Canon FD to Micro 4/3 noob question on adapters

A

Andor

Active member
I was curious if there are good ones and bad ones? Like, obviously there's more than one person making these... So surely there's a quality difference?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-FD-FL-G1-...ccessories&hash=item3a5c9da208#ht_3608wt_1139

vs

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-FD-lens-PANASONIC-G1-GF1-GH1-micro-4-3-Adapter-/290422570192?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item439e88bcd0

vs

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-FD-Lens-P...wItem&pt=Lens_Accessories&hash=item5888bc015a

What should I know before buying? Is each adapter really going to give the exact same result and quality? Everyone just says "buy a __" but I never hear any more details than that. Curiosity before investment, I suppose. Thanks!
 
Andor said:
I was curious if there are good ones and bad ones? Like, obviously there's more than one person making these... So surely there's a quality difference?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-FD-FL-G1-...ccessories&hash=item3a5c9da208#ht_3608wt_1139


What should I know before buying? Is each adapter really going to give the exact same result and quality? Everyone just says "buy a __" but I never hear any more details than that. Curiosity before investment, I suppose. Thanks!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure you are going to get a comparison between all three items, since who wants to buy more than one adapter type.

I can heartily recommend the one from the first link, as have many other user, although I think I paid less than that price when I bought mine. But it is well made and does the job.

My only comparison with other adapters has been with M42 to micro 43. I bought one from Belarus which was built like a tank and worked perfectly with my Russian lenses. But it was also $60. Out of curiosity I bought a much cheaper version and it was cheaper, lighter and didn't have the form factor that would allow for the manual aperture control I needed. Luckily I was able to return it.

So, yes there is a difference. Make sure there is a decent return policy and you should be fine.
 
stoneinapond said:
I'm not sure you are going to get a comparison between all three items, since who wants to buy more than one adapter type.

I can heartily recommend the one from the first link, as have many other user, although I think I paid less than that price when I bought mine. But it is well made and does the job.
Click to expand...

Thanks! I know it'd be wishful thinking to hope someone had hands-on experience with each one. I just have no clue what to look for in purchasing an adapter. The GH1 is my first camera of any type, so this is also the first time I've ever bought lenses. If no one else has a recommendation or tip by the end of the day then I'll just go with the first link.
 
I have got one FD-adaptor with the text "RJ Camera FD-m4/3" inscribed on the side.
- It has got an aperture ring that is handy for smooth aperture-adjustment during filming and quick interim-opening aperture for easier focusing.
- It allows focussing on infinty well on all lenses. (Actually focussing goes a bit beyond infinity - is there an adaptor that goes just to the sweet spot for infinity?)
- It is 'okay' built... seems sturdy enough. So I _thought_ it was good, but...

The downside of the adapter is: I now noticed that it hinders stepping down aperture to the 2-4 smallest apertures (i.e. 8/11-22) on my older built FD lenses (for example a CanonFD 50mm/f1.4 SSC Chrome-ring, a Vivitar(for FD) 35mm/f1.9) a newer built CanonFD 85mm/f1.8 with a slightly different locking-mechanism works perfectly with all apertures.
I just noticed this recently as I am shooting one the wide-open side most of the time for maximum depth of field.
But I consider this to be a big mistake of the adaptor.

So... I would love to know if there exists one adaptor, where stepping down aperture to smallest opening is possible on all FD lenses and which ideally has an aperture-ring for quick-opening of aperture (as described above).
 
Andor said:
Thanks! I know it'd be wishful thinking to hope someone had hands-on experience with each one.
Click to expand...

This may be premature... as I'm still waiting on the adapter from your first link... but I currently have the one from your third link... the "pixco" styled one (which I think is probably the exact same thing in the second link, with the exception of black vs. chrome on the mounting plate.

I've heard nothing but good things about the ciecio7 adapter and decided to order one. The pixco adapter does work, but I'll put mine in the marketplace as soon as the ciecio7 one arrives (unless it feels/handles the same way). There is a slight bit of play in the pixco adapter... not at the adapter-to-cam side... but where the lenses attach to the adapter. This play may be common in all of them... I don't know. It's slight, but you can feel the connection vs. the adapter-lens feeling like one solid piece.

Let me put it this way... if I don't sell it in the marketplace for cheap... I'll mount the pixco one on my smallest lens and leave it on there... treating the adapter/lens as just one complete lens.

If I were you I'd buy the ciecio7 adapter... as I understand it that one is being machined in Europe vs. all the other ones that are being made in China (I suspect there's some real dedication involved in the custom designed/machined one vs. a zone of manufacturing +/- tolerance in one you get from China.)

I'll update once the ciecio7 adapter arrives.
 
Without the adapters, if you put an object to 10 feet of distance and in the lens you put 10 feet, the object should to be in focus. Ir´s the same thing with the adapters?
Thanks
 
I've owned the ceicio7 adapter (which is considered one of the good ones) and I've shot with
maybe 10 or 12 different FD lenses on a gh1.

The one thing I have noticed is there is a wide variety of FD locks out there. Some lenses go on easy
some are damn tricky. Some you need to rotate past the dot and then rotate back. Some you develop a feel for. The variety is huge.

unlike the Nikon F mount where everything locks on the same
 
Benjus said:
Without the adapters, if you put an object to 10 feet of distance and in the lens you put 10 feet, the object should to be in focus. Ir´s the same thing with the adapters?
Thanks
Click to expand...

As best I can tell... it's close. I don't know if I'd trust a tape measure over my eyes for focus, not yet anyway. I've been trying to determine the actual answer to your question (for myself) for a couple days. I suspect the extra distance added by the adapter is putting the scale off just a bit. I don't mean off by the 1/2" thickness of the adapter... obviously... I'm thinking it could be like having a slim extension tube added to any lens... which may put the scale off by only inches real close, and off by more as distance increases. I'm currently using the lens numbers as a guide... but not relying on them entirely.

J Davis said:
I've owned the ceicio7 adapter (which is considered one of the good ones) and I've shot with
maybe 10 or 12 different FD lenses on a gh1.

The one thing I have noticed is there is a wide variety of FD locks out there. Some lenses go on easy
some are damn tricky. Some you need to rotate past the dot and then rotate back. Some you develop a feel for. The variety is huge.

unlike the Nikon F mount where everything locks on the same
Click to expand...

Hmm, I was wondering if the ciecio7 adapter would "fix" that. The video link they have makes it look like a precision process. That is/was one of my complaints with the pixco-style adapter... that each FD lens I've mounted has a unique relationship with the adapter. On some the little "arm" in the adapter doesn't even touch the lens "lever"... yet the lens still functions through the aperture range. On other lenses it must, or the lens aperture won't adjust.

So how's the fit of the ceicio7? Is it consistently (fully) tight on all of your FD lenses? Is there any play with any of your lenses on the adapter?

I almost prefer the older FD lenses with the silver ring on back. They seem to consistently fit the current adapter best (since you can use both the "open-lock" ring on the adapter AND the locking ring on the lens to tighten everything up.) That's why I'm asking you about the fit of the ceicio7 adapter.

Finally... are you not completely blown away by these old FD lenses?! I'm having to reprogram my brain on what's suddenly possible.
 
MattinSTL said:
Hmm, I was wondering if the ciecio7 adapter would "fix" that. The video link they have makes it look like a precision process. That is/was one of my complaints with the pixco-style adapter... that each FD lens I've mounted has a unique relationship with the adapter. On some the little "arm" in the adapter doesn't even touch the lens "lever"... yet the lens still functions through the aperture range. On other lenses it must, or the lens aperture won't adjust.

So how's the fit of the ceicio7? Is it consistently (fully) tight on all of your FD lenses? Is there any play with any of your lenses on the adapter?
Click to expand...

The ceicio7 adapter held all the lenses tight but I could always focus past infinity

MattinSTL said:
Finally... are you not completely blown away by these old FD lenses?! I'm having to reprogram my brain on what's suddenly possible.
Click to expand...

The FD lenses that blew me away was the ...

amazingly fast canon FD 24mm f1.4 wide angle
video is here http://dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=2033027
(sorry no screen shot from this piece)


the 50mm f1.2 and 50mm f1.4
stills posted here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?p=1719577#post1719577
(tests comparing these two against the nikon equivalent)

3832738134_5d76e3c532_o.jpg


I had some fun with a vivitar FD 28mm, nice lens
video is here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=177133

3714087542_717a6a8400_o.jpg



but I have since sold my m43 FD adapter as well as all my FD lenses, well, all except 1 lens
and that is a crappy $29 FD cosina zoom. The only reason I kept it is because it has some
very unusual flares as well as the images from it look vintage! A very handy effect. For example
take a look at the very first shot for the vintage look and throughout the vid are flares
video is here http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=177128

3714079690_8bd683ca13_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
J Davis said:
The ceicio7 adapter held all the lenses tight but I could always focus past infinity.
Click to expand...

I think this ties in with my above assumption that the adapters are all adding just a slight bit of "extension tube" to whatever lens you mount to the cam... so that any lens you mount on the cam is a little bit near (far?) sighted.

I have the same experience BTW... when something is 30' or more away you can't simply turn the lens until it stops or it will go past focus back to a little soft.

You're giving me a really good argument for keeping the Panny 20mm pancake lens... I've been debating the idea of returning it, after doing a shoot-out of course, since I have a 20mm FD on the way. Although any glass at/under f/2.0 can be your best friend for video.

So are you all Nikon now? Which lens won out? 1.4 or 1.2? I read your links and it struck me as odd that both the Canon and Nikon 1.4 appeared brighter at 2.0... it seems like a choice of ultimate brightness or decent brightness with smoother roll-off through a couple stops.
 
As much as I love 50/1.2 practicality won and I stay with 50/1.4

Till now I am all nikon ai-s with renting eos zooms for corporate shoots but a recent
burst of still photography gigs meant digging deep and investing on the 17-55 (ouch my wallet)
 
You and I are having very similar experience with this gear... I think we'll be in the handful of people on the boards that can directly compare the GH13 and t2i... I see value in both cams, for the same reasons you just gave.

EDIT: The ceicio7 adapter arrived today. It's worth the cost difference... both adapters work, but this one locks very securely at both the lens and the camera. A very well made piece of kit.
 
MattinSTL said:
As best I can tell... it's close. I don't know if I'd trust a tape measure over my eyes for focus, not yet anyway. I've been trying to determine the actual answer to your question (for myself) for a couple days. I suspect the extra distance added by the adapter is putting the scale off just a bit. I don't mean off by the 1/2" thickness of the adapter... obviously... I'm thinking it could be like having a slim extension tube added to any lens... which may put the scale off by only inches real close, and off by more as distance increases. I'm currently using the lens numbers as a guide... but not relying on them entirely.
Click to expand...

Then if we use a zoom, which happens with the focus?
Normally when I use a zoom, I do the focus to the maximum that gives the zoom and after i do zoom back. With the adapter we have the area in focus in the whole zoom tour?
It is a bit difficult for my to explain this in english.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top