This Canon FD Glass is Pretty Good.

Steve M. said:
Did you buy a 135 2.5 Brad? That's a great price. I just ordered an FD 85 1.8 to compare it to the 135 2.5. Looking at the first roll, I think the 135 needs to be stopped down to maybe f4 on portraits due to it's long focal length. It weighs a ton mounted on that FT QL, but it will be interesting to compare it to the 85 1.8.
Click to expand...

Yeah it was the 2.5! It's in BGN condition. I almost bought the 200 f/4 SSC FOR $22.00! But I want the 200mm f/2.8.
 
jarski said:
FD 85/1.2 would be nice beast to try. not a sleeper lens unfortunately.
Click to expand...

It's certainly a great way to find out how narrow 1.2 really is. I can't tell you how many photos I have with the tip of a person's NOSE perfectly in focus. :bang:
 
"I can't tell you how many photos I have with the tip of a person's NOSE perfectly in focus".

That's funny. It's what I'm seeing on the 135 2.5. Normally I shoot a 90, and w/ the 135 wide open at 2.5, the part that's in focus is pretty darn narrow.
 
Joining the fun.

6967626320_fcf2781dcb_c.jpg


Canon FTb + 135/2.0 FD.
 
A good week on CrazedList.org

A good week on CrazedList.org

I have quite a bit of Canon... Two T90's recently serviced, some lenses FD glass, An EF (The Black Beauty All black body, of the F1 era), EOS A2e. So my eyes light up when I see Canon on CL.

four days ago....$100.

Camera bag with:
Very nice AE-1 body
Speedlite 199A
FD 50mm f1.4
FD 28mm f2.8
FD 135mm f2.5
All documentation..manuals

Excellent condition, clean clear glass

Made my Day... looks like a few days at Smith Rock (Central Oregon) is in order. Film thawing as I post.
 
FD on micro 4/3

FD on micro 4/3

raid said:
I have been using FD glass for about 30 years now. My favorites include the 50/1.2L, 85/1.2L, 80-200/4L, 28-50/3.5 SSC and 24mm/2.8.
Click to expand...

Raid, have you used any of your Canon FD lens' adapted to micro 4/3?
 
kuzano said:
four days ago....$100.

Camera bag with:
Very nice AE-1 body
Speedlite 199A
FD 50mm f1.4
FD 28mm f2.8
FD 135mm f2.5
All documentation..manuals

Excellent condition, clean clear glass

Made my Day... looks like a few days at Smith Rock (Central Oregon) is in order. Film thawing as I post.
Click to expand...

nice find. 3 great lenses in one bag. have a lot of fun!
 
kuzano said:
Raid, have you used any of your Canon FD lens' adapted to micro 4/3?
Click to expand...


No, I have not. Maybe I should do this soon.
I have the amazing 500/4.5L too, and it is a very sharp lens. I would get effectively a 1000mm lens that is sharp when using it on the EP-2 or EPL-1.
I wonder how good macro lenses perform on the micro 4/3 system.

This is so much fun!
 
Your both welcome.

Yes DOF is very thin and very difficult to nail on the E-P1, especially in bright light.
 
raid said:
......I have the amazing 500/4.5L too, and it is a very sharp lens. I would get effectively a 1000mm lens that is sharp when using it on the EP-2 or EPL-1.......
Click to expand...

I can tell you that I get excellent results when I use my 500mm FL-F on my E-P1. A great combo for wildlife or dramatic shots.

Jim B.
 
Why are people so surprised that high quality lenses designed in the past (especially in the last 50 years or so) are good and sharp?

Do you think everyone who came before you didn't know what they were doing?
 
I'm not surprised that old lenses are great. Some of the best lenses I ever owned were old AND uncoated (Summar, Heliar, etc). What I am surprised at is that some of the Canon FD glass is so good! Before now, the only prime FD lenses I ever owned were a 50 1.8 and a 50 1.4. Now these are excellent performers, but truthfully a Leica R 50 stomps them in the dirt. Not so the longer FD and FL primes. I bought an FD 85 1.8 since starting this thread, and it's as good a portrait lens as I've ever used. OK, maybe an R Summicron 90 2.0 would be sharper, but that's of dubious benefit for portraits. I have nothing to base this on other than looking at web images, but I'm sure some of the old FD glass takes better photos than modern Canon glass. You just have to manually focus the lenses.

Trust me, not that many people are aware that the old Canon glass is really, really good. That, and the fact that up until recently you couldn't easily adapt the lenses to other cameras due to tight lens to film plane distances, has nicely kept prices affordable. Now, all the lenses aren't as good as others, but when you DO find glass this good, it's great.

I took these ages ago w/ that FD 50 1.8 I was talking about. Bought it and an AE-1 body w/ hippie strap in a Savannah thrift store for $13.50. And they took an ou tof state check for it. My best photo deal ever probably, image wise.

SteveMarino_30973f508800.jpg


[
SteveMarino_dc6950508798.jpg


SteveMarino_803869508799.jpg


SteveMarino_ea136c508797.jpg


SteveMarino_8a5035508794.jpg


SteveMarino_29cbcf508793.jpg


SteveMarino_cd1959508796.jpg
 
In their day, Canon FD lenses were considered to be very high quality.

I would not agree Leica R lenses "stomp them in the dirt". The Leica lenses were incrementally better, but it would be very difficult to tell photos made with Leica and Canon lenses apart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom