Why not Canon FD lenses? And other such questions... at DVinfo.net

Dylan Couper · March 2nd, 2009, 12:58 AM

I'm curious why everyone is jumping on Nikon lenses and no one is using Canon FD lenses, which also have external, manual aperture control? There's plenty of them, and they are cheap... or is there something I don't know?

Chris Barcellos · March 2nd, 2009, 02:07 AM

I have a couple of them. I believe their mount makes them unadaptable. I'm guessing adding any adapter would result in the lens being to far away from the film/imager plane and loss of focus except at very short distances.

Olof Ekbergh · March 2nd, 2009, 06:26 AM

I use them sometimes, but they need an adapter with a lens to be able to focus to infinity.
This also makes them a 1.3 tele extender.
Here is a link to some tests with FD lenses.

Old Canon FD lenses on 5DMKII

Dylan Couper · March 2nd, 2009, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Barcellos

I have a couple of them. I believe their mount makes them unadaptable. I'm guessing adding any adapter would result in the lens being to far away from the film/imager plane and loss of focus except at very short distances.

There are lots of FD-EF adapters on Ebay for $20-$40, some are glassless but lose locus planes, some use glass to reestablish correct focus.

I'm asking because I've got a set of fast (under F2) FD primes. I don't love them and was going to replace them with Nikons, but wondered if anyone had other experiences with them.

Gary Szunyogh · March 2nd, 2009, 06:05 PM

There is no infinity focus on anything I have except on a 300 f4. Research I found shows that the adapters only work with long lenses.+

Olof Ekbergh · March 2nd, 2009, 06:27 PM

I never heard of a Canon SLR lens w/o infinity focus in 40 years of shooting.

All my old lenses 24 35 50 135 all focus to infinity.

And if you check the video I posted it shows how dramatically different they are. 50 very soft 35 sharp and saturated 24 ditto. They all focus according to their markings with my adaptor from B&H.

My new Canon L lenses 17mm - 400mm all focus to infinity as well and are much sharper than the old Canons. I use them most of the time with the 5D. But I like the special effects you can get with the old lenses. I also use a Nikon 50mm 1.4 with adapter no glass, nice dof and easy to control.

I really think of the 5D as a convenient vid cam but mostly as a still camera. I do use it for special situations, when I need shallow dof, traveling light, or low light but it really is not a pro vid cam.

Dylan Couper · March 2nd, 2009, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Olof Ekbergh

I never heard of a Canon SLR lens w/o infinity focus in 40 years of shooting.

I believe he means with the use of an adapter.

Re FD lenses:
After doing a little more research, there are two types of adapters you can get, ones without glass, that won't let the lenses focus to infinity, and ones with glass that allow infinite focus.

So, assuming the focus isn't an issue, what reasons are there that you wouldn't want to use Canon FD lenses instead of Nikon?

Jon Fairhurst · March 2nd, 2009, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

So, assuming the focus isn't an issue, what reasons are there that you wouldn't want to use Canon FD lenses instead of Nikon?

I think you've answered your own question. To get infinite focus with an AI lens, I can use a $15 adapter. To use an FD lens with infinite focus, I need a more expensive adapter with an extra piece of glass in the chain.

To turn the question around, why exactly would I choose FD over AI glass?

Dylan Couper · March 2nd, 2009, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst

I think you've answered your own question. To get infinite focus with an AI lens, I can use a $15 adapter. To use an FD lens with infinite focus, I need a more expensive adapter with an extra piece of glass in the chain.

More expensive = $40... not that big a deal.
The extra glass... may or may not be a big deal depending on the quality. Does anyone know for sure?

Quote:

To turn the question around, why exactly would I choose FD over AI glass?

Because if you are me, you already own a set of F1.8-F2 FD prime lenses? :)

So I guess my question is... is there anything quality wise that FD lenses lack that Nikon AI's have?

Jon Fairhurst · March 2nd, 2009, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

Because if you are me, you already own a set of F1.8-F2 FD prime lenses? :)

In that case, FD lenses are perfect - and easily worth the $40 to try them out. :)

Dylan Couper · March 3rd, 2009, 12:18 AM

Just bought an adapter, I'll post screen grabs when I get it.

Gerdy Vandermeersch · November 5th, 2009, 07:47 AM

So Dylan,

Which adapter did you bought? And do you have any screen grabs yet?

Greetings

Brian Boyko · November 5th, 2009, 10:27 AM

I bought an adapter without glass. I can tell you that I'm totally unsatisfied with it.

I'm able to use a couple of Tamron lenses (with something called an "Adaptall" on them, though I can't figure out if that's part of the lens or if it's something permanently attached to the lens) but any of the Canon or Sigma FD lenses I have won't work.

Dylan Couper · November 5th, 2009, 12:30 PM

I purchased the infinite focus adapter with the glass.
My best technical description is that the picture looked like suck. (cmpared to nikons w no xtra glass)
I've snce sold all my FD lenses (part of a 35mm adapter package, which they were great with). The adapter is just not a good thing.
If anyone wants my FD adapter, email me. :)

Dan Brockett · November 5th, 2009, 12:35 PM

Thanks for proving that Dylan. Everyone in this business tries to cheap out and it is refreshing to hear from someone who did and discovered why it is bad to cheap out usually. Even my Nikons, some of them look decent, but some of them look like you know what. I recently bought two Canon lenses, the 17-40 f4 and the 70-300 VR 3.5-5.6. I am glad that I did.

Dan

March 2nd, 2009, 12:58 AM	#1
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	Why not Canon FD lenses? And other such questions... I'm curious why everyone is jumping on Nikon lenses and no one is using Canon FD lenses, which also have external, manual aperture control? There's plenty of them, and they are cheap... or is there something I don't know? __________________ Need to rent camera gear in Vancouver BC? Check me out at camerarentalsvancouver.com

March 2nd, 2009, 02:07 AM	#2
Chris Barcellos Inner Circle Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Elk Grove CA Posts: 6,838	I have a couple of them. I believe their mount makes them unadaptable. I'm guessing adding any adapter would result in the lens being to far away from the film/imager plane and loss of focus except at very short distances. __________________ Chris J. Barcellos

March 2nd, 2009, 06:05 PM	#5
Gary Szunyogh Regular Crew Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Strongsville, Ohio Posts: 30	FD's are for telephotos only on the eos There is no infinity focus on anything I have except on a 300 f4. Research I found shows that the adapters only work with long lenses.+

March 3rd, 2009, 12:18 AM	#11
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	Just bought an adapter, I'll post screen grabs when I get it. __________________ Need to rent camera gear in Vancouver BC? Check me out at camerarentalsvancouver.com

November 5th, 2009, 10:27 AM	#13
Brian Boyko Major Player Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 773	I bought an adapter without glass. I can tell you that I'm totally unsatisfied with it. I'm able to use a couple of Tamron lenses (with something called an "Adaptall" on them, though I can't figure out if that's part of the lens or if it's something permanently attached to the lens) but any of the Canon or Sigma FD lenses I have won't work. __________________ Equip: Panny GH1, Canon HG20, Juicedlink, AT897, Sennh. EW/GW100, Zoom H2, Vegas 8.1

March 2nd, 2009, 06:26 AM	#3
Olof Ekbergh Sponsor: Westside AV Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA Posts: 1,365	I use them sometimes, but they need an adapter with a lens to be able to focus to infinity. This also makes them a 1.3 tele extender. Here is a link to some tests with FD lenses. Old Canon FD lenses on 5DMKII

March 2nd, 2009, 06:27 PM	#6
Olof Ekbergh Sponsor: Westside AV Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA Posts: 1,365	I never heard of a Canon SLR lens w/o infinity focus in 40 years of shooting. All my old lenses 24 35 50 135 all focus to infinity. And if you check the video I posted it shows how dramatically different they are. 50 very soft 35 sharp and saturated 24 ditto. They all focus according to their markings with my adaptor from B&H. My new Canon L lenses 17mm - 400mm all focus to infinity as well and are much sharper than the old Canons. I use them most of the time with the 5D. But I like the special effects you can get with the old lenses. I also use a Nikon 50mm 1.4 with adapter no glass, nice dof and easy to control. I really think of the 5D as a convenient vid cam but mostly as a still camera. I do use it for special situations, when I need shallow dof, traveling light, or low light but it really is not a pro vid cam.

November 5th, 2009, 07:47 AM	#12
Gerdy Vandermeersch Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Ieper, Belgium Posts: 75	So Dylan, Which adapter did you bought? And do you have any screen grabs yet? Greetings

November 5th, 2009, 12:30 PM	#14
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	I purchased the infinite focus adapter with the glass. My best technical description is that the picture looked like suck. (cmpared to nikons w no xtra glass) I've snce sold all my FD lenses (part of a 35mm adapter package, which they were great with). The adapter is just not a good thing. If anyone wants my FD adapter, email me. :) __________________ Need to rent camera gear in Vancouver BC? Check me out at camerarentalsvancouver.com

November 5th, 2009, 12:35 PM	#15
Dan Brockett Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Los Angeles, California Posts: 2,109	Thanks for proving that Dylan. Everyone in this business tries to cheap out and it is refreshing to hear from someone who did and discovered why it is bad to cheap out usually. Even my Nikons, some of them look decent, but some of them look like you know what. I recently bought two Canon lenses, the 17-40 f4 and the 70-300 VR 3.5-5.6. I am glad that I did. Dan