Canon LTM Cooke Amotal versus Canon 50mm F1.8

Canon M39 M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
I own one of these but cannot compare it to the Canon as I have never used or owned one. The last time I used the Cooke a year and a half ago not having used it for about 40 years, I was surprised at the excellent quality of the result and posted a picture on this forum. Unfortunately that picture is on a disk at my summer home 225 miles from here. The lens which was made for a camera other than a LTM was adapted to LTM via an OEM housing which is clearly shown in the Ebay picture. The housing is different from my lens, but the lens itself is clearly the same. I understand that these lenses were originally uncoated, but mine has a single coat.
Kurt M.
 
Since I have & have shot w/multiple examples of both lenses, I feel somewhat qualified to weigh in here. :p

As much as I like the Amotal, I think the Canon 50/1.8 is a better lens overall in that it's sharper wide-open & more flare-resistant. My verdict: the Canon is more "modern" & the TTH is more "classic." Both are plenty sharp enough for real world shooting & have smooth boke (if you're into that sort of thing). I'm not sure if the differences in the look or "fingerprint" are due to the different optical designs or differences in glass & coatings (late 1940's v. mid-1950s/early 1960's)--probably it's a combination of both.

Pix from the Amotal (LTM & Foton mount--the Foton shots are much more "flarey" because of numerous cleaning marks):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/taylortaylorhobson2inch2cookeamotalanastigmatltmc194850/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/taylortaylorhobson2inch2cookeamotalanastigmatc194850/

Pix from the Canon (chrome & black, respectively):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/canon5018lenschromec195255/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/canon5018lensblackc195861/

This reminds me that I need to shoot these guys more often . . .


Canon7SZ35f2 said:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7584766865

No connection.

I am only interested in lens performance.
I heard that the TTH 50mm Amotal has outstanding performance
but never have a chance to try one. I wonder how is it compared
to the well known Canon RF 50mm F1.8 that nearly everybody
owns or owned one. Any input or image will be highly appreciated.
Click to expand...
 
Actually, they were all originally single-coated (should look purplish, kind of like the Zeiss "T" coating).

Scarpia said:
I understand that these lenses were originally uncoated, but mine has a single coat.
Kurt M.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the inputs.
I found the photo links by member furcafe impressive.
After enjoying all the nice images my own perference
go for the Amotal. Whilst the Canon RF 50mm F1.8 Lens
may win at certain particular points in a photo, the overall
tonal expression for the complete picture are better in the case of
Amotal for most of the pictures. Of course this is only my subjective
opinion based on transferred digital images, the original
photographs may look different. I must admit both lenses are
top performers. Now I have a strong desire to own at least
one Amotal although I don't have a deep pocket. Any idea what
is a market price for an Amotal in excellent shape ?
 
I have the Taylor Hobson f2 50mm Anastigmat, which was made for the Reid camera. I don't know if this is the same construction, but is from the same factory.
The Cooke/Taylor Hobson company is still in existance.
I can certainly vouch for the quality of the images from my lens, and is in fact my preferred 50. I also have a CV f1.5 Nokton.
I bought my lens in 1980 new for £20, a mint one today will cost about £700, if you can find one without a Reid camera attached.
The only thing I've hear about the Amotal concerns the quality of the Aluminum mount. The Anastigmat is mounted in chromed brass, and is very heavy!!!
The sunset was taken straight into the sun and shows no flare! :D
 
Last edited:
that is a very nice photo, John, TTH made some very excellent lenses. I have heard that Cooke makes a wonderful portrait lens for 4x5, a copy of the Pinkham and Smith soft focus lens, called the PS 945
 
Just curious about the design of the Amotal. Is it a 2-2 design (4 elements/ 2 groups)? Then f/2.0 would be very high speed for it.
 
Sonnar2 said:
Just curious about the design of the Amotal. Is it a 2-2 design (4 elements/ 2 groups)? Then f/2.0 would be very high speed for it.
Click to expand...

I have been totally unable to find out anything about either the Amotal or the Anastigmat construction. The company themselves tried to find out for me but the records are either lost or destroyed. by looking at reflections in it the Anastigmat has at least six elements. The only info I could get was that they are based on a pre-war non-symetrical design of six or seven elements. I was told similar to the Leitz f1.5 Xenar, and covered by the same Taylor Taylor and Hobson patents shown on that lens.

P.S. Taylor Hobson, at one time had an almost a monopoly of the movie industry, we have all probably watched films made with their lenses.
 
Last edited:
The Amotal is mentioned in the Lens Vade Mecum, but I can't access it @ the moment. Will check later.

John Robertson said:
I have been totally unable to find out anything about either the Amotal or the Anastigmat construction. The company themselves tried to find out for me but the records are either lost or destroyed. by looking at reflections in it the Anastigmat has at least six elements. The only info I could get was that they are based on a pre-war non-symetrical design of six or seven elements. I was told similar to the Leitz f1.5 Xenar, and covered by the same Taylor Taylor and Hobson patents shown on that lens.

P.S. Taylor Hobson, at one time had an almost a monopoly of the movie industry, we have all probably watched films made with their lenses.
Click to expand...
 
The market price of the Amotal varies, because of its rarity. 1 thing is certain, it will cost you @ least twice as much as the Canon. Another thing you need to know is that hoods & accessories that fit the Amotal are extremely rare (the Foton wasn't exactly a big seller)--it has a non-standard filter/hood thread (34mm?), although a clamp-on hood of approx. 36mm might work (there have been a couple threads on the photo.net Leica forum).

That said, I have an extra that I can sell you, so if you're interested & can't find anything on eBay, etc., just send me a private message/email.

Canon7SZ35f2 said:
Thanks for all the inputs.
I found the photo links by member furcafe impressive.
After enjoying all the nice images my own perference
go for the Amotal. Whilst the Canon RF 50mm F1.8 Lens
may win at certain particular points in a photo, the overall
tonal expression for the complete picture are better in the case of
Amotal for most of the pictures. Of course this is only my subjective
opinion based on transferred digital images, the original
photographs may look different. I must admit both lenses are
top performers. Now I have a strong desire to own at least
one Amotal although I don't have a deep pocket. Any idea what
is a market price for an Amotal in excellent shape ?
Click to expand...
 
I bought my lens in 1980 new for £20, a mint one today will cost about £700, if you can find one without a Reid camera attached.
The only thing I've hear about the Amotal concerns the quality of the Aluminum mount. The Anastigmat is mounted in chromed brass, and is very heavy!!! (Quote from John Robertson)

Mine is the one with the grungy aluminum Italian made mount. It simply is not up to the quality of the lens, but functions well, nevertheless. When I last used the lens I took several shots that one would expect to show some flare, yet none of them did. I bought my lens attached to a Leica M-1 in Europe around 1963 for about $110.00 US. for the whole thing including a separate rangefinder mounted on the flash shoe. When I last used the Amotal I used it on my Bessa T with no problem whatsoever. It worked beautifly with the rangefinder.
Kurt M.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Again thanks for all the inputs.
The lens sold for $264
I missed the auction due to sudden call out
so a lucky guy got it. I look at ebay again and found:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7585094319

Present price $1309 still got 5 days to go

I believe the glass is the same and the serial number is in the same
catagory but is it worth that much for a copper lens barrel and copper
focus unit? Most likely the coating is more modern and I like the image
from John very much, with the current bid price I can only pass.
 
Canon7SZ35f2 said:
Again thanks for all the inputs.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7585094319

Present price $1309 still got 5 days to go

I believe the glass is the same and the serial number is in the same
catagory but is it worth that much for a copper lens barrel and copper
focus unit? Most likely the coating is more modern and I like the image
from John very much, with the current bid price I can only pass.
Click to expand...

I would have to pass on this too, I am trying not to appear "smug" about my own lens, it was pure luck that I kept it all these years unused. :angel: The sad thing is that the successful bidder will probably place it in a cabinet just to look at and not appreciate its photographic qualities. Mine is still in mint cindition but is in regular use on the Bessa R2, and has a SOOGZ adaptor fitted to it, to allow use of 39mm filters and a vented Leitz hood.
I think i will have to re-assess its insurance value!!! :eek:
Keep looking, and I hope you have luck in finding a lens soon. My lens is #328480.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom