50/2.8 - huh?

[Hibbs]

Lately...I've seen a couple of Canon 50/2.8 on the online auction sites. One stated that it is a rare lens but was considered an 'econo' model.

What gives?...should this lens be avoided?

Thanks in advance!

 

[back alley]

i've read that it's a dog but have no proof of that.

joe

 

[jlw]

Some people here have said it's mediocre, while the Schneider book says it's excellent. I'm inclined to lean toward the latter. Considering all the other fine lenses Canon made during its late RF era, I can't imagine they couldn't figure out a 50/2.8!

It's uncommon simply because it appeared during the height of the available-darkness era -- and when you could buy a Canon 50mm f/0.95, f/1.2, f/1.4 or f/1.8 at fairly reasonable prices, who would have gone for a 50.2.8 instead?

This is the only late Canon 50 I don't own, and I'd like to have one so I could see how it stacks up with the others. Are there any on the auction sites right now?

 

[bmattock]

Many, if not most, 45/50mm f2.8 lenses are a Tessar-style design, as opposed to a Gauss-style. I could be way wrong, but this has been my observation. Tessar-style lenses are known for their sharpness, and for design reasons I don't claim to understand, they can't go faster than 2.8. Gauss lens design allows faster lenses, but is known (by some) to be 'less sharp' or 'less something'. That is, some prefer the 'look' of a Tessar - others don't.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[Mark W]

there is actually 3 different 50mm f2.8's in the Canon RF line up. All are 4 elements in 3 groups which would be the same as a Tessar design as mentioned above. Tesars if done properly can be great lenses.

You can find out a lot of this stuff on the Canon museum site at:

http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/

That is not to infer you shouldn't ask questions here since I love answering them gives me something to do instead of what ever it was the wife wanted me to do tonight LOL
But the Museum site is so cool it should be a referance for everyone interested in Canon cameras.

 

[back alley]

but the museum doesn't say if it's a good lens or not, does it?
or talk about low contrast vs. high resolution etc.

have you tried the lens? what do you think of it?
i'm curious to hear.

joe

 

[Mark W]

No I only own two 50mm Canon RF lenses both are the same version of the 50mm f1.8 black and chrome. One is beautiful and produces very nice photo's the other just came with my L-1 body and needs a big dent in the filter ring fixed and the internals cleaned as it is currently unusable.

Sorry I could only offer facts about the lens construction (which was being speculated about)

I do have a super nice Leica 5cm f2.8 Elmar which is most likely the only RF 50mm lens I will ever get this slow that doesn't fit a Braun Paxette.

Once I have the extra 50mm f1.8 B&C cleaned up and in good usable condition it will go up for sale to help afford a 50mm f1.4 B&C as soon as I can find one.

I'm really not a big 50mm lens shooter even though I have a WHOLE bunch of them.

The two lenses I'm hoping to pickup this year are the 85mm f1.8 B&C and the 100mm f2.0 B&C of course they should just about suck up my optical budget for this coming year.

 

[cbettis]

I actually had one for a while that came on a "P" that I bought. Above 5.6 it was of fairly good center sharpness but VERY soft at the edges. Below 5.6 you might as well have smeared grease on the front element it was so soft. Unless you need one to complete a collection, this is one to avoid.

 

[back alley]

The two lenses I'm hoping to pickup this year are the 85mm f1.8 B&C and the 100mm f2.0

mark, i have an 85/2 chrome that is very sharp. i intend on keeping this one.
i have a 100/4 which is not bad but not great either. i'd love the 100/2 but they seem scarce and expensive too.

for now, i'm just happy my 35/2 is on it's way.


chuck, now i remember where i heard that the 50/2.8 was a dog...

joe
joe

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I would also like the Canon 85mm F1.8 and 100mm F2. I may end up going for the FL series lenses to go on the Pellix and F1. They are about 1/3 to 1/4 the price of the RF lenses. Those would be my first choice, but if the right FL came along.

 

[xayraa33]

I had a Canon 50mm f2.8 lens (1st style, 2 tone focus grip) , Sold it and bought the F 1.8. My Industar 61 LD was a sharper lens. I just thought my Canon 50 mm f 2.8 was a one off lemon. It should have been tack sharp like any Tessar design. Most if not all Canon RF lenses are generally, very very good.

 

[jlw]

The two lenses I'm hoping to pickup this year are the 85mm f1.8 B&C and the 100mm f2.0 B&C of course they should just about suck up my optical budget for this coming year.

I don't think you'll find black-and-chrome versions of these -- they were very late production, and I think they came only in the almost-all-black finish used on the last lenses. I have a 100/2 and the barrel is finished all in black, except for one thin white-chrome trim ring just ahead of the aperture ring.

Meanwhile, browsing on the Canon museum website, I came across another 50mm oddity! It turns out there were three versions of the 50/2.8, but Canon must not have been satisfied with it either... because in 1961 they introduced a 50mm f/2.2 (?!?!) This is a more sophisticated optical design with five elements in four groups.

I have never seen or heard of the 50/2.2 before, and it's not mentioned in Dechert's book, so it must be extra-obscure! Has anyone here ever seen, heard of, used, or owned one?


[Drat, this means now there's another late Canon 50 I don't own! I have a 50/0.95, 50/1.2, 50/1.4 and 50/1.8, so for a while I foolishly thought I owned all the 50s that were listed as current for Canon RFs when they ceased production... except for the 50/2.8, for which I never looked too hard because of its dubious reputation. Now I discover that while I don't need to track down a 50/2.8 to have a complete set, I do need to uncover something even more hard to find!]

 

[dberger]

I had a Canon 50mm f2.8 lens (1st style, 2 tone focus grip) , Sold it and bought the F 1.8. My Industar 61 LD was a sharper lens. I just thought my Canon 50 mm f 2.8 was a one off lemon. It should have been tack sharp like any Tessar design. Most if not all Canon RF lenses are generally, very very good.

I think you did have a lemon. Perhaps, being a cheaper lens, less quality control was devoted to them and more lemons got through--just a guess though. I have both the old style (art deco, 2-tone grip) and the newer style lenses, and they are very fine. Typical Tessar look: sharp enough wide open, with contrast taking over. Gets progressively sharper stopped down. Nice "round" look to the images, with excellent out-of-focus imagery. As good as the 50s/60s era f2.8 Elmar, but not as good as the 3.5 Elmar. Also not quite up to the 45mm Tessar on the Contessa, but then again, few lenses are.

One thing though: I have seen haze/fog in the Canon 50mm 2.8 lenses more often than in their other 50s. Why? Who knows -- maybe just bad luck? Both of my 50mm 2.8 lenses described above were hazy and needed a good clean before they performed at their best. I recommend them without hesitation.

Cheers,

dsb