GH13 with Canon FD/FL Lens Thread.

This is an excellent resource. Thanks everyone. I'm just starting my FD collection and only have the 50mm f1.4 so far. I love it. I feel like this lens has a warmer look than the kit glass--like Matt says about comparing to the pancake lens. I picked mine up at a local used camera store with no defects for $39! Planning to go for something wider next, but wide and fast can get pretty pricey on eBay. Waiting for some more good stuff to show up in the used store.
 
MattinSTL said:
On a side note... does anybody know of a tripod mounting ring (tripod collar) for FD lenses? I can tell you that for anything 200mm or longer you'll want a tripod collar... otherwise the lens/cam (sometimes) vibrates too much to do good pans because of the "diving board" effect of the long lens coming off the cam.
Click to expand...

I'd probably get something like this as support on my rod rig if I bought some longer tele lenses.

http://store.redrockmicro.com/Catalog/Accessories/microLensSupport
 
The first legacy lens I adapted to my GF1 was the Canon FDn 50/1.4 and it blew my mind. Such a different look than the pancake, instant film look on any video I shot with it. The shallow DOF wide open was fodder for weeks of fun. And the short tele effective focal length makes it a better portrait lens as well.

Perusing a local camera shop I found an older breech mount Canon FL 50/1.4 the owner practically gave me just to get rid of it. Some dust, nothing that shows up on output. I like this lens even more than the FDn version. It's bigger and heavier, but its image quality is somehow sharper yet smoother than its later rev. Its only drawback is it doesn't fit on the Polish adapter that works fine with all my other legacy Canons. So it has a Chinese jinfinance adapter all to itself.

My favorite legacy Canon these days is a radioactive FD 35/2. I lucked out and got one on eBay at a fair price and with not a trace of yellowing. The previous owner must have had this thing in the sun for months before he sold it. I was fully prepared to put off using it for awhile once it arrived but I didn't have to break out the tinfoil for this one. This lens is the one I'd keep if I could only pick one Canon for my GF1. If Vitaliy hadn't unlocked full manual video control for the pancake, I'd never take the 35/2 off the camera. It's the sharpest of the Canons I've tried, and it's creamier behind focus plane than the pancake. Glad I found it after living with the 50s, because it would've spoiled me for anything else. I'll sell a kidney before I sell this lens.

I was hunting the FD 24/2 on eBay but after Vitaliy's firmware hack unlocked manual shutter video for the 20mm Pana lens, I gave up. With locked 1/60 shutter the pancake is a jaw dropping video lens. I'm sure the FD 24/2 has its own charms but for now I'm happy with my lineup. No interest in any legacy zooms, but may pick up one of the macros after seeing some of the stellar pics here.

Legacy Canon glass on these new Lumixes is the best fun I've had in years. It's not just about image quality. The solidity of these old Canons and the manual focusing get you closer to the task at hand, like driving a stick. Everyone with a GH/F1 should pick up a cheap adapter on eBay and own at least the FL 50/1.4. You can pick up both for under a hundred and it's like suddenly owning a whole new camera.
 
Last edited:
Agreed, that radioactive 35/2 looks incredible. When I got mine, it was actually pretty yellow, but direct sunlight for about two weeks cleared it right up.

It makes me want to try other radioactive lenses... I know some of the earlier Nikon 35mm 1.4's had thorium, and Canon FL 55mm 1.2, I think.
 
I spoke too soon. My earlier assessment of the FD 35/2's degree of yellowing was based on shooting, which didn't look at all affected once sucked into LR3. Further examination by actually looking through the bare lens at a white surface shows a moderate amount of yellowing as compared with my non-lethal Canon glass. Maybe LR3 corrected for it. So now the lens is bathing in UVA courtesy of a $5 BLB bulb from Home Depot, wrapped in tinfoil to keep the gummint from knowing what it's thinking and also to reflect the UVA back up through the glass for a double shot of yellow-b-gone. Kind of like an EZ-Bake oven for lethal legacy glass. I'll check on it in a few days and see how it looks. Web research indicates this approach clears things up much more quickly than aiming the lens out the window for a month. We'll see.

I have to say, though, even with the moderate yellowing, this lens is amazing. If you ever come across one on eBay, wait till the last 5 seconds of the bidding and stab at your keyboard with a max bid of $200. You just might outbid me, because a lens this good needs a backup.
 
SSC is a type of lens coating Canon used, and it has nothing to do with radioactivity. To my knowledge only the FD 35/2 was radioactive, though some have said a few other Canons may also have used Thorium.

Only the versions of the 35/2 that went up to f16 had the Thorium. If you see one that goes to f22, it's the later version which isn't radioactive.
 
I think some versions of either the FL 58mm f/1.2 or 55mm f/1.2 may have thorium elements.

Also forgot this lens.

Canon FD 35mm f/2.8 Tilt Shift (sold) - Sharpest 35mm lens I've ever used, insanely sharp, I just got rid of it because the value had gone up so much that it didn't make sense for me to keep it, and I didn't need its T&S capability...but if you do, it's a fantastic lens and you can do really cool stuff with it (not just miniatures). But yeah, bloody sharp at f/2.8 with great contrast and color.
 
shaveblog said:
To my knowledge only the FD 35/2 was radioactive, though some have said a few other Canons may also have used Thorium.
Click to expand...
I have a Tokina AT-X 24-40mm f2.8 manual focus zoom I bought in the mid-eighties that has a Thorium front lens. It was stored in the dark for over a decade and developed a warm, but not quite yellow cast. I found out about the UV cure and sure enough, a few weeks of sunlight brightened it up. And while it's not a Canon, it does have an FD mount. :thumbsup:
 
A part of me is afraid that once my lens is clear again, the magic will be gone. This is how I justify hunting down a 2nd one, the browner the better, which I will store in a coffin and only shoot with at night..
 
shaveblog said:
A part of me is afraid that once my lens is clear again, the magic will be gone. This is how I justify hunting down a 2nd one, the browner the better, which I will store in a coffin and only shoot with at night..
Click to expand...


I was afraid of that too. I read some comments online telling people not to bleach it in the sun, since the yellowing was part of its magic, and does some wonderful things with B/W photos.

But in the meantime, I'll just grab a yellow filter while I wait the 30 or so years it takes to yellow again. :thumbsup:
 
pianoboy said:
I was afraid of that too. I read some comments online telling people not to bleach it in the sun, since the yellowing was part of its magic, and does some wonderful things with B/W photos.

But in the meantime, I'll just grab a yellow filter while I wait the 30 or so years it takes to yellow again. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

There doesn't seem to be any definitive answer online as to what's going on with this lens. Some say it's the Thorium that yellows and it can be reduced if not outright eliminated with UVA, others say it's the balsam-based glue between the elements that yellows and this can't be corrected with UVA. Some say the yellow acts like a built-in yellow filter and works great for color and especially B&W, others say the yellowing robs the lens of a few stops. That definitely doesn't work for me, I want as much speed out of a lens as possible so I can shoot without flash in as many situations as possible.

I love this lens with the yellow. It isn't noticeable at all in stills or video. But I'm clearing it up anyway, just to see what's gained/lost. Never owned a radioactive lens before, so I'm curious to see what effect the process may have. It's hard to fathom that "the magic" of the FD 35/2 is due to the yellowing -- these lenses were beloved decades before they yellowed. Has to be the optics.
 
Do these have the same optics as the EF series, or the L? I heard the L are very good but that the EF are too soft.
 
bumkicho said:
Those are the exact FD lenses I own and I love them both. Now I am waiting for a used 24mm f2 that I picked up at $90 off ebay.
Click to expand...

You are lucky, have been looking for that lens for a while, pls relay your opinion when you have tested it thanks

Got a hefty price tag recently for 3 lenses in a vintage camera place all three lenses were never used it was the 35mm f2, a 85mm, and the 100mm macro f4 ..... i bit the bullet for a $150 each.With the resurgence of old glass lenses and adapters...these lenses would not last long in those shelves., I still have not regretted shelving perhaps an overpriced old lenses and these stores seems to know what they had.
the other FD lenses I have was the 28mm f2 which i got for $35, the 100mm (not macro) for $50 and and another 35mm with yellowish color for $60.

So the FD lenses in my area are more expensive than your Ebay aquired FDs in the U.S.
 
Last edited:
oneted said:
You are lucky, have been looking for that lens for a while, pls relay your opinion when you have tested it thanks
Click to expand...

Well, we'll see if I got lucky when I actually receive the lens. It was described to have light scuff mark on the front glass which doesn't affect the image and to have slightly tight focusing. I took the risk when bidding for this item. I just hope these issues are in fact minor as described.
 
Update: my FD 35/2 is clear as a bell after sitting under a UVA bulb for nearly a week. It was actually clear a few days ago but I gave it a few extra days to really clean up. It wasn't that yellow before, but it's not yellow anymore.

The magic is still there. What a lens. But I'll be honest, the only difference is it may be a hair faster now -- once I bring my raw RW2s into LR3, whatever color differences between the lens pre and post UVA are rendered moot. On an OCD level I like looking through the lens and seeing clear glass, but performance-wise I don't think I really gained anything by doing this. I'm sure if it had been really brown I'd notice a significant improvement.
 
I tried my FD f1.2 55mm S.S.C. with FD adapter and picture was flawless. But I also got some hazing from light reflected from adapter when sun was in certain position (imaging circle is twice as big as m4/3 so strong sunlight will bounce from the adapter walls, I guess I need matte box)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top