Canon 50mm f/2.2

Bingley said:
Yes, the filter thread is 40mm. Although I have a couple of old Canon 40mm filters, they’re hard to find and may not be in as good condition as modern filters. My solution has been to use a 40-43mm step ring on each of my Canon lenses, and then use new 43mm filters. I also use generic 43mm hoods.
Click to expand...

Hello
Thanks
I have been trying to find a step up adapter but no luck.
It looks like "filterfinder.net" is gone, unless they have changed websites.
I ordered some Tiffen Series 6 40mm adapters but find out that they are a different thread pitch.

I have a skylight filter off of my Canon 1.8 and still have to find my 1.4 lens to see what it has on it.

If anyone has a source for the correct step up I would appreciate a lead, I have found a couple of Canon filters on the bay but they are high and I want to try to find something different, if not I will break down and spend the money.

Thanks
Don
 
45govt said:
Hello
Thanks
I have been trying to find a step up adapter but no luck.
It looks like "filterfinder.net" is gone, unless they have changed websites.
I ordered some Tiffen Series 6 40mm adapters but find out that they are a different thread pitch.

I have a skylight filter off of my Canon 1.8 and still have to find my 1.4 lens to see what it has on it.

If anyone has a source for the correct step up I would appreciate a lead, I have found a couple of Canon filters on the bay but they are high and I want to try to find something different, if not I will break down and spend the money.

Thanks
Don
Click to expand...

Hi Don,

There is an ebay seller named heavystar, who is currently selling a 40-40.5 step up ring. I’ve purchased many things from him in the past, although not so much since he started selling on ebay. But you might want to take a look... 40.5 is the thread mount used by vintage Zeiss and Nikkor lenses and also by the Minolta M-Rokkor 40/2.0. In other words, filters in 40.5mm mount are readily available (I buy mine from B&H). So a 40-40.5 adapter could be the solution for you.
 
 
Sonnar Brian said:
On the 50/1.8: the optical formula changed around 1956, a new SN of 2000001 is the cross-over.
Click to expand...

Hi Brian! Interested in this comment. How did the optical formula on the 50/1.8 change? Your comment is the first I’ve seen regarding a change in optical formula...

If the formula did change around 1956, it’s interesting... and puzzling ... why Canon brought out the 50/2.2 in 1961, only to discontinue it after 6 mos. Does the 50/2.2 have a different optical formula than the 50/1.8 of the same period?
 
Canon used their new high-index of refraction/ low-dispersion glass that was used in the Canon 50/1.2 and others. This is why the newer lenses suffer from etching problems- over time the newer glass reacts badly with the lubricants outgassing. The older Canon 50/1.8 and others of that vintage used a more durable glass. I have very clean examples of both versions of Canon 50/1.8, shooting the two side-by-side, you can see the improvements.

The 50/2.2 is a 5 element lens, and I'm speculating it uses the older glass. The elements are big compared to the 50/1.8.
 
This is a Double-Gauss design, 1-2-1-1 layout. The third group typical of a 1-2-2-1 double Gauss has been combined into a single element.

Canon 50mm F2.2 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

Canon 50mm F2.2 by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

The Bokeh on this lens is very smooth.

Canon 50/2.2 test, Wide-Open by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr

Peter Kitchingman's book on Canon Rangefinder Lenses has a wealth of information, a must. But it can be an expensive read. I have Eleven different Canon 50mm lenses, and it's all Peter's fault. I picked up a Canon 5cm F2 from the late 1940s, finally found a perfect-glass 50mm F1.2 and late 50mm F1.8.

Canon 50/2.2 test, Wide-Open by fiftyonepointsix, on Flickr
 
Thanks, Brian. I have Peter Kitchingman’s book and have actually purchased several lenses from his collection, including the copy of the 50mm f2.2 pictured in the book. Although the exterior of that lens is very worn, the glass is quite good. I also have the 50mm f1.8 in the first version chrome and black, and my experience w/ that lens matches your description. I’ve had to have the lens cleaned a couple of times in the time I’ve owned it. The glass is presently quite clear, but I expect haze will return in time.
 
My wife asked what I wanted for Christmas- went for a collapsible 5cm F3.5, beautiful condition. That gives me the 5cm F3.5, 5cm F2, 50/1.9, 50/1.8 chrome, 50/1.5, 50/2.8, 50/1.2, 50/1.8 black/chrome, 50 1.4, 50/2.2, and 50/0.95. Not the most expensive book that I've bought... Bob Rotoloni's book on Nikon Rangefinders ended up costing me more. My 50/2.2 is a good bit lower SN than the lowest observed in the book (10537), and everything appears as described- so I believe 1 version of the F2.2 lens made.
 
Sonnar Brian said:
My wife asked what I wanted for Christmas- went for a collapsible 5cm F3.5, beautiful condition. That gives me the 5cm F3.5, 5cm F2, 50/1.9, 50/1.8 chrome, 50/1.5, 50/2.8, 50/1.2, 50/1.8 black/chrome, 50 1.4, 50/2.2, and 50/0.95. Not the most expensive book that I've bought... Bob Rotoloni's book on Nikon Rangefinders ended up costing me more. My 50/2.2 is a good bit lower SN than the lowest observed in the book (10537), and everything appears as described- so I believe 1 version of the F2.2 lens made.
Click to expand...

Good for you!! I’ll be interested how the collapsible 5cm f3.5 compares to an Elmar 5cm f3.5. My favorite Canon 50 remains the 50/1.5, although the 50/2.2 could give it a run for its money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
50mm lens for the Leica CL (film)
Replies
13
Views
387
splitimageview
splitimageview
N
Canon LTM 35mm f2, Canon 35mm f2.8, Jupiter 12 - opinions on these lenses?
2 3
Replies
45
Views
10K
titrisol
titrisol
R
Where to get 3rd party lens hood for Canon Serenar 50mm f1.8?
Replies
9
Views
379
kodachrome25
K
E
canon 50mm f1.5 Sonnar type on leica monochrom
Replies
1
Views
79
plexi
plexi
aoresteen
Voigtlander 50mm f/1.0 For Nikon SP?
Replies
7
Views
382
former member
F
Back
Top Bottom