GH13 with Canon FD/FL Lens Thread.

A Canon FD 20mm f 2.8 could be the equivalent of a moderate wide-angle (@40mm equivalent) and it is a great lens overall. A Zenitar FD fisheye 16mm f 2.8 could be even a tad wider (@32mm equivalent), although there might be more barrel distortion on this one due to the fisheye effect.
But if you are talking ultra wide angle I think there is no legacy glass that can give you this effect.
 
Yeah...

By using the kit lens, based on my personal taste and needs, I'll invest in a 10~12mm in the future.

14mm really sits on the threshold if you want a decent WA.
 
I'm a long time Canon FD shooter, and I'm happy to have a "digital video back" for my FD lenses that I otherwise use only a few times a year.

My collection consists of:

New FD 20mm f/2.8
New FD 24mm f/2
New FD 35mm f/2
New FD 50mm f/1.4
New FD 50mm f/1.2L
New FD 85mm f/1.2L
New FD 100mm f/2
New FD 135mm f/2
New FD 300mm f/4L
New FD 400mm f/4.5

(Note: "New FD" refers to FD lenses with the bayonet mount, not the earlier breech-lock mount with the silver ring. Some people think one is superior to the other, but I don't know, it just so happens the newer mount is what I have.) The 24, 35, both 50s and the 100 have 52mm filter rings, and the 20, 85 and 135 have 72mm. The 300 and 400 have a drop-in filter drawer that unfortunately takes only the 34mm filter and holder made specifically for them. These are harder to find than hen's teeth, but I was able to find a ND filter for them.)

For video, my favorites are the 24, 50 1.4, and 100, but the 300 with 15mm of extension is nice for insects, and the 400 for birds. These two also have lens-mounting feet for tripod use. The fact that the 85 and 135 do not is a drawback, as others have said. I'm in the process of making a tripod mount for them using a Really Right Stuff multi-purpose rail as a base. The rail will lock the camera and lens onto one platform that can then be mounted on a tripod. The 20mm is not so great on the G-series cameras--it's just not up to the task of bending the light at the angles required for the sensor and may also produce some internal reflections.

Here's a forum devoted to Canon FD:

http://photo.net/canon-fd-camera-forum/

KEH is well-regarded by many FD-ers as a good source of FD gear, and they grade conservatively:

http://www.keh.com/
 
Last edited:
Exactly right, a digital back for FD glass is how I view my GF13. Although I do love the 20mm pancake and almost never remove it if I'm shooting stills.

2 questions:

1. I was going to get the FD85 but I'm worried about the size and weight of this lens hanging off the front of my GF13. Not so much for balance but rather the possibility of ripping the adapter off the camera. Is this lens really too big to use without some support?

2. WHY did you have to share that FD forum? Well, there goes the rest of my day.

Long Rob said:
I'm a long time Canon FD shooter, and I'm happy to have a "digital video back" for my FD lenses.

My collection consists of:

New FD 20mm f/2.8
New FD 24mm f/2
New FD 35mm f/2
New FD 50mm f/1.4
New FD 50mm f/1.2L
New FD 85mm f/1.2L
New FD 100mm f/2
New FD 135mm f/2
New FD 300mm f/4L
New FD 400mm f/4.5

(Note: "New FD" refers to FD lenses with the bayonet mount, not the earlier breech-lock mount with the silver ring. Some people think one is superior to the other, but I don't know, it just so happens the newer mount is what I have.)

For video, my favorites are the 24, 50 1.4, and 100, but the 300 with 15mm of extension is nice for insects, and the 400 for birds. The latter two have a drop-in filter drawer, and I was able to find a couple of ND filters for them. These two also have lens-mounting feet for tripod use. The fact that the 85 and 135 do not is a drawback, as others have said. I'm in the process of making a tripod mount for them using a Really Right Stuff multi-purpose rail as a base.

Here's a forum devoted to Canon FD:

http://photo.net/canon-fd-camera-forum/
Click to expand...
 
1. Yes, on a tripod I think the 85 is just too heavy to have hanging off the adapter and camera mount, and also as someone mentioned, you do get a sort of "diving board effect." I do use it for stills, hand-held, but the camera is more like hanging off the lens in that case.

2. Well, it's Thursday, so you're winding down to the weekend anyway, no?
 
I think I'll aim for the FD85/1.8 then. Smaller/lighter but still quite good glass. Thanks for the data.

I overestimated the threadcount of that FD forum. Looks like it just started, so it's not that huge. Got through it in 5 mins. Seems more for guys still shooting film on AE1s. But interesting nonetheless, thanks for the pointer.

Long Rob said:
1. Yes, on a tripod I think the 85 is just too heavy to have hanging off the adapter and camera mount, and also as someone mentioned, you do get a sort of "diving board effect." I do use it for stills, hand-held, but the camera is more like hanging off the lens in that case.

2. Well, it's Thursday, so you're winding down to the weekend anyway, no?
Click to expand...
 
shaveblog said:
I think I'll aim for the FD85/1.8 then. Smaller/lighter but still quite good glass. Thanks for the data.

I overestimated the threadcount of that FD forum. Looks like it just started, so it's not that huge. Got through it in 5 mins. Seems more for guys still shooting film on AE1s. But interesting nonetheless, thanks for the pointer.
Click to expand...

Look in the archived postings for more:

http://photo.net/canon-fd-camera-forum/?category=uncategorized
 
got lucky :)
managed to get the 50mm 1.4 on a street shop for 90$
(i live in Israel so Ebay gets pricier for me)
so... what's the best adapter at the moment ?
and for how much?

tnx
 
Just wondering how well the FDs match with the 14-140 kit lens and the 20mm pancake. Sharpness/color rendition/etc. Looking at info for doc shooting.

Many thanks
 
It matches well. Or not. Depends who you ask. I say the FD lens look very different than the Panasonic native glass. Others disagree. I think you're far better off shooting video with FD glass if you want a more traditional film look. If you want a modern video look, stick with the Panas.

xocomil said:
Just wondering how well the FDs match with the 14-140 kit lens and the 20mm pancake. Sharpness/color rendition/etc. Looking at info for doc shooting.

Many thanks
Click to expand...
 
xocomil said:
Just wondering how well the FDs match with the 14-140 kit lens and the 20mm pancake. Sharpness/color rendition/etc. Looking at info for doc shooting.

Many thanks
Click to expand...

They don't match up at all. The FD's have a softer look than the panny's. The FD's might be perfect for you but it wasn't the look I was going for.
 
climber said:
They don't match up at all. The FD's have a softer look than the panny's.
Click to expand...

Gotcha guys. Thanks for that.

What about the Nikon AI lenses. Do they give a softer, more "organic" look as well?

Only reason I ask is I'm looking for a 40-50mm fast but inexpensive lens to compliment my kit lens and 20mm panny pancake.

That said, sounds like I need to try out an FD with adaptor to see what the fuss is all about. I imagine it'd be a real learning curve filming actuality with these lenses (MF, no-OIS, etc)
 
shaveblog said:
I think we kind of covered it all, no?
The standouts are the 28/2.8, 35/2.0, and 50/1.4.
Click to expand...

You forgot 24mm f1.4 L - excellent, very fast, normal lens on GH1. You can get really shallow DOF with it, if you need it. It's not extremely sharp wide open and this is great, too. Definitely has its look. Something you probably won't get with pancake (just guessing - don't have one). 24mm f2.0 version is cheaper and sharper, but I still prefer f1.4L (have both).
Be aware that 35mm f2.0 can have yellow cast (if you get thorium radioactive version with concave from element and minimum aperture f16), so you might need to white-balance every time you change your lens. Some people say you can get rid of it by exposing the lens to UV radiation for a week or two. Other report it doesn't help. Can't confirm - mine is convex f22 version, no thorium glass inside. I have one radioactive lens in my collection (amazing 55mm f1.2 Aspherical), but for some reason its thorium element hasn't turned yellow.
 
xocomil said:
Gotcha guys. Thanks for that.

What about the Nikon AI lenses. Do they give a softer, more "organic" look as well?

Only reason I ask is I'm looking for a 40-50mm fast but inexpensive lens to compliment my kit lens and 20mm panny pancake.

That said, sounds like I need to try out an FD with adaptor to see what the fuss is all about. I imagine it'd be a real learning curve filming actuality with these lenses (MF, no-OIS, etc)
Click to expand...

I think your most inexpensive option is FD 50mm f 1.4. However, as said above, and like most of the vintage lenses it has the organic look, which imho the panasonic lenses don't have, so these may not mix that well. Maybe some zeiss lens could better compliment your kit, but these are not inexpensive. I am thinking in particular of the Contax G zeiss Planar 45mm f2.0. Very very sharp lens, but is a bit particular in the sense that you focus with a ring on the adapter, the lens itself doesn't have a focusing ring.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top