Canon lenses or Nikon lenses for Letus35?

wnyhiphop

Active member
Canon lenses or Nikon lenses for Letus35? These are some lenses I found on ebay! Whats good?

Canon FD 135mm 1: 3.8 tele-portrait lens $59.99
CANON Lens FD 50mm 1: 1.4 $59.99
Canon FD 50mm f/1.4 Lens
s.gif
$49.99</IMG>

CANON FD 28MM 1: 2.8 WIDE ANGLE LENS $49.99
Canon FD 28mm f/2.8 Lens - Excellent
s.gif
$59.99

</IMG>
Nikon Sigma 28-70mm AF lac187 $59.99
Nikon Quantaray 70-210mm Ais 612 $49.99
Nikon Albinar 28-80mm AIs Zoom a265
s.gif
$39.99


</IMG>
 
im going through the same debate with the brevis, Nikon or Canon...the canon FD 50mm 1.4 are all around $50...but the Nice Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1.4 seem to be going for $150 (ish)

im not sure if they are newer models, maybe its just the price difference. The big question for me is...

"Do the newer model nikkons look better than the older?"

Id love to find an article that compares canon FD and a similar Nikkon mount (WITH PICTURES) to judge the image quality.
 
i have some newer nikons and some older fd's. i have just done the shootout with the redrock m2 and the canons are way better. maybe the older nikon glass is cool but i'm sticking with my fd's. if you can find the s.s.c. fd's get them. they are sharper. the say "s.s.c." in red on the front of the lens.
 
cheezweezl said:
i have some newer nikons and some older fd's. i have just done the shootout with the redrock m2 and the canons are way better. maybe the older nikon glass is cool but i'm sticking with my fd's. if you can find the s.s.c. fd's get them. they are sharper. the say "s.s.c." in red on the front of the lens.

Really? Hmmm... have any comparison pics? I'd LOVE to see them.

I'm placing an order for the sgpro right now, and I was planning on a Nikon mount just because I'm also picking up a D70... but I do have my old canon cam (and a couple of lenses) laying around.

Anyone else care to chime in here?

-brown
 
In 1973, two years after the FD mount was introduced Canon started advertising the use of Super Spectra Coating (SSC) on its lenses and marked them with "SSC" on the lens. Prior to this only two lenses used SSC coating, the 55mm F1.2 and 55mm F1.2 AL (aspherical). Lenses now had either SC or SSC on their barrels as appropriate. At the same time Canon did away with the chrome front lens barrels.

In 1978, the "New FD" mount was introduced and SSC became standard (except for the New FD 50mm F1.8) and the marking was removed.

a quote i took form wikipedia.

so everthing after 1978 has S.S.C (except FD 50mm F1.8)
 
Instead of asking which brand (Canon or Nikon) is better, you have to take a closer look at each lens you want to compare. There are some real dogs in both the Canon and Nikon lines, especially lenses geared toward the lower end of the consumer market. (Personally, I'd take the Canon FD f/1.4 SSC over its Nikon counterpart, based on what you asked. It is a very good lens and less expensive. I have a review of that lens somewhere on the www., if you Google it.)

Another more subjective factor is the lens bokeh. You can only judge that for yourself. The point is not only to get shallow depth of field with an adapter, but to render the out of focus regions smoothly, with good tonality and gradation, and with no glaring, geometric characteristics in the out of focus catchlights. (This is harder to explain than to see in some comparison shots.) I feel that this, along with the focal length desired, are the most important characteristics to look for when you are selecting a lens to use on an adapter.
 
I'm also currently researching this and still undecided on which way to go.

I keep reading that the Nikons are easier to deal with as far as the 35mm adapters are concerned. On the other hand, Canon lens seem cheaper and easier to find on eBay. Both are supposedly equal in quality.
 
im VERY happy with my Canons, but the Nikons are easier to work with. Their irises open and close in incriments, and without the "thunk thunk thunk" 1 stop increments of FD's. Though im VERY happy with my FD SSC's Optically.
 
Back
Top