Canon 50mm f/1.8 LTM versions?

[Bille]

Is there an optical difference between the earlier all chrome and the later black and chrome models?

For comparison:

This is the older all chrome type:
https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...e2e4b099ad1b67d654/1406513126242/_MG_9170.JPG

This is the newer black and chrome type:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/SUQL68sxHNQ/maxresdefault.jpg

 

[FujiLove]

I'm also interested in this question. The early 'Serenar" version doesn't seem to suffer from the haze problems of the later lens which I've heard has something to do with the glass and/or lubricants used. Different glass would suggest there could be an optical difference, but if it's just the lubricant, then obviously not.

 

[newfilm]

Is there an optical difference between the earlier all chrome and the later black and chrome models?

Yes it is different, I have both, and the newer ones has that ever so slightly sharper image. By the way I think this question has been ask many times and I think rahid from this forum even has comparison for *all* the majority of 50s that he compared and shown with example images.

 

[mcfingon]

In Peter Kitchingman's book "Canon M39 Rangefinder Lenses" it says that the 50/1.8 optical layout by Itoh Hiroshi was the same from November 1951 to March 1975. He lists eight different external appearances but no changes in optics.

 

[ray*j*gun]

In Peter Kitchingman's book "Canon M39 Rangefinder Lenses" it says that the 50/1.8 optical layout by Itoh Hiroshi was the same from November 1951 to March 1975. He lists eight different external appearances but no changes in optics.

That may be, but I believe the coatings are vastly different as the lens matured. That can have a significant impact on the IQ of the lens.

 

[MIkhail]

To my experience it's a low contrast lens (I have a black one), lower than I would prefer anyway... probably will be selling mine.

 

[mcfingon]

That may be, but I believe the coatings are vastly different as the lens matured. That can have a significant impact on the IQ of the lens.

That may well be a difference. Kitchingman doesn't talk about coatings, but the technology changed a lot over the period that the lenses were manufactured.

 

[rajmohan-fotograf]

I have the chrome Serenar - it's heavy and beautifully made. And plenty sharp for my uses.

 

[uhoh7]

Haze varies dramatically in these lenses, some of it can be cleaned, some cannot be reached easily. Also, copy variation has been a factor in lenses from deep in the past to today.

There is also a myth out there that the 50/1.4 LTM varies in formula. I don't think that's the case.

 

[Mackinaw]

......There is also a myth out there that the 50/1.4 LTM varies in formula. I don't think that's the case.

A guy named Randol Hooper did research on Canon LTM lenses several years back that appeared in the LHSA journal. He suggested that the first version of the Canon 50/1.4 had a different optical formula ( 8 elements in 4 groups) than later versions (6 elements in 4 groups). The Canon Museum website and Peter Kitchingman only list the “6 element/4 group” version as being produced.

Jim B.