06-19-2019, 11:35 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-19-2019, 11:56 AM by Brightcolours.)
Contemporary as in: Looks very contemporary to the current design of lens barrels.
This sunday I came across a Canon EOS 750 on a kind of car booth sale. The EOS 750 was one of the 1st EOS cameras, introduced in 1988. It was a simplified model, meant to only be used in auto-exposure (auto everything) mode. So, not a very desirable camera in any way, really.
Mounted on it: a EF 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 A. The EF 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 (1987) was a typical standard zoom at the time, based on the manual focus standard zooms of the 1980s.
In fact, it has the same optical formula as the Canon FDn 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 from 1983 and the autofocus AC 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 from 1985.
The EF 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 A is a "dumbed down" cheaper and lighter version of the EF 35-70mm f3.5-4.5, and probably was specifically designed with the EOS 750 in mind. No focus ring and no AF/Manual switch (autofocus only then).
This makes it look very contemporary with modern lenses... Just a smooth, straight barrel.
CanonEF3570mmf3545A.png (Size: 317.03 KB / Downloads: 12)
I decided to pay 8 euros for the camera and lens and see what it was about.
So, what is it about? A very light weight (230 grams) and small "standard zoom" with limited wide angle ability. It seems to be sharp enough at f8, and even usable wide open (albeit some PP sharpening might be wanted). Low in contrast to modern standard, especially wide open with backlight. Wide open very prone to purple fringing! Some CA issues are not a surprise, the bokeh seems to be surprisingly tolerable. Noisy and slow in AF. Appears to be pretty accurate (not really tested but that is the 1st impression).
One thing that I have noticed just now: at 70mm, even at f8 the corners are quite a bit darker than the rest of the frame.
donnaingreenwater.jpg (Size: 496.18 KB / Downloads: 8)
This lens misses the rubber of the zoom ring so that needs some attention, but besides that it is in very good shape. Kinda fun to use this compact and small zoom from the beginning of AF. Equivalent to a 17.5-35mm f1.8-2.2 lens on MFT or 23-47mm f2.3-3 lens on APS-C.
I will have to use it more to get a better feel for what it can and especially can't do, but it appears to be a nice little, 8 euro, unassuming lens for unassuming tasks. More to follow. Oh yes, and on my 8 euro EF 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 A the rubber from the zoom ring is missing.
How could you skip the medium format equivalency. Your mission spreading the gospel isn't done unless you calculate and post these numbers. 
(06-21-2019, 09:33 PM)Rover Wrote: How could you skip the medium format equivalency. Your mission spreading the gospel isn't done unless you calculate and post these numbers.
Which MF format in particular would you like to see covered? 
06-22-2019, 08:23 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-22-2019, 08:39 AM by Rover.)
Am I the one calling the shots now?
GFX/Hassy X1D, 6x4.5 and whichever else you see fit.
Seriously, the lens looks interesting from the design standpoint, and I can totally see the allure of using old "junk" gear like this even when coupled with modern cameras. It's the same reason some people are enthusiastic about using adapted manual lenses, Lensbabies and whatnot. I feel that call sometimes, though I'm trying to avoid getting drawn into buying the gear that I might not be able to get rid of afterwards. Of course there's a thin line between "vintage" and outright bad gear, like the 75-300 zoom that Canon, in their infinite wisdom, chose to keep producing and marketing to unsuspecting casual APS-C shooters as a bundle that makes very little sense.
BTW I remember seeing (a few years back) a guy - apparently a tourist - with an 1DS Mark II and a vintage 35-70 Canon zoom, though probably not this one (most probably this: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef261.html). It made for a weird combo in my opinion but whatever floats his boat. 
(06-22-2019, 08:23 AM)Rover Wrote: Am I the one calling the shots now?
GFX/Hassy X1D, 6x4.5 and whichever else you see fit.
Seriously, the lens looks interesting from the design standpoint, and I can totally see the allure of using old "junk" gear like this even when coupled with modern cameras. It's the same reason some people are enthusiastic about using adapted manual lenses, Lensbabies and whatnot. I feel that call sometimes, though I'm trying to avoid getting drawn into buying the gear that I might not be able to get rid of afterwards. Of course there's a thin line between "vintage" and outright bad gear, like the 75-300 zoom that Canon, in their infinite wisdom, chose to keep producing and marketing to unsuspecting casual APS-C shooters as a bundle that makes very little sense.
BTW I remember seeing (a few years back) a guy - apparently a tourist - with an 1DS Mark II and a vintage 35-70 Canon zoom, though probably not this one (most probably this: https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef261.html). It made for a weird combo in my opinion but whatever floats his boat. Ok, the current "MF" crop format: this 35-70mm f3.5-4.5 is equivalent to a 44-88mm ff4.4-5.7 MF crop format lens.
The lens you link to is the 1987 lens with zoom ring and MF switch, the "normal" one. Mine is the "A" version, same optics and less weight (and functionality).
As I mentioned before, my 8 euro lens misses the rubber on the zoom ring. Something that really needs fixing (even to just prevent dust and dirt from entering).
35-70mm_1.jpg (Size: 53.34 KB / Downloads: 6)
So, I was thinking... finding the parts I have left from my old broken Sigma 70-300mm, getting the rubber off from its zoom ring, cutting a strip from it and glueing it on this Canon 35-70mm. Looking for the parts, I came across the remains of a broken Nikkor 35-105mm f3.5-4.5.
35-70mm_1a.jpg (Size: 83.74 KB / Downloads: 7)
Imagine that... Look at that manual focus ring-rubber. Exactly the same diameter, and also a similar width?
35-70mm_2.jpg (Size: 65.41 KB / Downloads: 9)
Ok, that must have been the easiest fix, ever.
Was that worth the effort ? up to you to judge, but it seems you enjoyed it.
I had a better find in my own house, a forgotten Canon 28mmf2.8 I stopped using since it was giving error messages besides it was pointless on 7D2 since I had EFs17-55f2.8 so didn't bother with repairso
tried it after reading your post it is working nicely on EOS RP (always error message on 7D2) so I got tiny lens very practical on EOS RP with a very decent performance for free...
I once bought Helios 58mmf2.0 44-2 it has an interesting swirly bokeh for 20$ add 25$ for Canon and Sony adapters it took some neat keepers
I also bought for 25$ Kiev rangefinder with a collection of lenses 35mmf2.0 50mmf2.0 85mmf2.0 and 135mmf2.8 they are quite nice as ornament till now couldn't find a adapter to use them...
Contax Kiev to M39 adapter:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/KIPON-COPY-CONTAX-RANGEFINDER-TO-M39-M42-MOUNT-ADAPTER-MULTILISTING-2/173032855030?_trkparms=ispr%3D1&hash=item28498fd5f6:g:FvMAAOSw2iNZYP9X&enc=AQADAAAB4KX%2FKt4E1xf3SDqEdBclaYYOHDnytZ1hzZgXeZf4qgTqq18JEGU00afcCeyLWjL5MewdHFChSemHa9l3gnxfuclF0TG3Sfa8NkMQWtheii6QXX4oTLXD54rIwBvEqC5Wk0YgpuJt3%2FKNtEUVulf%2F9H0J7igNboDVZQchBV0MgGSkjQR7KlysYz3XlWT0kAd9tJBEJfgXB4uq9H7le8zoyiO12pDC7xobyFsUfBD3TqQSRHE3ZxoyzNPc537qEgxoAQUilWh%2FBi8qiBAmN834uDyHkQPgHDCXNXllmHm%2BjaaMXNIZIaMKgXh1c4Rlw9H%2FlH5rXDwKs4J20Ko5supI9tq%2F1JCo6OtO8QJZ0HZn3YvTqyyYZpW3aKp%2ByUwNqBueRuQ15XuwosfhC5hH%2FHXM6hxqlnbWEQV4xvaqh9cHSgLdzncrjQd3RaiFN8rD55jWDjfH%2F6QTbIYZhs2PJZrA%2BxFBtcMEB%2BOZJyQs3535G4V9Jz88DeVKt93ZfgPlt5UQhxlughJGPFjpKNFfm8E7QKTCNOgqocmistk3bqVLJ7aoUotMOE0jbOoiI0%2BlRgJ4sRBQ69Y3G9RbaVzOiFV4D4GYfk2hpjVqnRAYbyQ2l0%2BTS7eMyJr1J4wLXyO6CVnvhg%3D%3D&checksum=1730328550304ef3a8b802014e039017ba09585b0877
M39 to RF adapter:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/M39-screw-mount-LTM-lens-to-Canon-EOS-R-RF-mount-full-frame-mirrorless-adapter/183738105147?hash=item2ac7a4fd3b:g:irkAAOSwuTRckKVG
06-26-2019, 10:57 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-26-2019, 11:01 AM by Rover.)
Cool, now you have a unique looking lens. It's nice to see something like this sometime. Remember how Markus posted a review of the "Frankenstein" Sigma 70-200/2.8 OS HSM that had part old, part new finish?
P.S. I knew I was posting the link for the original version (the one I saw in the wild), not the A one. That one is also mentioned in the Camera Museum.
https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef276.html
P.P.S. It appears that there was a (semi-)matching 100-200A? Also without a focus ring.
https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/ef281.html
P.P.P.S. If Klaus had still been based in Europe, you would have totally had to send this lens for him to review.
Interesting, that 100-200mm f4.5 A. Another lens especially made for thet dumbed down EOS 750/750 QD/850. I do not think that that dumbed down range did all that well, I don't think that EOS line lasted very long.
(06-25-2019, 07:09 PM)toni-a Wrote: Was that worth the effort ? up to you to judge, but it seems you enjoyed it.
It is not a perfect lens at all. But a lot to like:
Very small and light, about the size of this Sigma lens (but quite a bit lighter):
compared to 24-70mm f4
Compared to the EF 24-70mm f4 L IS USM, which probably does EVERYTHING better (sharpness, AF speed and noise, wide angle, CA, PF, contrast and veiling, vignetting, MFD, IS, sealing), you can see the attraction of this 1988 lens... Tiny. And only 8 euros.
It is like having 3 slow primes (35mm, 50mm, 70mm) of the size and weight of a (not too fast) 50mm prime. Of course I would not say no to a 24-70mm f2.8 L USM or 24-70mm f4 L IS USM, but the f4 lens already weighs almost 3 times what this old little 35-70mm lens weighs. So this silly little lens will always have its uses (and you can't so easily damage the coatings on it as you can with the 24-70mm f2.8 L USM II).
And to be frank, not too much effort involved in getting it basically for 8 euros and taking a rubber ring off one lens and putting it on this one ;-)
|
