Canon TV 50mm f/0.95 optical construction

OlivierAOP

OlivierAOP

medium format
Local time
12:05 PM
Joined
May 30, 2019
Messages
266
Hi. First post here, in search of advice.

I found a Canon 50mm f/0.95 in my lab, it was used 30+ years ago in medical imaging. It is missing the rearmost optical element. That's based on appearance and from the back-focus distance (too long), FOV (too narrow) and image quality (quite poor at large apertures). It is also missing a mount but I made one for my Sony A7.

My hopes of finding a correct replacement lens element are pretty low but maybe Mr. Kitchingman or others have detailed info on that element?

It looks bi-convex from the diagram, and based on rough measurements and calculations it should have a focal length of approx. 50mm.
 

Attachments

  • DSCF4730.JPG
    DSCF4730.JPG
    27.9 KB · Views: 0
With no rear element, no wonder the pictures are blurry.

Here's the optical diagram. No idea what type of glass Canon used, or the curvature of the rear element. Good luck.

s43-lens-construction.gif


Jim B.
 
Thanks. I did lift the curvatures and thickness from the diagram and scaled the results to what I think is the correct OD of the element. I got sensible results (r=75 & 85mm, t=5mm) which gives focal lengths of ~55-80mm depending on glass type. I doubt the diagram is to scale given that there should be a space between the concave doublets for the aperture.
 
Last edited:
You're so close to having a neato lens. I guess I wonder why the rear element is missing. Was it intentionally removed? Or some mishap? I know how labs can get filled with the remnants of so many past activities -- kind of fun to peek in my drawers sometimes. So...perhaps that element is sitting in a drawer? Worth a look?
 
It's funny. When I was researching the lens after it was found (I had no idea it existed nor that it was missing an element), I was thinking this lens might not be for me. Now that it's out of reach I have a bad case of the blue balls LOL.

Anyway. My colleague who was around back then has no recollection of that lens. Too bad. My best guest a a mishap... the lens it quite bad without the element.

I did find an element in the drawer that sort of fitted. Testing (freelensing) did improve the IQ and restored the FOV. That's why (+ some tests/calculations) I think a 50mm element will help but it'll be bad at f0.95 I think.

Short of finding spare parts or hiring a lab that'll have to do!
 
If you're so inclined, wouldn't it be possible to buy or borrow another specimen, measure the radii of that element, and together with the focal length that your incomplete lens has, calculate what glass properties are needed?
 
Well right now the images are a hazy mess with no contrast or detail at f0.95. More 'knocked-out' than 'dreamy'. Once I figure stuff out I'll post pictures to illustrate.

Retinax ideally I'd find a broken one for the parts. Buying or borrowing is an option but measuring curvature accurately requires specialised equipment.

I guess this thread shows my wishful thinking. Even if I knew the exact specs of the element I don't know that it could be sourced unless it's coincidentally off-the-shelf like 50mm FL symmetrical bi-convex in BK-7.
 
OlivierAOP said:
Well right now the images are a hazy mess with no contrast or detail at f0.95. More 'knocked-out' than 'dreamy'. Once I figure stuff out I'll post pictures to illustrate.

Retinax ideally I'd find a broken one for the parts. Buying or borrowing is an option but measuring curvature accurately requires specialised equipment.

I guess this thread shows my wishful thinking. Even if I knew the exact specs of the element I don't know that it could be sourced unless it's coincidentally off-the-shelf like 50mm FL symmetrical bi-convex in BK-7.
Click to expand...


Yes, it seems more likely that you could find one with a broken front. Fortunately normally the fronts are destroyed in a fall or so.
 
I corresponded with DAG, Japan Camera Hunter and Kamera Service (Netherlands). Asked an optical physicist as well. No luck. I'm a newcomer in my area regarding photography and I haven't found local people. Happy to receive further suggestions!
 
I think there is no way to build the rear element in the right spec. If you don't want to waste this lens part, just sell it for parts. I guess some technician may need the rest of the element to fix the other Canon 0.95. Or you bought another lens part with the rear element and resemble together.
 
Small update. Via Marco Cavina's site I found the patent for the lens. It's by Oude Delft (US 3357776) which Canon may have licensed?

I modeled the specs on WinLens3D and without the last element the focal length matches that of my incomplete Canon (f=115-6mm, measured via FOV crop factor vs. a 90mm lens).

I also modeled the Canon f1.2 lens (US patent 283361102) and it doesn't match. So I can't recycle one of those.

So the rear element should be f=40mm. I can't get one in the same glass (high refraction & low dispersion) but I've ordered some in BK7. I'll update when I've tested them.
 
NY_Dan said:
The problem is elementary my dear Olivier.
Click to expand...

Because I need the right element?

Anyway. I tested some BK7 40mm and 43mm assymetric pieces. Correct FOV is right in between (i.e. close enough) but image is kinda poop. Guess I need high refraction glass as per patent.

A piece from the Canon f/1.2 would likely be decent as well.
 
Olivier, our pal Peter Kitchingman lists Mukai Jirou as the designer of this lens. Why do you think Canon might have used an Old Delft design?
 
It's only a theory. So far it *seems* to match the lens and while many Canon patents are out there (from H. Ito and M. Jirou), the Oude Delft one is the only one at 0.95 that I could find. It's my only lead basically.
 
But the patent was applied for in 1963, after being prepared in Nov 1962. The Canon 0.95 hit the market in June 1961. Again, I'm using Peter K's information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top