New purchase - Canon 35mm f1.8 Ltm questions

[pixelvandal]

Hi all. I'm relatively new to the world of canon rangefinder equipment. I saw a lens advertised as 'canon lens' on gumtree (sort of like Craigslist?) And it had a single blurry photo of the front of it. I could just make out that it was the 35mm f1.8 the guy had no idea what it was or how to evaluate condition. He claimed it wouldn't turn and there was scratches on the front. I figured at 60 bucks I'd take a punt...
Lens arrived today, and I see no scratches on the front element (minor cleaning marks only) and the infinity lock was engaged. It had a tiny fungus spot on the rear element on the outside (I've never had that kind of luck) which came off very easily. The lens had obviously not been used for some time as the grease had nearly siezed, but after a bit of gentle caressing, she moves relatively freely. A little bit of a clean of the grubby focus ring grooves, and what I'm left with is a near immaculate copy of this lens.

Granted it may not be something as valuable as a pristine summilux, but with my usual bad luck with these sorts of things, I'm ecstatic! Can anyone tell me how to tell the year of manufacture from the serial number? It's 19662...
And am I correct in assuming it's a 40mm filter thread?
I see plenty of reviews for the 35mm f2, but only one or two of the older F1.8, so I'm hoping that it's a decent performer. Low contrast and softish wide open with decent sharpness around f8 would make me pretty happy. The only other 35mm I've shot with was the Jupiter 12. Can't even test it on film or digital as I need an adapter, grumble grumble.......
Anyway, just thought I'd see if there were any resources about that you could point me towards 🙂
Thanking you in advance.
Pavel

 

[Barry Kirsten]

Hi Pavel, can't tell you the year of manufacture, but at a guess early 60s. I believe the performance would be according to your wishes. Here are some useful reviews of a few Canon ltm lenses: http://web.archive.org/web/20101119091218/http://dantestella.com/technical/canoleic.html

The Canon Museum website is also a useful resource, but it's down for me at the moment. Enjoy your new lens.

 

[pixelvandal]

Thank you kindly 🙂

 

[shimokita]

Is this the lens...

http://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/s39.html

 

[Peter Jennings]

You got a great deal! The 35/1.8 is not generally as highly regarded as the 35/2, but it does have its fans. Production began in 1957. Replaced by the 35/2 in 1962.
Enjoy it!
http://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/s39.html

 

[pixelvandal]

That's the one! 🙂 I'm blown away at just how tiny this thing is. Really looking forward to shooting with it. I literally never get this lucky. I must have done something right recently haha.

 

[albertospa]

This is one of the best lenses I've ever had. Soft but with so much definition provided beautiful images. Excellent even on digital, it lends itself very well to change its character with appropriate post production.
I changed it for a summicron but even today I have a wonderful memory.

 

[mynikonf2]

Had this lens glued to my M2 for years. Congrates on your good fortune.

Save​

 

[lawrence]

I had one of these for many years. It's amazingly light but I got a bit fed up with the handling -- long focus throw, for example -- and also it was pretty much unusable at f1.8 as far as I was concerned (a kind of 'soft jumbled' look that reminded me of a wide open Canon 50mm f1.2 from the same era). I hope you enjoy it but if you don't like it you can always sell it, probably for more than you paid.

 

[bluesun267]

I am a fan of this lens too. Exactly as the previous poster describes, bokeh is a soft-jumble at 1.8 and the in-focus areas have a glow, but all becomes very sharp at f4 and up. Lowish contrast at all apertures perfect for tonal separation in B/W.

And the 35/1.8 does have very similar rendering to the 50/1.2, which is also surprisingly sharp at daytime apertures. I feel these two lenses have the quintessential "Canon signature", some may or may not like it. It took me awhile to warm up to it myself.

 

[rogue_designer]

One of my favorite lenses. Used on my P's my M4, and my Fuji X-Pro1. I love the size, and the way it paints. Congratulations on a bargain.

Yes it is 40mm filter ring. I got a 40-40.5 step up, which i had on a couple other lenses so I could swap filters and get a metal hood (not that one is so necessary with the recessed lens).

 

[pixelvandal]

Great, thank you all for the replies. I found that the fujifilm x10/x20/x30 series actually have a 40mm filter thread as well. you can buy a cheap third party hood for it on evilbay. https://www.ebay.com.au/i/172538548455?chn=ps&dispItem=1
this allows you to then have a hood, and the ability to mount 52mm filters within the hood. not bad for a few bucks. Definitely cheaper than the genuine canon hoods, and it will allow me to use some of the filters I have for my canon FD lenses on it. win/win 🙂

 

[michaelwj]

Nice find, Gumtree rocks. I love it.

 

[pixelvandal]

Nice find, Gumtree rocks. I love it.

Michaelwj, looks like you're only a stones throw from me if you're from brisbane, I'm just down in Carrara, small world!

 

[Bingley]

I'll jump in here too. I had a Canon 35/1.8 lens for a number of years and parted with it reluctantly (keeping the Canon 35/2.0). The 1.8 has medium contrast and performs very well with black and white film; w/ color, expect a somewhat desaturated look, although not as pastel as lenses from the 40s and early 50s. The lens will flare badly when pointed at a light source like a window or open door. That said, it's a lovely old-school lens and, as you now know, very compact and well built. It renders very differently from the later 2.0. If you like your sample, it might be worth having it professionally cleaned and lubed.

 

[bayernfan]

owned one, was never particularly impressed with the image quality or the handling. but it is a performance bargain if you get one for the right price.

 

[02Pilot]

I have one and I like it, though I really haven't used it a lot because a) 35mm is not my preferred focal length in most situations, and b) once I got my Hexar AF I tend to gravitate toward it over anything else when I do want to shoot 35mm.

That said, the Canon 1.8 does nice things. I've had good results with it on my X-E1, where it's probably spent more time than on any other camera. Wide open, I find the significant veiling flare can be used to good effect.

Stopped down it's more conventional, with typically low to moderate contrast and nice tonality.

 

[pagpow]

Can anyone tell me how to tell the year of manufacture from the serial number? It's 19662...
Pavel

Peter Kitchingham's book, Canon Lenses, indicates it is a Type 1, manufactured between 6/56 and 12/59, by serial number later in that period, Pavel.

Enjoy it.
Giorgio

 

[pixelvandal]

Peter Kitchingham's book, Canon Lenses, indicates it is a Type 1, manufactured between 6/56 and 12/59, by serial number later in that period, Pavel.

Enjoy it.
Giorgio

Thank you Giorgio. That is much appreciated. 🙂

 

[Timmyjoe]

I bought Tim's lens and have been playing around with it today. I have to disagree, this copy is quite sharp wide open. Especially at close distance.

Was out in the nasty weather tonight with my M9 and the little 35mm f1.8 and shot a few images thru the car windows. This first one was through the rain soaked windshield, wide open at f1.8, focused on the second to last car:

And this one was focused on the raindrops on the window:

Here's an 100% crop of the raindrops on the window. Again, shot at f1.8. I think they came out pretty sharp:

Also really love the bokeh I'm getting with the lens.

Best,
-Tim