Canon 50/1.8 "Improved" In '58?

[PCB_RF]

I have a copy of an English-language Canon lens brochure, apparently dated 9/58, printed in Japan by Canon. It shows mostly later black-finish lenses. I noticed that the title & copy for the 50/1.8 reads:

"50mm f:1.8 (Improved)

A newly improved-high-speed lens design which reduces spherical aberration to the absolute minimum, eliminating coma and providing an extremely flat image surface. Ideal standard lens for black-and-white and color."


I always thought the 50/1.8 optical formula didn't change during production, so this brochure description leaves me a little confused. I can think of a few possibilities:


1. Better glass types and coatings used in later lenses, but same formula? "New rare-earth glass" and "new Spectra-coating" are mentioned for some other lenses, but not the 50/1.8.

2. "Improved" not compared to the earlier 50/1.8 but to the 50/1.5, which was dropped from the line by '58? Thus the reference to "extremely flat image surface," Planar vs. Sonnar?

3. Actual formula design change some of us didn't notice?

4. Pure marketing hype, not true?

5. Something else I'm missing?

The '58 lineup, BTW, looks like this:

25/3.5
28/3.5
28/2.8
35/2.8
35/1.8
35/1.5
50/2.8
50/1.8 (Improved)
50/1.2
85/1.9
85/1.5
100/3.5
135/3.5
200/3.5 w/Mirror Box

 

[payasam]

Could be marketing hype, or could refer to flat field. I had the earlier Serenar 50/1.8 and was quite satisfied with its performance.

 

[gordonb]

Mike Butkus on his site Here has a copy of this lens manual. This looks like the 50mm f/1.8 III model.

The Canon Lens Museum shows this lens as being first marketed in December 1958 but the weights do not agree.

Dante Stella has some comments on the three different versions stating that they are the same design but the II & III (black & chrome) versions have a "gold" coating on one of the elements which the lens catalog refers to as "amber".

Peter Kitchingman (CanonRFinder here) has some info in his database Here but doesn't distinguish between type II & III.

 

[LeicaTom]

I`m pretty sure in this case it`s marketing hype, but I`ll do a comparison test shoot with my "trusty" chrome one vs a black paint one if someone wants to loan me a lens for the test -

WHO HAS A CLEAN ONE THEY CAN LEND ME FOR ABOUT 2 WEEKS?
(please email me off the board)


I`ll also make sure I pick a very beautiful and interesting subject matter ala PinUp, I have quite a few models here at my disposal

🙂

Tom

 

[lex]

it might be the difference in f-stops... my serenar canon 50/1.8 maxes down at f16 while the newer canon 50/1.8 maxes down at f22

 

[summaron]

Maybe the 1.8 Canon was indeed tweaked and corrected in 1958 for flat field performance, at the expense of something like additional astigmatism ("relieved of a blunder by substituting a sin" Piazzi Smith says in one of Kingslake's books about the reverse tradeoff.)

According to LHSA article a while back, the 35mm Elmar came out in batches that every two years or so were flat field or curved field. Someone else commented that the Summiluxes were slightly recomputed over the years, blunders alternating with sins. Canon may have done the same.

 

[Sonnar2]

They did a complete redesign of the barrel (black alloy instead of chrome brass) why shouldn't they change some glass types to newer (or cheaper) types?

 

[LeicaTom]

I`m pretty sure in this case it`s marketing hype, but I`ll do a comparison test shoot with my "trusty" chrome one vs a black paint one if someone wants to loan me a lens for the test -

WHO HAS A CLEAN ONE THEY CAN LEND ME FOR ABOUT 2 WEEKS?
(please email me off the board)


I`ll also make sure I pick a very beautiful and interesting subject matter ala PinUp, I have quite a few models here at my disposal

🙂

Tom

I`m still wanting to shoot the TEST with both of the Canon f1.8`s , so someone please contact me with a loaner lens for this test - I`ll be using my Canon IIF2 or my Leica M6 for the test bed camera

Thanks!

Tom