Canon FD lenses on an M Body?

No, but I've got a Nikon F to Leica adapter, and I see no reason why Canon lenses shouldn't work as well as Nikon, viz., very well if you don't mind scale focusing and big, bulky lenses.

Come to that, I have a 14/3.5 Sigma MF Nikon which was also available in Canon mount...

Cheers,

R.
 
Canon at one time made an adapter to mount FD/FL lenses on a Canon/Leica screw mount RF camera. Add a M adapter and you can mount it on a M series camera. The adapter is "Canon Lens Mount Converter B".
 
I have used Canon wide angle lenses with Adapter B on Leica bodies. There is no RF coupling. As mentioned above, using large sized lenses with a sleek RF camera is bulky. On the other hand, I was able to use the 7.5mm fisheye lens on the M6 [using also the M adapter], which was cool. It makes the 7.5 lens just another lens in my RF outfit.
 
I've done what Photodog writes about. Scale focussing, zone focussing, or measuring distance with another camera or with a separate rangefinder.
 
I have an adapter - the Novoflex LEICAN one designed to allow Canon lenses to fit on Leica bodies. It is a screw mount one but could be utilised on an M body by the simple expedient of adding an LTM to M mount adapter . Its occasionally fun to use an SLR lens on a Leica body. I do not have FD lenses only FL which function well and have a manual as well as an automatic stop down setting. (Not sure about FD lenses.)
 
Peter,

The FL lenses with the stop down lever have an advantage here over the "modern" FD lenses. I read online that they sell an accessory pin that allows FD lenses to be stopped down when needed, but I have been unable to buy one so far.
 
raid said:
The FL lenses with the stop down lever have an advantage here over the "modern" FD lenses. I read online that they sell an accessory pin that allows FD lenses to be stopped down when needed, but I have been unable to buy one so far.
Click to expand...

"New" FD lenses (with the so-called bayonet mount) need this accessory pin which is nothing more than a small plastic thingee that clips over the stop-down pin. I never bought one but remember they were easy to come by back in the 80's. Older breech-lock FD lenses could be put in full manual mode by pressing the large stop down lever counter-clockwise (back of lens facing you) until it locked. This is what I do when I put my FD 15mm on one of my Leicas'.

Jim B.
 
Jim,
I have a few breech-lock lenses, but I also have quite a few bayonet mount FD lenses. I still would benefit from on of those "plastic thingees".
 
rogue_designer said:
I have the Canon Adapter B and use it with my Canon 17f/4 mounted on a P - its glorious fun.
Click to expand...

The 17mm/4 may be the most useful lens to consider for such applications. It is a very nice lens.
 
raid said:
I have a few breech-lock lenses, but I also have quite a few bayonet mount FD lenses. I still would benefit from on of those "plastic thingees".
Click to expand...

Raid,

I wish I had some that I could send you. I remember visiting my local camera shop twenty some years back and recall that they had about 200 of these plastic attachments sitting in a drawer (each in a plastic bag). I've always preferred the older breech-lock FD lenses to the newer variety so saw no reason to buy any of these things. Wish I had now.

Jim B.
 
The one thing I don't understand is what the gain is? If, for example, you use it on a Canon P, the resulting camera is the same size as putting the lens on an EF, an FTb or AE-1; since you need an external finder with the RF, you don't have a vertical size advantage either; framing is much more accurate with the SLR finder; you don't have to go hunting or improvising finders for awkward focal lengths like 7.5mm fisheyes or 17mm wideangles, which can be difficult; you don't get metering; you have to guess-focus while with the SLR you can (when needed) focus through the lens.

The only possible advantage is that you have one less body. The RF may be a little more silent, but if you use mirror lock-up you get that problem out of the way as well. And a workable Canon FD body for this combination probably costs less than the adapter nowadays.

It's fun, of course. Myself I've been looking at Canon FD-M39 adapters more than once. But since my widest FD lens is a 24, I could never convince myself that I would actually use this combination for taking pictures instead of playing around; in practice I rather take the extra body. My combination this year was the M5 for 21&40mm and the AE-1P for 50&90mm; now that the AE-1 is dead there will be a T90 to fill the job.
 
If someone has switched away from SLR cameras to RF cameras, then using such adapters allows that person to make use of some lenses. Take into account that Canon FD lenses are extremely inexpensive these days, so a RF user can benefit from adding a wide angle lens of high optical quality. In my case, I found occasional use for the 7.5mm lens.

Of course, if you still enjoy using the Canon SLR system, then this adapter becomes just another gadget.
 
Well, to be honest the lenses we are talking about would be a reason to switch back from RFs to SLRs at least for this particular lens. Since you don't get to use the rangefinder or the internal finder anyway with an FD wideangle, I just don't see a reason why to use a RF camera in the first place. If one wants to stick to RFs at any cost, in this particular instance it sounds like a particularly artificial and counterproductive way of limiting oneself.

Canon FD bodies are probably even less expensive than Canon FD lenses. AE-1s sell for 20 EUR (and that's a positively brilliant and epoch-making camera), and even T-90s can be had for under 100 EUR. It's not like SLRs are evil or something 😉

Philipp
 
Philipp,

I love my Canon FD system. I have two T90, two F1N, one F1n, and one A1. The RF system is usually lighter to carry around than the FD system. Else, both systems are great for photography. I never even gave it a thought to sell off my FD system when the prices still were relatively high[er].
 
the benefit?

If I decide to only carry one body. I have other lens options open to me. (easier to throw the 17/4 in the bag, than a second body + lens) for that random fun shot.

If I'm sure I'm going to use that lens for a given reason, I'll take the F1N's. But I don't normally carry them.
 
rxmd said:
Well, to be honest the lenses we are talking about would be a reason to switch back from RFs to SLRs at least for this particular lens. Since you don't get to use the rangefinder or the internal finder anyway with an FD wideangle, I just don't see a reason why to use a RF camera in the first place. If one wants to stick to RFs at any cost, in this particular instance it sounds like a particularly artificial and counterproductive way of limiting oneself.

Canon FD bodies are probably even less expensive than Canon FD lenses. AE-1s sell for 20 EUR (and that's a positively brilliant and epoch-making camera), and even T-90s can be had for under 100 EUR. It's not like SLRs are evil or something 😉

Philipp
Click to expand...

No, SLR's aren't evil and I shoot a Canon 5D tody.

I use EF Canon lenses today on my 5D. I also like the compactness of the M8 and as for range finder coupling, the CV 12/5.6 and 15/4.5 I use don't couple and don't need to.

I'm most interested in the FD 14/2.8 as it is a fast Ultra wide options for the M8. I use a Zeiss 21/2.8 on the 5D and it doesn't autofocus and must manually be stopped down but that's not a problem either.

I'm looking at the 14/2.8 MkII for the 5D but FD can be set up for use on both my screw mount and M-mount bodies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Leica M mount to others
Replies
1
Views
371
Cascadilla
C
macmx
Best M body for 75mm?
Replies
2
Views
464
Harry the K
H
B
How best to sell AE-1 + off-brand zooms?
Replies
14
Views
992
OmegaB600
O
S
Canon FD Lenses on an FL Mount Body?
Replies
12
Views
3K
David Murphy
David Murphy
caila77
Mamiya SX lenses compatibility solutions?
Replies
3
Views
157
caila77
caila77
Back
Top Bottom