What's your oldest Canon EF lens?

[rmblack]

I have the older 80-200 2.8 all metal "drainpipe" from 1989 (which I just found out recently is perfect for IR photography!), and the old 28-70 2.8 ~1993 all metal as well. The AF switch just broke on the 28-70 so I might be taking it apart or getting it fixed locally soon, but the 80-200 was fixed last year after I bought it and is a great lens!

 

[sulla]

I offer an "E" lens from 1990: EF 35-80mm f/4-5.6

Gosh, I just realise that I haven't got this one in my signature...

 

[Jon Gilchrist]

I have a 50/1.8 Mk 1 with a date code UB0200, so that's February of 1987. Pristine condition.

It's for sale if anyone is interested.

+1 Mine is also UB0200. It looks even more pristine, if that's possible, than yours.

Looking at the picture perhaps "pristine" isn't the right word for my lens. Considering the thing is 26 years old and was not stored as a museum piece, it's in pretty amazing condition. There are a couple minor scuff marks and there is evidence on the contacts that it has actually been mounted on a camera. It's still in better shape than my 2-year old 24-105. I doubt there are many Mk2 plastic fantastic versions still surviving after 20+ years.

 

[Click]

My 2 oldest Canon lens are:

14 f2.8L II ... 2009

16-35 f2.8L II ... 2009

 

[mrsfotografie]

I have a 50/1.8 Mk 1 with a date code UB0200, so that's February of 1987. Pristine condition.

It's for sale if anyone is interested.

+1 Mine is also UB0200. It looks even more pristine, if that's possible, than yours.

Looking at the picture perhaps "pristine" isn't the right word for my lens. Considering the thing is 26 years old and was not stored as a museum piece, it's in pretty amazing condition. There are a couple minor scuff marks and there is evidence on the contacts that it has actually been mounted on a camera. It's still in better shape than my 2-year old 24-105. I doubt there are many Mk2 plastic fantastic versions still surviving after 20+ years.

It says something about relative build quality when people rather buy a 23+ years old occasion at a premium over a newly manufactured, all plastic model. I payed 1.3x what the MkII costs and have never regretted it

 

[paul13walnut5]

I have a 50/1.8 Mk 1 with a date code UB0200, so that's February of 1987. Pristine condition.

It's for sale if anyone is interested.

+1 Mine is also UB0200. It looks even more pristine, if that's possible, than yours.

Looking at the picture perhaps "pristine" isn't the right word for my lens. Considering the thing is 26 years old and was not stored as a museum piece, it's in pretty amazing condition. There are a couple minor scuff marks and there is evidence on the contacts that it has actually been mounted on a camera. It's still in better shape than my 2-year old 24-105. I doubt there are many Mk2 plastic fantastic versions still surviving after 20+ years.

It says something about relative build quality when people rather buy a 23+ years old occasion at a premium over a newly manufactured, all plastic model. I payed 1.3x what the MkII costs and have never regretted it

I had a mark 1 that lost infinity focus and couldn't be repaired unless I could source a donor lens with a different fault.
By that point I threw the towel in, optically there is no difference in any case.

I wouldn't buy a mark one now, mainly because of the parts issue, 23 years is a lot of iris movements etc...

They have become a cult item, fair enough, i just kind of think if you are going to spend 50% more for build quality then why not go that little bit further and get improved build, improved focus, improved bokeh, improved max aperture and pick up an in warranty in production servicable 1.4 instead?

I settled for the plastic fantastic.

 

[mrsfotografie]

I had a mark 1 that lost infinity focus and couldn't be repaired unless I could source a donor lens with a different fault.
By that point I threw the towel in, optically there is no difference in any case.

I wouldn't buy a mark one now, mainly because of the parts issue, 23 years is a lot of iris movements etc...

They have become a cult item, fair enough, i just kind of think if you are going to spend 50% more for build quality then why not go that little bit further and get improved build, improved focus, improved bokeh, improved max aperture and pick up an in warranty in production servicable 1.4 instead?

I settled for the plastic fantastic.

Actually from what I've heard the 1.4 is not really that reliable, with stuck focus rings for instance. History shows the Mk I to be remarkably durable, so it's worth having a unit that hasn't seen that much use over the years (hooray to my sublime copy )

Nothing wrong with the plastic fantastic by the way, given its low pricing (but still I prefer the Mk I).