a pretty safe assumption to state that you want to make sure the lens aperture is set to a numeric value.</p>

<p>The folks here are recommending the 50mm f/1.4 -- especially the SSC model, which is my personal favorite 50mm, and I also recommend it highly. Every good camera should have at least one good normal lens.</p>

<p>But what about the rest? Well, setting aside zooms for the moment, you'll probably want a good wide and a good telephoto. I personally prefer the 24mm over the 28mm because it behaves much the same as the 28mm, but a good deal more can be included in the frame. So I recommend a 24mm for the wide end. Canon made a 24mm f/2.8 SSC as well as the later nFD 24mm f/2.8, which I highly recommend. For something on the long end, say 200mm, Canon produced a 200mm f/2.8 and a 200mm f/4. The f/4 is usually much cheaper than the f/2.8, both are great lenses optically. The f/4 is quite compact whereas the f/2.8 is a bit on the large side. I recommend the latest nFD versions of these because they have internal focusing, which is quite a bit faster than standard focusing. Now, as for zooms, you'll probabaly get many recommendations so I'll just pass along my two favorites, neither of which are Canon: the Vivitar Series 1 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5 and the Tamron 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4. Both are outstanding zooms. For years, I carried around a three lens kit with one of my F-1s: the FL 19mm f/3.5, Vvitar S1 28-90 and Tamron 60-300. Not exactly lightweight (mostly because cameras and lenses were built like tanks back then), but a very effective kit, I found, that could handle most any situation.</p>

 

[david_carroll4]

Michael I thought the second version of the F-1 (F-1n) was introduced in 1976. A '74 would be the original F-1.

I kitted my original version F-1 with a set of SSC primes (24/2.8, 50/1.4, 100/2.8 and 200/4.0) which cover most eventualities. These lenses are pretty cheap on fleabay. I also tracked down a focusing screen with a split image and a rubberized eyepiece - neither of these were standard on the original, IIRC. Also quite hard to track down

[Keith S in Arizona USA]

<p>david carroll is absolutely right<br>

Here is just a bit more information<br>

First F-1 1974 (uses 1.3 volt button cell in base plate)<br>

Then the second version, sometimes aka F-1<strong>n (lower case 'n')</strong>, has a few slight upgrades (still uses 1.3 volt button cell in base plate)<br>

Then the "<strong>NEW</strong>" and last version, aka F-1<strong>N</strong> (1980's) uses the 6V type 28 battery (in front) and the "New FD" lenses with the dual-aperture row, the smaller rear-most row of which is used for aperture-setting viewing via the camera viewfinder optic. This version also has a thoughtfully built-in (as opposed to former-model separate accessory) viewfinder illumination feature<br>

Sort of odd, weird and confusing that each model actually has nothing more than "F-1" embossed in their bodies</p>

[steve_bellayr]

<p>Thanks for the info on the battery. I never thought about it. I have a criscam converter. I'll try it with the silver oxide 386. Who would you recommend to replace the foam?</p>

[Keith S in Arizona USA]

<p>Foam can be replaced by yourself if you desire. Easy Peasy!<br /> Kurt's Camera Repair, Inc. of San Diego, and Camera Clinic of Sparks, NV are good quality repair shops. They have serviced various Canon and Nikon 35mm SLR's for me. Great people.<br /> These shops have very reasonable service/repair prices. It will likely cost far more to ship your camera to them than the cost incurred for seal replacement.<br /> I just replaced the foam dust seals and mirror cushions in 3 Canon A-1's and it was EASY and fun, too.<br /> You can obtain "seal kits" from Jon Goodman of Dallas, TX. JGood21967@aol.com The kits for my A-1 were $9 each, including a nice, durable bamboo work tool.<br /> This repair is so easy there is no reason you cannot do it yourself. If <em><strong>I</strong></em> can do it, <strong>anyone</strong> can. And even if you mess it up, you have not lost anything because the repair facility would have had to remove the old worn and gummy seals anyway. Don't know what the seal repairs alone would cost from a repair facility, but it is mostly an hour of labor plus maybe $15 (their cost to you) for the seal kit.</p>

<p>Oh, yeah, I almost forgot. See if a Duracell 303/357 will fit your adapter. If not, the thinner 386 should do fine.</p>

[mwmcbroom]

<p>Rather than mess with adapters and a confusing array of batteries, there is a cheap alternative that works very well. The 675 hearing aid battery. It is a zinc air battery that puts out 1.4v, which is close enough to the F-1's 1.35v requirement that the meter will read accurately. Now, zinc-air batteries don't last that long -- maybe 10 months or so -- but the good thing about 675s is they're cheap. I buy a card of 40 of them at Costco for $10. Yep, that's 40 cents each. So, who cares if it only lasts 10 months. Just carry a few spares and toss them when they wear out. Now, the 675 is not the same size as the original 625 -- it's about the same thickness, but it is a smaller diameter. But because the battery compartment in the F-1 contains a spring, this spring keeps the battery centered, so its being smaller in diameter isn't really an issue. Some people prefer to use something to center the battery. About a 1" snippet of 20 ga. wire, coiled into the bottom will do the trick, as will an o-ring of the appropriate size. But it isn't really necessary. I've been using 675s in my F-1s and FTbs for several years and they work great.</p>

<p>Oh, you can get a battery with the right voltage that fits the F-1's battery compartment -- Wein is the brand name and it's a 625 battery, which is what the old mercury one was (not to be confused with the new alkaline or silver oxide 625s that are rated at 1.5v -- too much). This Wein 625 costs about $6 or $7, but guess what? It's a zinc-air battery also and it isn't gonna last any longer than a 675. So, the choice is a no-brainer for me.</p>

[mwmcbroom]

<blockquote>

<p>Michael I thought the second version of the F-1 (F-1n) was introduced in 1976. A '74 would be the original F-1.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Mea culpa, I thought I'd read recently where the claim was made that the F-1n was released in 1974, but according to Wikipedia's write up on the F-1, the "n" was released in 1976.</p>

<p>Not a big deal, though. I owned two of the early model F-1s. They were beaters when I bought them, and I put them through their paces while I owned them, but they never once missed a lick. Darn near indestructible. I love the "pop" the shutter makes when you dry fire it with the back open. I also love the accuracy of the F-1's meter. You could practically calibrate a hand-held meter to it, it's so accurate.</p>

[flavio_egoavil]

<p>Steve, <br /> - The 675 battery will be a perfect replacement and work perfectly on your F-1.</p>

<p>As for lenses:<br /> - There is no bad FD lens. Most FD lenses are really good.<br /> - FD Zoom lenses can be very good but note that many of them rely on internal mechanisms that have rubber parts. These parts can decay with time and the end result is that you have a zoom of way inferior optical performance. A sign of this is that the zoom lens is not parfocal anymore (that is, that focus does not stay stable when changing the focal length).</p>

<p>You will easily find the most famous FD lenses listed elsewhere. But note that there are some FD lenses which were inexpensive, AND they are extremely sharp and good, for example:<br /> - FD 35/3.5 S.C<br /> - FDn 35/2.8<br /> - FDn 28/2.8, FD 28/2.8 S.C.<br /> - FD 100/2.8<br /> - FDn 135/2.8 and FD 135/2.5 S.C.</p>

<p>Also note that the FL versions of the 35/3.5, "50/1.8 II", 55/1.2, and "50/1.4 II" are optically identical to their FD breech lock counterparts, the only difference is that the FD lenses are multicoated (if they say "SSC").</p>