I'm trying to determine (and obtain an example of each), which Canon FD lenses were originally released in the chrome front (chrome nose) versions. I believe these were the very first FD's sold, and were heavier than their SSC/SC followers.

So far I have a 50/1.4 and 35/2 (the latter the infamous razor sharp radioactive lens)

I have seen the 50/1.8 and heard of a 135/3.5 and 24/2.8 (the latter possibly radioactive). Can anyone confirm the latter two.

Were there any others?

TIA.

-- Adam G. Lang (aglang@hotmail.com), May 28, 2002

Answers

Adam I have a 100mm 2.8 with the chrome nose Manufacture date of 6/71 I believe you will find that almost all of the 24mm to 200mm lenses were first produced in this chrome nose version. It was only after a number of Pros complained about glare that Canon went to the black nose as far a construction they are exactly the same as the S.S.C. labled lenses. With only one or two exceptions. The 35mm F2.0 with the concave front element (this is the one made with Lathium glass that is radioactive) I have never heard of any of the other early FD mount lenses being Radioactive and I have been involved with a couple of long discussions about this subject on both of the Canon FD discussion groups on Yahoo and the KJSL group as well as a large collectors group. Hope this is of help to you in your quest. As a side note I am trying to decide if I want to sell my 100mm as I'm trying to get all new FD mount lenses to simplify my filters and hoods. If interested please feel free to contact me about this lens. Mark W.

Canonitis FD sufferer and collector of 1950's rangefinder cameras

Show and tell: http://awahlster@tripod.com/

Don't meddle in the affairs of Dragons, as you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

-- Mark Wahlster (awahlster@aol.com), June 02, 2002.

In addition to the chrome nose 35/2 the first SSC 35/2 also has yellow glass and concave front element, so presumably it is also radioactive. Both yellow 35/2's stop down to f16 whilst the second (convex front element) stops down to f22. I have found the lasr 35/2 SSC to be distinctly inferior to the earlier radioactive versions, but of course its color is neutral!

Same construction chrome nose/vs SSC? I dont think so. The chrome 35/2 is distinctly heavier than it's immediate successor, as is my chrome nose 50/1.4 vs my 50/1.4 SSC. I just won a chrome 24/2.8 on eBay so will get a first hand look soon. What do you want for your 100?

-- Adam G. Lang (aglang@hotmail.com), June 02, 2002.

The chrome nose 24/2.8 has only a very slight yellow tint to the glass. Probably not radioactive.

-- adam g. lang (aglang@hotmail.com), June 05, 2002.