50mm f1.4 Vintage Pick: Canon FD or Nikkor or... Rokkor?

50mm f1.4 Vintage Pick: Canon FD or Nikkor or... Rokkor?

  • Total voters
    64
A lot of FD glass is fine with a few exceptions just like any other brand - but the FD locking mechanism leaves a lot to be desired, especially in consistancy from lens to lens.
When it comes to vintage glass I'll take F mount anyday over FD for that reason. I have since sold off nearly all of them (manual canons), the FD 24/1.4 was the hardest to part with.
 
There are a lot more Nikkor Ai-s lenses available than Canon FD lenses. Nikon still manufactures new Ai-s lenses in Japan because modern Nikon bodies still use F mount. It's getting harder to find good quality FD lenses. FD lenses are popular because they are more imperfect than Ai-s lenses. As Berry said, it was a mere coincident that mirrorless system + old imperfect lenses like Canon FD yielded less aliasing. I have both Canon FD 50mm 1.4 and Nikkor 50mm 1.4 A-is. They were cheaper a year ago. I wanted to collect more "legacy" lenses, but they are getting expensive. Canon FD 20mm 2.8 and an adapter go easily $500+. So do Nikkor 24mm 2.0 + an adapter. I'd rather buy fast m43 lens like 25mm 0.95 or 1.4 when the price drops more. YMMV.
 
Sorry forgot to mention this.
The other huge advantage for going with vintage nikon and I mean HUGE advantage is the flange distance. You can put a manual nikon on a gh1 as well as a canon eos mount. Not the same for FD's.
 
BTW what's nice about FD 50mm and Ai-s 50mm is that they are great for "reference" lenses when mixing with m43 lenses. I pick either FD or Ai-s and mix with m43 lenses. I don't mix FD and Ai-s though. Then the clip from the chosen legacy len becomes sorta reference, and I try to match clips from m43 lenses to the reference. Don't think too much about it. Just own them both. They are still cheap.
 
Putting Nikkor lenses on Canon EOS mount... is it really a good idea? F to EOS adapter seems extremely thin. Does the infinite focus work? Same thing is happening in mirrorless systems. NEX mount has just a few millimeter shorter flange distance than m43's. The adapter may not hold m43 lenses properly on nex system.
 
The Nikon to EOS adapters are absolutely fine. As are C/Y to EOS adapters. They are this, but 1.5mm isn't "too" thin for aluminium, at all.
 
stonebat said:
Does the infinite focus work?
Click to expand...
No it always focuses past infinity ... but if you are shooting video with still lenses you should not be relying on the (inadequate) lens markings anyway. HDMI to an LCD that is at least 5" is a good idea for getting accurate focus.
F to eos adapters are thin but fine, get one per lens and a bag of eos rear caps - but no need to talk about that in the GH1 forum, plenty of info in the 7d section.
 
Lucas Adamson said:
Certainly people aren't voting Rokkor, because they're not familiar with it. It's the biggest bargain, for sure, and probably the better lens anyway (not that there's much in it).
Click to expand...
True,
hence I wish I shouldn't have put Rokkor into this Race, since my main objective was to compare Niks-&-Cans according to the Sharpness and Look.
And Nikon seems to be a winner in Majority.

But hard to say how many people who Voted have Used and Tested both Nikkors and FDs to compare them.
 
exttreem said:
But hard to say how many people who Voted have Used and Tested both Nikkors and FDs to compare them.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I have a couple of FDs and a pair of Russian lenses, but have not compared them to the Nikkors. Hence my non participation in your poll.

But now that I have finally got my GH2 today, I'll be able to test those for the first time since I purchased them.

:thumbsup:
 
exttreem said:
True,
hence I wish I shouldn't have put Rokkor into this Race, since my main objective was to compare Niks-&-Cans according to the Sharpness and Look.
And Nikon seems to be a winner in Majority.

But hard to say how many people who Voted have Used and Tested both Nikkors and FDs to compare them.
Click to expand...

I've used both for many years. And I chose Nkon every time given the choice. As did most professionals at the time.
 
stoneinapond said:
Exactly. I have a couple of FDs and a pair of Russian lenses, but have not compared them to the Nikkors. Hence my non participation in your poll.

But now that I have finally got my GH2 today, I'll be able to test those for the first time since I purchased them.

:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I would love to know which one you like after comparing FDs and Nikkors (mainly 50mm).
Please Vote and let us know after doing it.
Best of Luck!
 
exttreem said:
I would love to know which one you like after comparing FDs and Nikkors (mainly 50mm).
Please Vote and let us know after doing it.
Best of Luck!
Click to expand...

Sorry if my message wasn't clear. I do not own any Nikkor. I have a MIR24 and Helios 44-5M in addition to two FDs. So I won't be much use there. And all four lenses are different focal lengths, with closest being the Helios, 57, and a Canon being 50. But at some point I will be more than happy to share product from all of them.
 
I hope everyone is Thinking about Sharpness before Voting.
I don't believe that Softer look makes Video more Film-Like.

Sharpness must be nicely maintained if I want to Blow it out to the Film.
 
But all of these lenses are sharp. I've owned them all over the years. All are sharp at f5.6 and f8 for sure. Sharp as a tack. They are all sharp(ish) at f2 in the centre.

For me it's not about sharpness, but about the contrast between sharp in focus and soft out of focus.

That's what Zeiss is so good for. What's in focus is pingingly sharp against a soft dreamy background. That's what I love, and Zeiss is the best for this. For this effect, of those listed, it is the Rokkor for me, but I feel the Zeiss f1.4 or f1.7 should be in the test, because it's the best standard 50 prime IMHO. Actually the best is the Zeiss G lens Planar 45mm f2 rangefinder lens, unless you go to Cine primes, when the cost gets silly.

exttreem said:
I hope everyone is Thinking about Sharpness before Voting.
I don't believe that Softer look makes Video more Film-Like.

Sharpness must be nicely maintained if I want to Blow it out to the Film.
Click to expand...
 
I own both Ai-s and FD, but I prefer Ai-s. It's easier to match with M43 lenses.

Also I hate FD adapter. It got stuck in 28mm lens, and I can't get it out. Metabones has very nice Nikon-to-M43 adapter. I love it.

For future mirrorless systems, I bet F mount adapter is likely to be the first available 3rd party adapter. So I'm sticking to Ai-s.
 
All lenses, even Zeiss and Nikon, have their own unique character. Saying this one or that one is "better" sort of misses the point.

Going by what "pros" use is also a non-starter. Not everyone is looking for the perfectly characterless, artifact-free lens, and I'd wager that if most of you ever actually got to shoot with such a lens, it would be a serious let down. Boring, even.

Look at microphones, the aural equivalent of camera lenses. There are nearly perfect microphones available at very reasonable cost -- extraordinarily linear omni electret measurement mics (similar to the tiny mic capsules in all video DSLRs and camcorders) which capture sound in a much more accurate and artifact-free manner than the old tube, large-diaphragm electrets, and ribbon mics of the 50s and 60s.

So which mics do pros reach for on an A-list gig? The old mics with loads of character and artifacts, of course. They guys who use linear measurement mics for music recording can only find work for tiny audiophile labels where they make unremarkable sounding CDs of hammered dulcimers in old churches that even fans of hammered dulcimer sacred music can't stand.

Which mics are routinely knocked off by the Chinese and Russians because of the great demand for That Sound? Not the distortionless, accurate measurement mics.

It's fun to talk about insane sharpness, resolving resolution, CA, and read about the exploits of guys like Hurlbut who claim only Zeiss glass can match the pixel count of a 5DII sensor. But if any of you guys actually got to the top of the mountain, you'd be bored to tears. It's the character of these lenses you respond to, not the lack thereof. If you like this lens more than that one, you just like its particular artifacts better than those of the other lens.

Obviously I'm talking about lenses above a certain quality level, like Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc. Lenses with obvious, gross artifacts like the LensBaby toy lenses are in a whole other category, like the toy acoustic mics with springs inside to make a reverb effect when you shout into them.

I feel bad for newcomers to m43 who read these threads and believe the twaddle like Canon FDs aren't good lenses, and only Nikon is good enough for pros, and Zeiss uber alles. Some of the best (correction: most film-like and pleasing) m43 footage I've seen online and shot myself has been nothing but a $50 Canon FD 50mm f/1.4, which gets short thrift in this forum for committing the three deadly sins of being cheap, easy to source, and not a pain in the ass to adapt to your Lumix.

If you're reading this and are new to m43 video, do yourself a favor and pick up whatever glass threads like this dismiss as not being "what pros use". It's the only way to choose a lens you're going to love shooting with that has a guaranteed 100-percent success rate.
 
Last edited:
shaveblog said:
I feel bad for newcomers to m43 who read these threads and believe the twaddle like Canon FDs aren't good lenses, and only Nikon is good enough for pros, and Zeiss uber alles. Some of the best (correction: most film-like and pleasing) m43 footage I've seen online and shot myself has been nothing but a $50 Canon FD 50mm f/1.4, which gets short thrift in this forum for committing the three deadly sins of being cheap, easy to source, and not a pain in the ass to adapt to your Lumix.

If you're reading this and are new to m43 video, do yourself a favor and pick up whatever glass threads like this dismiss as not being "what pros use". It's the only way to choose a lens you're going to love shooting with that has a guaranteed 100-percent success rate.
Click to expand...

Well you can disagree with me, but I actually agree wholeheartedly with you, so go figure....

I like FD lenses. I think that ALL 50mm f1.4 lenses by the major brands are good. Takumars, Nikon Ais, Contax Zeiss, Yashica, Canon FD, Rokkor.

I only shared what I consider my preference. It is Contax Zeiss, but I agree, subtle differences can cost the earth and aren't particularly worth it, considering all of the creative elements that really contribute to good filming. I think newcomers to manual lenses on m4/3 should use almost anything, not the best. It will make only the tiniest of difference to their videos. Audio is more important to invest in, in my opinion, and a good tripod.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top