Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Canon FD 24mm f 2.8 New & Old SSC -
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:47 am    Post subject: Canon FD 24mm f 2.8 New & Old SSC - Reply with quote
Canon FD 24mm f 2.8 New & Old SSC

Can anyone tell me the differences of image quality?

Thank you very much.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
You will not see any difference in image quality between the old and new.

MAYBE, and that's a big maybe, you might see a tiny difference in the ability of the older lens to resist flare in direct strong sunlight.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have used the FD 24/2.8 non-ssc ("chrome nose") briefly on the NEX 7 and found it to be one of the sharpest 24mm lenses ever. I dont think there is any field relevant difference between the non- and SSC versions.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bille wrote:
I have used the FD 24/2.8 non-ssc ("chrome nose") briefly on the NEX 7 and found it to be one of the sharpest 24mm lenses ever. I dont think there is any field relevant difference between the non- and SSC versions.


the later is better and very good, but considering the current prices on FD 2.8/24 maybe worth considering the FD 2.0/24 which is in my opinion even better and really compact.

Regards


PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
and price ?
how much would be a "normal" price for this lens?? 60€ ??


PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 8:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
M. Valdemar wrote:
You will not see any difference in image quality between the old and new.

MAYBE, and that's a big maybe, you might see a tiny difference in the ability of the older lens to resist flare in direct strong sunlight.

Why?


PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
chrome nose SSC version is definitely better build, although it means it´s heavier and that breechlock is one of most stupid things I´ve experienced during years of shooting. I had both and didn´t noticed major difference in picture quality - on film.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
martinsmith99 wrote:
M. Valdemar wrote:
You will not see any difference in image quality between the old and new.

MAYBE, and that's a big maybe, you might see a tiny difference in the ability of the older lens to resist flare in direct strong sunlight.

Why?

Better coatings = Better flare resistance???


PostPosted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Gentlemen, thank you very much, tomorrow I will buy a 24/2.8 SSC chrome nose. I hope to adapt it to EOS.
Best regards.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
francotirador wrote:
Gentlemen, thank you very much, tomorrow I will buy a 24/2.8 SSC chrome nose. I hope to adapt it to EOS.
Best regards.

I thought you cant adapt Canon MF lenses to AF bodies?


PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
hifisapi wrote:
francotirador wrote:
Gentlemen, thank you very much, tomorrow I will buy a 24/2.8 SSC chrome nose. I hope to adapt it to EOS.
Best regards.

I thought you cant adapt Canon MF lenses to AF bodies?


Yes, I can. Actually I have adapted one 100-300


PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Exactly, but in reality the later coatings are not vastly superior in any meaningful way.

hifisapi wrote:
martinsmith99 wrote:
M. Valdemar wrote:
You will not see any difference in image quality between the old and new.

MAYBE, and that's a big maybe, you might see a tiny difference in the ability of the older lens to resist flare in direct strong sunlight.

Why?

Better coatings = Better flare resistance???


PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
berraneck wrote:
chrome nose SSC version is definitely better build, although it means it´s heavier and that breechlock is one of most stupid things I´ve experienced during years of shooting. I had both and didn´t noticed major difference in picture quality - on film.

Sorry, there is no "chrome nose SSC version" of the 24/2.8, there is the chrome nose version, the SSC version, and the nFD version.

Chrome nose (Specta Coating) http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/fd/data/17-35/fd_24_28.html
Lens Construction (group) 8
Lens Construction (element) 9

SSC (Super-Specta Coating)(aka muilti coating) http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/fd/data/17-35/fd_24_28_ssc.html
Lens Construction (group) 8
Lens Construction (element) 9

nFD (Super-Specta Coating) http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/nfd/data/fisheye-35/nfd_24_28.html
Lens Construction (group) 9
Lens Construction (element) 10

I prefer the SSC versions, as they are better built, and you can force the aperture to always work(push the aperture lever till it locks), unlike the nFD's.
Re; The breach lock, yeah it's different, it does take time to get used to it, but the lens is always solidly mounted with no play, nFD can develop some play in well used lenses, as can some bayonet systems.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
hifisapi wrote:
martinsmith99 wrote:
M. Valdemar wrote:
You will not see any difference in image quality between the old and new.

MAYBE, and that's a big maybe, you might see a tiny difference in the ability of the older lens to resist flare in direct strong sunlight.

Why?

Better coatings = Better flare resistance???

Yes, obviously, but where does it say that the SSC has better coatings?

Also, M. Valdemar is not claiming anything about coatings in that post.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2013 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
francotirador wrote:
hifisapi wrote:
francotirador wrote:
Gentlemen, thank you very much, tomorrow I will buy a 24/2.8 SSC chrome nose. I hope to adapt it to EOS.
Best regards.

I thought you cant adapt Canon MF lenses to AF bodies?


Yes, I can. Actually I have adapted one 100-300


Not so sure regarding adapting to EOS the Canon FD2.8/24mm SSC...
For the FD 24mm 2.0 and 1.4L versions there are a conversion kits (edMika) with no mirror issues on canon FF.


PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2013 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
francotirador wrote:
hifisapi wrote:
francotirador wrote:
Gentlemen, thank you very much, tomorrow I will buy a 24/2.8 SSC chrome nose. I hope to adapt it to EOS.
Best regards.

I thought you cant adapt Canon MF lenses to AF bodies?


Yes, I can. Actually I have adapted one 100-300
looking forward for pictures and information of your adaptation!


PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2013 6:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I missed the EOS part, FD would need mount conversion unless the thin adapter works(as discussed above).
Lenses I'd adapt first:
OM 24/2.8
Sigma Super-Wide 24II
Nikkor 24/2.8 Pre AI through AIS


PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lightshow wrote:
berraneck wrote:
chrome nose SSC version is definitely better build, although it means it´s heavier and that breechlock is one of most stupid things I´ve experienced during years of shooting. I had both and didn´t noticed major difference in picture quality - on film.

Sorry, there is no "chrome nose SSC version" of the 24/2.8, there is the chrome nose version, the SSC version, and the nFD version.

Chrome nose (Specta Coating) http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/fd/data/17-35/fd_24_28.html
Lens Construction (group) 8
Lens Construction (element) 9

SSC (Super-Specta Coating)(aka muilti coating) http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/fd/data/17-35/fd_24_28_ssc.html
Lens Construction (group) 8
Lens Construction (element) 9

nFD (Super-Specta Coating) http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/lens/nfd/data/fisheye-35/nfd_24_28.html
Lens Construction (group) 9
Lens Construction (element) 10

I prefer the SSC versions, as they are better built, and you can force the aperture to always work(push the aperture lever till it locks), unlike the nFD's.
Re; The breach lock, yeah it's different, it does take time to get used to it, but the lens is always solidly mounted with no play, nFD can develop some play in well used lenses, as can some bayonet systems.


Is it true that FD Chrome Nose are Single Coated ?


PostPosted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 8:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Phenix jc wrote:

Is it true that FD Chrome Nose are Single Coated ?


Nope, not true. To quote wikipedia
wikipedia wrote:

The earliest breech-lock Canon FD lenses (1971-1973) are generally recognizable by a chrome (silver) filter ring at the front (this ring includes its own bayonet used to mount an appropriate lens hood). Nicknamed 'chrome nose' lenses, these used two new proprietary lens coatings, designated "S.C." (Spectra Coating) and "S.S.C." (Super Spectra Coating). These were both multi-coatings, but indicated two quality grades. In the 'chrome nose' series, only the large-aperture 55mm f/1.2, 50mm f/1.4 (regular and 'AL'-type) and 7.5mm Fish-Eye lenses used S.S.C. coating. On these lenses the breech ring can be rotated freely without mounting it on a camera body.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I'm not familiar with the technical differences between SC & SSC, it could be much the same as the differences between Super-Takumar and S-M-C Takumar (IIRC 3 layers vs. 7 layers)


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
fermy wrote:
Phenix jc wrote:

Is it true that FD Chrome Nose are Single Coated ?


Nope, not true. To quote wikipedia
wikipedia wrote:

The earliest breech-lock Canon FD lenses (1971-1973) are generally recognizable by a chrome (silver) filter ring at the front (this ring includes its own bayonet used to mount an appropriate lens hood). Nicknamed 'chrome nose' lenses, these used two new proprietary lens coatings, designated "S.C." (Spectra Coating) and "S.S.C." (Super Spectra Coating). These were both multi-coatings, but indicated two quality grades. In the 'chrome nose' series, only the large-aperture 55mm f/1.2, 50mm f/1.4 (regular and 'AL'-type) and 7.5mm Fish-Eye lenses used S.S.C. coating. On these lenses the breech ring can be rotated freely without mounting it on a camera body.

Perfect answer and usefull link. Thanks.


PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
IT'S a very sharp lens with minimum amount of ca.

it's a great lens with very little distortion - BTW the FD 24 f2 has also very little distortion

it has floating element.

if you can get nFD copy - go for it.

SSC version is not easy to convert at all.


the nFD version converted to EOS mount;

LINK; http://ftp.cameraserviceone.com/galleries/000-cso-convert-fd2428/index.html





SAMPLES

LINK; http://ftp.cameraserviceone.com/000-fd24f28/index.html





TF


PostPosted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have bought the SSC version, like new. A pleasure to see him . Today I went to turner, for to make the holes in the EF mount and tomorrow I have. I'm anxious and I've also reserved a 135mm F 2.5 SC, inspired in the pictures of Trifox. It is a lens that does not need because I have the EF 135 L f2.0. But I think it should be better for video.

Thanks Trifox for your pictures.
Best regards
Sergio


PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 2:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
As said Trifox, the new FD is more easy to adapt. but I will not give up. Only one more week will delay.
I have to remove 1.15 mm from somewhere. And I'll have the same problem with the 135 2.5 SC
Best regards.
Sergio


PostPosted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
francotirador wrote:
As said Trifox, the new FD is more easy to adapt. but I will not give up. Only one more week will delay.
I have to remove 1.15 mm from somewhere. And I'll have the same problem with the 135 2.5 SC
Best regards.
Sergio


Sergio - be aware of that you need to make focusing barrel shorter - SSC lenses are difficult to adapt to EOS because of that.

The problem is not obviously to take the lens apart and put helicoid in a lathe...
but having 1.15 mm extra - as you mentioned above - is the problem.

Replacing the mount and linking the aperture mechanism is not the main problem here - with SSC lenses.
the limit is the focusing barrel - there is not too much room to make it shorter

However - good luck.

Stan
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2