CSB 5858
Member
Hi Peter,
What are the best Canon RF screw mount lenses, and how do they compare to their screw mount counteparts from Leica and Nikon?
Thank You,
Alex
**********
REPLY: Canon, Leica, and Nikon have all made some outstanding lenses, and I have no intention of belittling the achievements of any of them; therefore I don't care to address the comparison part of this question. As to the "best" Canon RF lenses, I can really only speak from personal experience; among the ones that I have used, I especially appreciated the 19mm f/3.5, the 25/3.5, the 35/2.0, the 50/1.4, the 85/1.8, the 100/2.0, and the last version of the 135/3.5. They're not necessarily the "best", I guess, but they're the ones that helped me most during my professional use of them, and they seemed to me to be the equals of other lenses of their types from other manufacturers.
I must add that I have renamed the thread you began, with the new title "Canon Rangefinder Cameras", so that from now one we can find all the questions and observations relating to this subject in one place. I do want occasionally to post some corrections and additions to my book, too, and this seems like the best title to use for all Canon RF camera matters.
Please excuse my impertinence!
Peter
**********
What are the best Canon RF screw mount lenses, and how do they compare to their screw mount counteparts from Leica and Nikon?
Thank You,
Alex
**********
REPLY: Canon, Leica, and Nikon have all made some outstanding lenses, and I have no intention of belittling the achievements of any of them; therefore I don't care to address the comparison part of this question. As to the "best" Canon RF lenses, I can really only speak from personal experience; among the ones that I have used, I especially appreciated the 19mm f/3.5, the 25/3.5, the 35/2.0, the 50/1.4, the 85/1.8, the 100/2.0, and the last version of the 135/3.5. They're not necessarily the "best", I guess, but they're the ones that helped me most during my professional use of them, and they seemed to me to be the equals of other lenses of their types from other manufacturers.
I must add that I have renamed the thread you began, with the new title "Canon Rangefinder Cameras", so that from now one we can find all the questions and observations relating to this subject in one place. I do want occasionally to post some corrections and additions to my book, too, and this seems like the best title to use for all Canon RF camera matters.
Please excuse my impertinence!
Peter
**********
Last edited by a moderator:
kmack
do your job, then let go
An article to get you started is on Dante Stellas site: http://www.dantestella.com/technical/canoleic.html
Last edited:
pdek
"Dekkam" as was
Canon Rangefinder Cameras & Lenses
Canon Rangefinder Cameras & Lenses
This thread, with the renamed title "Canon Rangefinder Cameras & Lenses", is intended to let us find all the questions and observations relating to this subject in one place. I do want occasionally to post some corrections and additions to my book, too, and this seems like the best title to use for all Canon RF camera matters.
More later, Peter
Canon Rangefinder Cameras & Lenses
This thread, with the renamed title "Canon Rangefinder Cameras & Lenses", is intended to let us find all the questions and observations relating to this subject in one place. I do want occasionally to post some corrections and additions to my book, too, and this seems like the best title to use for all Canon RF camera matters.
More later, Peter
Last edited:
canonchromie
Newbie
Peter,
Regarding the early years (1935-1956) of the Canon RF manufacturing process, why was Canon so lax (lax may not be the correct term here) in their record keeping and manufacturing process, i.e. serial numbers, parts assembly, specific model designations, dates etc? Japan is a country that has been known for it's attention to detail. Thanks.
Ron
**********
REPLY: Hi, Ron! I don't think "lax" is the correct word. Before WW2, Seiki-Kogaku was more interested in making cameras than in bothering to keep track of production (which wasn't yet very large anyway). During that war, record-keeping wasn't very important either, since S-K's main efforts were directed toward making military equipment. After the war reconstruction and getting up and running again took more time and effort than record-keeping did.
As you know, however, records WERE kept from the late 1940s onward; some of them are quoted in my book. Simple production totals go back at least as far as the J and S models, in fact.
For the latter parts of your questions: camera parts were made in batches, and on the finder covering housings serial numbers, which of course had been applied in numerical order during the manufacture of that particular part, were apparently put onto unfinished camera bodies by having the assembler simply reach into a box of finder covers and use whichever one he happened to pull out. Canon DID keep track of model designations, but since they were, after 1950, making several models at the same time, the serial numbers wound up being jumbled among several models that all used the same finder housings.
Japan has been known for its attention to all sorts of things, I guess, and in this case the attention was to production and (hopefully on their part) profits. Can't blame them for that!
Peter
**********
Regarding the early years (1935-1956) of the Canon RF manufacturing process, why was Canon so lax (lax may not be the correct term here) in their record keeping and manufacturing process, i.e. serial numbers, parts assembly, specific model designations, dates etc? Japan is a country that has been known for it's attention to detail. Thanks.
Ron
**********
REPLY: Hi, Ron! I don't think "lax" is the correct word. Before WW2, Seiki-Kogaku was more interested in making cameras than in bothering to keep track of production (which wasn't yet very large anyway). During that war, record-keeping wasn't very important either, since S-K's main efforts were directed toward making military equipment. After the war reconstruction and getting up and running again took more time and effort than record-keeping did.
As you know, however, records WERE kept from the late 1940s onward; some of them are quoted in my book. Simple production totals go back at least as far as the J and S models, in fact.
For the latter parts of your questions: camera parts were made in batches, and on the finder covering housings serial numbers, which of course had been applied in numerical order during the manufacture of that particular part, were apparently put onto unfinished camera bodies by having the assembler simply reach into a box of finder covers and use whichever one he happened to pull out. Canon DID keep track of model designations, but since they were, after 1950, making several models at the same time, the serial numbers wound up being jumbled among several models that all used the same finder housings.
Japan has been known for its attention to all sorts of things, I guess, and in this case the attention was to production and (hopefully on their part) profits. Can't blame them for that!
Peter
**********
Last edited by a moderator:
canonchromie
Newbie
Thanks Peter.
One more question: How and why did Bell & Howell connect itself with Canon (Canon 7). To me, it did not appear to be a "marriage made in heaven". Was it similiar to the C.R. Skinner arrangement? Thanks.
Ron
**********
REPLY: Ron, I don't know very much about the Canon/B&H relationship except from observation. But I do think it was a sort of "marriage made in heaven". Canon had tried and failed to set up its own distributorship: failed from lack of experience in the US market. B&H had been successfully marketing their (largely cine) equipment for a long while, and had the distributorships in place. Remember the excellent Filmo cine cameras: that had been B&H. But by the late 1950s B&H couldn't continue to afford all the R&D and manufacturing costs necessary to make and sell, in quick succession, good 8mm cameras and then suddenly Super 8 ones. They were looking for products to keep them going, and simultaneously Canon had products but needed someone to market them. I imagine that the B&H marketing staff was augmented by a number of Canon people, so that when Canon again became their own US distributor, they had learned a lot from B&H, as well as making a number of useful contacts. The Skinner relationship had been much less of a big thing, basically local/regional: B&H was national. I don't know who brought Canon & B&H together; I believe, though, that it was simply circumstances.
Peter
**********
One more question: How and why did Bell & Howell connect itself with Canon (Canon 7). To me, it did not appear to be a "marriage made in heaven". Was it similiar to the C.R. Skinner arrangement? Thanks.
Ron
**********
REPLY: Ron, I don't know very much about the Canon/B&H relationship except from observation. But I do think it was a sort of "marriage made in heaven". Canon had tried and failed to set up its own distributorship: failed from lack of experience in the US market. B&H had been successfully marketing their (largely cine) equipment for a long while, and had the distributorships in place. Remember the excellent Filmo cine cameras: that had been B&H. But by the late 1950s B&H couldn't continue to afford all the R&D and manufacturing costs necessary to make and sell, in quick succession, good 8mm cameras and then suddenly Super 8 ones. They were looking for products to keep them going, and simultaneously Canon had products but needed someone to market them. I imagine that the B&H marketing staff was augmented by a number of Canon people, so that when Canon again became their own US distributor, they had learned a lot from B&H, as well as making a number of useful contacts. The Skinner relationship had been much less of a big thing, basically local/regional: B&H was national. I don't know who brought Canon & B&H together; I believe, though, that it was simply circumstances.
Peter
**********
Last edited by a moderator:
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
Canon Rapid Winder
Canon Rapid Winder
Hello Peter,
I just want to draw attention to the Canon Rapid Winder, while I`m sort of "new" to the Canon RF cameras
I love the lenses (I have a f1.5 50mm lens constantly on my Leica IIIC) but there`s really no place online I can find information about the Rapid Winder and it`s history, what camera`s it works on etc. etc.
I just worked out a Leitz/Canon trade and I have a very clean winder #137xx and grip, I`m looking for a pretty mate for this base maybe a IIF2 or IIF or IIS2?
Also my f1.5 50mm is #219xx anyway or where I can find dates of when these two items were made?
Thank You
Tom
**********
REPLY: For dating Canon lenses, see Peter Kitchingman's website at www.canonrangefinder.com ; he's in the process of completing a new book, all about Canon lenses. Compare the external details on your lens with his descriptions. Your Rapid Winder will fit onto most any Canon with a serial number between 50,200 and 300,000; that is, any Canon bottom-loader made after the IIB. It may also fit some of the late IIB's as well. I don't have any listing of Winder serials, but yours sounds pretty late to me, maybe 1954 or 55. Thanks for visiting! Peter
**********
Canon Rapid Winder
Hello Peter,
I just want to draw attention to the Canon Rapid Winder, while I`m sort of "new" to the Canon RF cameras
I love the lenses (I have a f1.5 50mm lens constantly on my Leica IIIC) but there`s really no place online I can find information about the Rapid Winder and it`s history, what camera`s it works on etc. etc.
I just worked out a Leitz/Canon trade and I have a very clean winder #137xx and grip, I`m looking for a pretty mate for this base maybe a IIF2 or IIF or IIS2?
Also my f1.5 50mm is #219xx anyway or where I can find dates of when these two items were made?
Thank You
Tom
**********
REPLY: For dating Canon lenses, see Peter Kitchingman's website at www.canonrangefinder.com ; he's in the process of completing a new book, all about Canon lenses. Compare the external details on your lens with his descriptions. Your Rapid Winder will fit onto most any Canon with a serial number between 50,200 and 300,000; that is, any Canon bottom-loader made after the IIB. It may also fit some of the late IIB's as well. I don't have any listing of Winder serials, but yours sounds pretty late to me, maybe 1954 or 55. Thanks for visiting! Peter
**********
Last edited by a moderator:
Revolucion Artistico
Established
I have a rapid winder that fits on my IVS II and I'm pretty sure it would fit on the IVSB. Don't know if that helps.
Black Finish Canon VtD ?
Black Finish Canon VtD ?
http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-Vt-de-luxe-rangefinder-camera-black-chrome-deluxe_W0QQitemZ120146712854QQihZ002QQcategoryZ30027QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
The chromed fittings bother me, along with the black that looks a bit too much like black chrome or anodizing.
but then, for a starting bid of .99 .... with 35/1.8
Stephen
**********
REPLY: I don't think it was originally black either. Seller says to consider it a user; I agree. One of your other responses tells us the lens is a good one; personally, though, I never found it gave me the quality I got from the 35mm f/2.0. Peter
**********
Black Finish Canon VtD ?
http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-Vt-de-luxe-rangefinder-camera-black-chrome-deluxe_W0QQitemZ120146712854QQihZ002QQcategoryZ30027QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
The chromed fittings bother me, along with the black that looks a bit too much like black chrome or anodizing.
but then, for a starting bid of .99 .... with 35/1.8
Stephen
**********
REPLY: I don't think it was originally black either. Seller says to consider it a user; I agree. One of your other responses tells us the lens is a good one; personally, though, I never found it gave me the quality I got from the 35mm f/2.0. Peter
**********
Last edited by a moderator:
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
He says it isn't likely that it's original. I don't believe it's original either. I still like the look of it, though. Very pretty.
W
wlewisiii
Guest
It is pretty for a trigger wind... My wallet is glad it's not a VL model as I'd be badly tempted. And that lens, well, as I love the one I have I'd say that'll be a good user combo for someone.
William
My wallet is glad it's not a VL model as I'd be badly tempted. And that lens, well, as I love the one I have I'd say that'll be a good user combo for someone. William
pdek
"Dekkam" as was
If you want to locate my out-of-print stuff
If you want to locate my out-of-print stuff
Some of you may be interested in reading the monographs that I wrote for John Baird's Historical Camera Publications. They were issued in small printings, and his business was terminated by unrelated events in his life before he could get around to reprinting them. The titles were:
Canon Single Lens Reflex Cameras 1959-1991
Olympus Pen Single Lens Reflex Cameras
The Contax Connection
The Contax S Camera Family
In addition, on the "SONGOFSNOW.COM" website you will find reprints of some of the articles I wrote for SHUTTERBUG and other outlets, under the general title I used during my many years of being a monthly contributor:
The Dekkam Files
The address for all these reissues is:
http://www.songofsnow.com/Peter-Dechert-Articles-s/156.htm
More, including brand-new musings, will be added as we go along: I'm working right now on a new monograph about the very early development of the Canon Hansa cameras.
Enjoy!
Peter
If you want to locate my out-of-print stuff
Some of you may be interested in reading the monographs that I wrote for John Baird's Historical Camera Publications. They were issued in small printings, and his business was terminated by unrelated events in his life before he could get around to reprinting them. The titles were:
Canon Single Lens Reflex Cameras 1959-1991
Olympus Pen Single Lens Reflex Cameras
The Contax Connection
The Contax S Camera Family
In addition, on the "SONGOFSNOW.COM" website you will find reprints of some of the articles I wrote for SHUTTERBUG and other outlets, under the general title I used during my many years of being a monthly contributor:
The Dekkam Files
The address for all these reissues is:
http://www.songofsnow.com/Peter-Dechert-Articles-s/156.htm
More, including brand-new musings, will be added as we go along: I'm working right now on a new monograph about the very early development of the Canon Hansa cameras.
Enjoy!
Peter
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
......hummm nothing to say about the Rapid Winder?
Also is there anyone in INTERNETLAND who has access to Canon production serial numbers of camera bodies and lenses built before 1960? I can never find anything that`s firmly established as the Leica numbers are
Tom
Also is there anyone in INTERNETLAND who has access to Canon production serial numbers of camera bodies and lenses built before 1960? I can never find anything that`s firmly established as the Leica numbers are
Tom
Last edited:
pdek
"Dekkam" as was
To Leicatom
To Leicatom
You didn't read the "Read This First" page/"thread". If you ask me a question, I edit the answer directly into your original posting with the prefix REPLY -- if you go back to your question on this thread, you'll find your answer has been there for quite a while, unseen and unnoticed.
That's the way I work, and that's why I posted "Read This First".
Sorry 'bout that,
Peter
PS _ there was no firm differentiation between models and serial numbers. My book can give you some general guides, and it's still available.
To Leicatom
You didn't read the "Read This First" page/"thread". If you ask me a question, I edit the answer directly into your original posting with the prefix REPLY -- if you go back to your question on this thread, you'll find your answer has been there for quite a while, unseen and unnoticed.
That's the way I work, and that's why I posted "Read This First".
Sorry 'bout that,
Peter
PS _ there was no firm differentiation between models and serial numbers. My book can give you some general guides, and it's still available.
Last edited:
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
pdek said:
opps...there`s another reason to get my eyes checked
thanks Peter!!!!
(ohhh seems Peter Kitchingman`s site is down at the moment)
Last edited:
W
wlewisiii
Guest
Oh, that Canon SLR monograph looks tasty. I had been meaning to ask if you knew of anything like that as I like all of my Canon toys Thanks for making these available!
William
Thanks for making these available!William
pdek
"Dekkam" as was
To Peter K
To Peter K
Dear Peter,
I received and answered your message about Canon history books and their importance this morning. Then one of the forum administrators decided that the whole forum database was corrupted and reverted everything back in time by 24 hours, erasing not only your message but several others and a totally new thread that another participant had opened.
Your message was important and deserves to be sent again. I'll answer it again, and maybe this time it'll hold up!
Sorry, Peter D
IF ANYONE ELSE HAS POSTED A MESSAGE THAT ISN'T HERE ANY LONGER, PLEASE POST IT AGAIN! Thanks
To Peter K
Dear Peter,
I received and answered your message about Canon history books and their importance this morning. Then one of the forum administrators decided that the whole forum database was corrupted and reverted everything back in time by 24 hours, erasing not only your message but several others and a totally new thread that another participant had opened.
Your message was important and deserves to be sent again. I'll answer it again, and maybe this time it'll hold up!
Sorry, Peter D
IF ANYONE ELSE HAS POSTED A MESSAGE THAT ISN'T HERE ANY LONGER, PLEASE POST IT AGAIN! Thanks
harry01562
Registered semi-lurker
Canon history
Canon history
I would also like to see Peter's question (and your answer), as I'm an avid collector of history, and camera history. I've always jumped into the books before exploring any hobby, and it has been to my benefit.
Sadly, some of the best books on Canon are apparently in Japanese... what a surprise. My knowledge of any language, including English, is sadly limited. Possibly the new book by Peter K., after the lenses book which is slightly overdue, will take the place of some of these.
I'm getting older by the day, Pete. Please publish while I can still read
Harry
**********
REPLY: Thanks, Harry. Peter K. listed five books: Hayato Ueyama's (entirely in Japanese, and dealing only with the very early Canons); Yoji Miyazaki's (Yoji was for quite a while the "official" Canon photo historian and was editor of the super-detailed history (of every kind of camera so far produced) that Canon published for internal dissemination only in connection with its "50th Anniversary" in 1987; but later Yoji issued a book on the RF cameras which does include a condensed section in English but deals only with the cameras, whereas the Japanese sections also deal with lenses and accessories; Jacob Deschin's 1967-67 book about the new VT-type cameras but which also includes some small discussion of earlier Canons); John Baird's monograph "The Japanese Camera", a history of Japanese camera and optical development up to about the second World War (I hope to be able to reproduce this on the songofsnow website sometime fairly soon; John and I have discussed it but won't decide till he returns from Europe in a week or two); and my book on Canon RF cameras. To his five I added the above-mentioned 1987 "official" history, if you can find it. That was it, at least so far; I did take some issue with listing the Deschin book, which is not really a history. Also I might add any recent edition of Jim McKeown's guide.
Peter
**********
Canon history
I would also like to see Peter's question (and your answer), as I'm an avid collector of history, and camera history. I've always jumped into the books before exploring any hobby, and it has been to my benefit.
Sadly, some of the best books on Canon are apparently in Japanese... what a surprise. My knowledge of any language, including English, is sadly limited. Possibly the new book by Peter K., after the lenses book which is slightly overdue, will take the place of some of these.
I'm getting older by the day, Pete. Please publish while I can still read
Harry
**********
REPLY: Thanks, Harry. Peter K. listed five books: Hayato Ueyama's (entirely in Japanese, and dealing only with the very early Canons); Yoji Miyazaki's (Yoji was for quite a while the "official" Canon photo historian and was editor of the super-detailed history (of every kind of camera so far produced) that Canon published for internal dissemination only in connection with its "50th Anniversary" in 1987; but later Yoji issued a book on the RF cameras which does include a condensed section in English but deals only with the cameras, whereas the Japanese sections also deal with lenses and accessories; Jacob Deschin's 1967-67 book about the new VT-type cameras but which also includes some small discussion of earlier Canons); John Baird's monograph "The Japanese Camera", a history of Japanese camera and optical development up to about the second World War (I hope to be able to reproduce this on the songofsnow website sometime fairly soon; John and I have discussed it but won't decide till he returns from Europe in a week or two); and my book on Canon RF cameras. To his five I added the above-mentioned 1987 "official" history, if you can find it. That was it, at least so far; I did take some issue with listing the Deschin book, which is not really a history. Also I might add any recent edition of Jim McKeown's guide.
Peter
**********
Last edited by a moderator:
Mackinaw
Think Different
Peter,
A different kind of Canon history question. Do you know the names of any of the lens designers responsible for some of Canon's high-speed lenses? Specifically, I'm wondering who actually designed the 50/0.95 lens? We tend to get so wrapped up with the technical aspects of photography we forget that there are names of real people who designed and engineered this great, old Canon rangefinder gear we like so much.
Jim Bielecki
**********
I'm sorry to say I don't know the answer. Peter Kitchingman is putting the final touches on his book about Canon RF camera lenses, and he may know. His website is canonrangefinder.com (which someone said recently is down again; it has had its ups and downs), and his e-mail address is peterk@canonrangefinder.com. Of course you're correct in saying that we would like to, and even perhaps ought to, know who designed what, but it has long been Canon official policy to view all developments as the result of group efforts, and they seldom if ever give special note to any one person. Peter
**********
A different kind of Canon history question. Do you know the names of any of the lens designers responsible for some of Canon's high-speed lenses? Specifically, I'm wondering who actually designed the 50/0.95 lens? We tend to get so wrapped up with the technical aspects of photography we forget that there are names of real people who designed and engineered this great, old Canon rangefinder gear we like so much.
Jim Bielecki
**********
I'm sorry to say I don't know the answer. Peter Kitchingman is putting the final touches on his book about Canon RF camera lenses, and he may know. His website is canonrangefinder.com (which someone said recently is down again; it has had its ups and downs), and his e-mail address is peterk@canonrangefinder.com. Of course you're correct in saying that we would like to, and even perhaps ought to, know who designed what, but it has long been Canon official policy to view all developments as the result of group efforts, and they seldom if ever give special note to any one person. Peter
**********
Last edited by a moderator:
brobbins
Established
Canon SII CPO Designation
Canon SII CPO Designation
Hi Peter,
I recently acquired a Canon SII (marked "Canon" not "Seiki Kogaku") engraved with the letters CPO in a diamond. (The very fine camera case that came with the camera also is embossed with the letters "CPO".) I understand that the CPO designation predates the use of "EP" on cameras sold in PX's to US forces, but I do not know how common or uncommon the use of the CPO designation is on Canon SII's. Do you have any data or thoughts on the incidence of the use of the CPO designation on Canon SIIs?
Thanks for your help.
Best regards,
Brett
P.S. I am not sure if you responded to the question above about differences between the first and second versions of the 35/2 lens. I too would be interested in the answer to this question.
Canon SII CPO Designation
Hi Peter,
I recently acquired a Canon SII (marked "Canon" not "Seiki Kogaku") engraved with the letters CPO in a diamond. (The very fine camera case that came with the camera also is embossed with the letters "CPO".) I understand that the CPO designation predates the use of "EP" on cameras sold in PX's to US forces, but I do not know how common or uncommon the use of the CPO designation is on Canon SII's. Do you have any data or thoughts on the incidence of the use of the CPO designation on Canon SIIs?
Thanks for your help.
Best regards,
Brett
P.S. I am not sure if you responded to the question above about differences between the first and second versions of the 35/2 lens. I too would be interested in the answer to this question.
pdek
"Dekkam" as was
Cpo
Cpo
Hi, Brett,
The CPO designation on Canon S-IIs is not particularly uncommon: you'll find it on many that were made in the late 1947 to 1949 period. But I have no database on it, so can't tell you what exact percentage of S-IIs were so marked. It would be unusual, however, to find it on a Seiki S-II, though I believe a small number of these cameras do exist, probably cameras made before the name-change to Canon but unsold until the next year.
I did respond to the question about the 35mm f/2 lenses: so far as I know, it is only a cosmetic change in the lensmount, not an optical change. It's one of Peter Kitchingman's designation/distinctions, I believe. He's the Canon lens guru!
Thanks for getting in touch, Peter
Cpo
Hi, Brett,
The CPO designation on Canon S-IIs is not particularly uncommon: you'll find it on many that were made in the late 1947 to 1949 period. But I have no database on it, so can't tell you what exact percentage of S-IIs were so marked. It would be unusual, however, to find it on a Seiki S-II, though I believe a small number of these cameras do exist, probably cameras made before the name-change to Canon but unsold until the next year.
I did respond to the question about the 35mm f/2 lenses: so far as I know, it is only a cosmetic change in the lensmount, not an optical change. It's one of Peter Kitchingman's designation/distinctions, I believe. He's the Canon lens guru!
Thanks for getting in touch, Peter
brobbins said: