Canon 50mm F2.8 lens for best color?

[Canon7SzGuy]

I was reading Canon literature from the 1950's and it suggested that for color film the best lens to use is the Canon 50mm F2.8. I was just wondering why that might be and if anyone has had experience with this lens?

 

[Robert Lai]

Maybe that was the only lens available in that focal length at the time that was coated. I've seen in reading literature of that era that "color" lenses mean single coated lenses as opposed to uncoated lenses from the pre-war era.

 

[raid]

Most likely, what Robert has said above. Such old claims are gone now, and what was labeled as "best" for color may be right for Canon lenses on that year this claim was made, and maybe not.

 

[ForestCap]

I was reading Canon literature from the 1950's and it suggested that for color film the best lens to use is the Canon 50mm F2.8. I was just wondering why that might be and if anyone has had experience with this lens?

The 1955 50/2.8 is Canon's first M39 lens that does not use the "Serenar" brand name. However I dont know if there were improvement on lens coating made in 1955.

I like the colour from my 50/2.2 (a "misnomer" lens made from 1961 on). On the other hand, these are scanned colour negatives so the "colour signature" of the lens is probably lost:

EDIT: the lens has a yellow-gold coating reflection colour. Similar to the Olympus PEN-F lenses made later in the 60s.

 

[Mackinaw]

I've never used this lens, but it's a Tessar. Magenta coating, according to Peter K's Canon rangefinder lens book.

Jim B.

 

[raid]

The color rendering in the three images above looks very similar to what I get with a Zeiss Tessar 50/2.8 that originally was made in M42 mount.

 

[Canon7SzGuy]

Thank you all for the information. The photos from nukecoke have just beautiful color and takes me back to that special look of film. Growing up with Canon SC lenses it's hard to imagine a time when lenses weren't coated. I may be incorrect but it appeared that non coated lenses provided more contrast for B&W film than those that have a coating.

 

[Corran]

I may be incorrect but it appeared that non coated lenses provided more contrast for B&W film than those that have a coating.

Coating increases contrast (through less flare overall) regardless of film used.

 

[pepeguitarra]

Agree with the coating comment. There is another famous lens that came wit the Asahiflex (precursor of the Pentax cameras), the Asahi Kogaku Takumar 50mm/3.5, what a good lens for B&W. However, few years later, they made the Asahi Kogaku Takumar 58/2.5, with special coating that makes it very useful for the growing color film tendency. I don not think they last one does very well on digital nowadays.

 

[Crazy Fedya]

Agree with the coating comment. There is another famous lens that came wit the Asahiflex (precursor of the Pentax cameras), the Asahi Kogaku Takumar 50mm/3.5, what a good lens for B&W. However, few years later, they made the Asahi Kogaku Takumar 58/2.5, with special coating that makes it very useful for the growing color film tendency. I don not think they last one does very well on digital nowadays.

I believe the replacement was 58/2.4 Takumar, and is of Heliar type. Fantastic lens!