Incoming L1...and a pair of questions

[photomoof]

The bottom plate of the camera says otherwise:

It does indeed! 🙂

The VL was simply an L1 with metal shutter curtains, a self timer, and silver coated finder optics.

So you either have an VL with a L1 bottom plate.
or
An L1 with a self timer.

So that begs the question is the shutter cloth (L1) or metal (VL)?

Interesting!

As an aside serial range on the L1 was 540000 to 56000. The VL 555000 to 592000. Could not read yours.

 

[Mackinaw]

......From the measurements online it appears the L1 is more or less as large as my Mk 7S, which is almost as big as my M5, are they correct?........

I didn’t take any measurements, I just lined up my L1 and 7 and compared bodies. The top plate of the L1 is substantially lower than that of the 7. The width of the L1 is less than the 7, mainly because of the viewfinder “bulge” on the 7 (quite obvious when looking straight down at both cameras). Both cameras appear to be identical when it comes to length.

When held in your hands, the overall mass of the L1 seems to be a lot less than that of the 7 (or 7s).

And I didn’t catch that your L1 had a self timer. Very interesting. Photomoof is right, whatever material used for the shutter curtains will tell you a lot, as well as the color of your viewfinder optics (gold or silver).

I see you serial number is 558706, which puts it right on the edge between L1 production and VL production. You may very well have a hybrid camera.

As for haze on the 50/1.8, like any lens that is 50+ years old, internal haze is a possibility. To my knowledge, it doesn’t have the haze characteristics of the 50/1.2, which will reoccur, no matter how many times you clean the lens (luckily, an easy fix, can take part my 50/1.2 and clean in about ten minutes).

Jim B.

 

[Fixcinater]

The late black 50/1.8 has the internal haze problem like the 50/1.2, probably worse. The earlier chrome lenses don't have the problem from what I have seen. I have been trying to polish out a late 50/1.8 with little success thus far...the haze attacked the glass and now has pitted it.

The 50/1.4 is an excellent and fairly compact option with the 50/1.5 being the Sonnar clone of the group which is small and compact but dense. I have not tried the earlier 50/1.9 or 50/2.0 but out of the bunch mentioned the 50/1.4 is the "best" in general terms: most contrast, sharpest.

 

[Wulfthari]

It does indeed! 🙂

The VL was simply an L1 with metal shutter curtains, a self timer, and silver coated finder optics.

So you either have an VL with a L1 bottom plate.
or
An L1 with a self timer.

So that begs the question is the shutter cloth (L1) or metal (VL)?

Interesting!

As an aside serial range on the L1 was 540000 to 56000. The VL 555000 to 592000. Could not read yours.

Sorry, I didn't realise I have bought an interesting camera (actually I still have to pay it because I'm bargaining with the seller to get a lens), the shutter is cloth, the serial number is in the overlapping range between the L1 and the VL...to be honest I was more interested in the VL but I couldn't find one, here there are the other pics:

I never noticed the particular of the self timer, I thought it was standard on all L1s.

The late black 50/1.8 has the internal haze problem like the 50/1.2, probably worse. The earlier chrome lenses don't have the problem from what I have seen. I have been trying to polish out a late 50/1.8 with little success thus far...the haze attacked the glass and now has pitted it.

The 50/1.4 is an excellent and fairly compact option with the 50/1.5 being the Sonnar clone of the group which is small and compact but dense. I have not tried the earlier 50/1.9 or 50/2.0 but out of the bunch mentioned the 50/1.4 is the "best" in general terms: most contrast, sharpest.

Thanks for letting me know, for my 1.2 the haze is not the real problem, or better there is no haze: something from the front elements precipitated on the first surface of the fourth group and ATE the coating.

There are CRATERS on the lens, my tech showed me with an enlarging lens, he also think it has something to deal with the radioactive glass they were using, I would like to avoid this problem so I'll see if I can bribe the seller and get a nice 1.4.

 

[Fixcinater]

Looks like a very nice body. Easy enough to clean out the viewfinder optics as well if there is some internal haze there. My first VT cleaned up nicely.

The 35/1.8 is the only Canon 35mm that I have experience with and it's so compact and lightweight that I won't travel without it.

 

[Mackinaw]

........the shutter is cloth, the serial number is in the overlapping range between the L1 and the VL...to be honest I was more interested in the VL but I couldn't find one...........

Do you have the camera in your possession? The shutter looks like it's made of metal, and not cloth, like on my L1.

Of course, I'm looking at a picture on a monitor, not holding the camera in my hands, but the shutter in my camera is more textured than what I see in your pictures.

Just an observation, I could be totally wrong.

Jim B.

 

[photomoof]

Well there you go, a special L1! There could not have been many. I may have seen others and just not noticed.

Edit: yes the shutter looks like metal, with the usual Canon scuff marks which can turn into wrinkles. I did not want to contradict you but I see other are asking. L1 cameras which I have owned or seen have all been cloth, unless they were repaired with a metal shutter.

 

[job]

Here we can see the Canon L1 is a real favourite of all the Canon RF fans here.
The vigorous discussion and expert comments are really nice.
I have 2 Canon L1. The early one has cloth shutter and a later one has metal shutter. Both without self-timer and have golden warm patch.
From the picture, yours looks like having a metal one and is more like a VL. VL also comes with a bottom plate of L1.

 

[Wulfthari]

Here we can see the Canon L1 is a real favourite of all the Canon RF fans here.
The vigorous discussion and expert comments are really nice.
I have 2 Canon L1. The early one has cloth shutter and a later one has metal shutter. Both without self-timer and have golden warm patch.
From the picture, yours looks like having a metal one and is more like a VL. VL also comes with a bottom plate of L1.

Yes I'm a little surprised to see how "special" this camera is, I don't have it at hand because as said before I haven't even paid for it, but it appears at this time Canon's production was a little erratic...or perhaps it's just a VL1 that has been repaired with spare parts from a L1, who knows?

 

[lawrence]

I've owned a few Canon rf and the L1 is the one I kept; it's a lot more compact than the 7 and has more personality than the P. However, I did find that I prefer the Voigtlander LTM line of lenses to the Canons because the performance is generally better and I prefer the handling (shorter focus throw etc.). Here's my L1 with 28mm Ultron f1.9 and CV minifinder, which I find a very nice combination.

 

[Mackinaw]

......but it appears at this time Canon's production was a little erratic.......

Erratic, or just using up old parts, which wasn't an unusual practice for many camera manufacturers in the years following WW2.

Jim B.

 

[photomoof]

Erratic, or just using up old parts, which wasn't an unusual practice for many camera manufacturers in the years following WW2.

Jim B.

Well into the early '60s Nikon would not throw anything away, if they misengraved a lens' ring, they would try to save the ring by putting on a ":" so it was marked as a duplicate.

There is a batch of early Nikon M cameras with the beginning of the serial number backwards. (most were M609xxxx, they were M906xxxx) They simply could not throw away parts, if it could be avoided.

 

[Wulfthari]

Thanks everybody for the comments, in the end I decided to get a 1.8 lens with hood, the seller made me a good price, I understand it won't look as cool as the 1.4 but with a minimum focusing distance of 1 mt I don't think I can effectively use the extra shallowness of the DOF of the 1.4 lens.

The lens serial number is 2231 86 so I assume it's more or less of the same vintage as the camera.

 

[Wulfthari]

I finally received the camera, I confirm everything you experts had already guessed: yes, it has a metal shutter, and yes it has the blue viewfinder with the golden patch.

On the matter it looks very similar to the VF of my Contax IIa and IIIa besides the fact the patch is round and VERY large, which I like. It's also similar to my Zorkis even if these have a slightly brighter and less contrasty viewfinder.

It feels like...well quality, probably the best old school Leica screwmount type camera with rotating dial, not super quiet but with a good metallic "snap" to it.

I am looking forward to trying it as soon as I receive some film, unfortunately the seller didn't send a yellow filter but I'll try to find something around. The lens is indeed slightly fogged but I hope it's not a problem, here there's a bad shot of the combo:

 

[marek_]

Lovely camera.

I have a VL which is very similar to your L1. The Canon 50 1.8 is an excellent lens, even by modern standards. I compared it to my Canon 50 1.5 and Summicron 50 v4 and it wasn't that far behind the Summicron. A little less sharpness, a little less contrast and a little less resolution. But nonetheless excellent.

I've never felt the lens needed a yellow filter to bump the contrast up. Or the hood - my copy handles flare very well. And these cameras a fun to use.

 

[John E Earley]

I have a black paint Canon 50/1.8 III that had a bit of haze. Fortunately this lens is easy to disassemble. Unfortunately, many of the lenses refuse to clean up. Fortunately mine did clear nicely. Unfortunately, they seem to re-fog after a while.

Very nice looking camera and if your lens isn't too fogged or cleans up easily, you have an excellent piece of kit.

 

[mcfingon]

I have an even more misbehaving L1. It appears from the top to be closest to an L2:

 

[mcfingon]

But the base says otherwise:

 

[mcfingon]

It has a cloth shutter, which is in good condition. Electronic flash sync seems to work at 30th of a second. I wonder how easy it is to change the base of these cameras? Has someone been swapping base-plates around?

 

[Mackinaw]

.......I wonder how easy it is to change the base of these cameras? Has someone been swapping base-plates around?

Taking off the bottom plate is easy. Unscrew the black retaining ring (with a lens spanner) then take off the two screws on the other end. The bottom plate will then come right off.

Jim B.