Canon FL lenses?

[David G. Smith]

I have been looking to get some more vintage lenses. (I know... it can be addictive!) and I was wondering if anyone has experience with using Canon FL lenses on digital video cameras? I am shooting with a Sony FS-100 and adapting an FL should be no problem with the Sony E-mount 18mm flange to focal distance. Has anyone used Canon FL lenses? They have a few very interesting lenses. I noted that they have a 35mm f2.5, a 38mm f2.8, a few versions of a 50mm f1.4 (Plus some 50mm f1.8s), a 55mm f1.2 and a couple of 58mm f1.2s, an 85mm f1.8, a 135 f2.5 and a 300mm f2.8. I am not a huge fan of the ultra low light, very shallow depth of field aesthetic. However, you throw in doing it with vintage lenses from the 1960s and there is the possibility of some serious image "Mojo" for specialty projects or shots. That 85mm f1.8, at first glance, seems like it might be a very cool lens for portraiture. Now, I know the basic drill about vintage lenses, that the coatings were not up to the snuff of modern lenses and flaring would be something to consider. I am just wondering about sharpness, contrast and color. If anyone who has used these types of lenses, let me ask, how is the sharpness wide open? That would be a big consideration with vintage lenses. Now those super fast lenses have enough room at the bottom end to let you stop down a stop-ish and still work at very stupid silly low light levels, but if they don't sharpen up for a couple of stops or three, then that would be kind of a pain.

Like I said, adapting the FL mount lenses to the E mount Sony SHOULD not be an issue, but, when I search for FL mount to E-mount adapters, I see a lot that are designated FD/FL mount. Does that sound fishy to anyone besides me? Does anyone know of a quality FL mount to E mount adapter?

So, anyone have info on, or opinions about, the use of Canon FL lenses for Digital Video work?

The Wikipedia article on Canon FL lenses:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_FL

Thanks.

 

[LyleGorch]

I've tried quite a few of the Canon FL series, the build quality is first rate, optically they can be hit-or-miss. In general the antireflective coatings are not as sophisticated as the FD and FDn lenses, this is more of a problem on some designs than others but overall the contrast is going to be a little lower. I have used and tested a very late 50mm f1.4 FL against some pretty serious competition (Zeiss and Leica) and was surprised how well it performed, same with the 135mm f2.5. I did not like the 85mm f1.8 which just seemed dull looking and my res chart tests comfirmed it was not resolving very well. The biggest problem I have had with buying these on ebay is that sellers generally can't tell if the lenses actually work, they may be cosmetically perfect but the iris is frozen and unless you know something about lenses you wouldn't know the difference. Many people (including myself) appreciate the old Canon FL/FD "look".

 

[maranfilms]

David, I have the 55 f1.2, and the 35 f2.5. I love both, the only thing i'm not crazy about is the aperture ring in the very front of the barrel as opposed to the rear. My 55mm is a bit tough to move the iris ring, but I keep it stopped down all the way, then use the iris ring on the adapter to change the f-stop which it becomes smooth, it's not the blades thats the issue, it's the actual bearing in the ring the binds up do to age, and lubrication worn away. The 35mm is a gorgous lens, It has an extra ring, also on the front of the barrel which if you set your f-stop to fully closed, you can then use the extra ring in the same way as the adapter to change f-stop without clicks. Their both heavy lenses, with a beautiful soft image, but not soft in a bad way. They dont have the contrast the new lenses have, They just have this warm creamy pleasing look about them, be careful of fungus though, My 55 has a bit, tried to get it cleaned up, but it wasn't doable, hopefully it wont effect image in years to come if it grows. I would get the 35mm first, it's a bit cheaper than the 55mm, then if you dig it, then go for the more expensive 55mm.

 

[David G. Smith]

I've tried quite a few of the Canon FL series, the build quality is first rate, optically they can be hit-or-miss. In general the antireflective coatings are not as sophisticated as the FD and FDn lenses, this is more of a problem on some designs than others but overall the contrast is going to be a little lower. I have used and tested a very late 50mm f1.4 FL against some pretty serious competition (Zeiss and Leica) and was surprised how well it performed, same with the 135mm f2.5. I did not like the 85mm f1.8 which just seemed dull looking and my res chart tests comfirmed it was not resolving very well. The biggest problem I have had with buying these on ebay is that sellers generally can't tell if the lenses actually work, they may be cosmetically perfect but the iris is frozen and unless you know something about lenses you wouldn't know the difference. Many people (including myself) appreciate the old Canon FL/FD "look".

I know that buying lenses this old is a gamble. Suprised on the 85mm 1.8, but may look at the 50 1.4 and the 135 2.5.
Thanks.

David, I have the 55 f1.2, and the 35 f2.5. I love both, the only thing i'm not crazy about is the aperture ring in the very front of the barrel as opposed to the rear. My 55mm is a bit tough to move the iris ring, but I keep it stopped down all the way, then use the iris ring on the adapter to change the f-stop which it becomes smooth, it's not the blades thats the issue, it's the actual bearing in the ring the binds up do to age, and lubrication worn away. The 35mm is a gorgous lens, It has an extra ring, also on the front of the barrel which if you set your f-stop to fully closed, you can then use the extra ring in the same way as the adapter to change f-stop without clicks. Their both heavy lenses, with a beautiful soft image, but not soft in a bad way. They dont have the contrast the new lenses have, They just have this warm creamy pleasing look about them, be careful of fungus though, My 55 has a bit, tried to get it cleaned up, but it wasn't doable, hopefully it wont effect image in years to come if it grows. I would get the 35mm first, it's a bit cheaper than the 55mm, then if you dig it, then go for the more expensive 55mm.

I didn't know that about the mechanics. That is kind of interesting. I do like the 35mm focal length on the Super 35mm sensor. Thanks.