Lens Brand?

If you are looking for long term use on other cameras such as Canon 5D, RED platforms, others, I would go for the Nikons and Zeiss ZF's. The longer flange to focal plane distance make Nikons easily adaptable to various camera bodies.

If you're on a budget and looking for something far cheaper for just 35mm adapters, I would buy Canon FD or Minolta MD lenses. These lenses have a shorter flange to focal plane distance, so they can't be used properly on such cameras like the Canon 5D without an additional lens element adapter which degrades the image. But most 35mm adapter makers support Canon FD and Minolta mounts.

I have both Nikon and Minolta MD lenses, and have good things to say about both. Nikons are not expensive compared to Cine glass, but they are about 2x more expensive than the equivalent Canon FD or Minolta MD lenses.
 
I'm looking at the Canon FD lenses available on eBay and the prices there are really tempting. But it feels sketchy buying a 30-40 yr old lens on eBay because it's difficult to tell what condition they are in. So now I'm torn between buying Nikon and Canon FD lenses. Is there any specific reason why a 35mm adapter user would choose one brand over the other?
 
Another thing I'm considering is what if I want to buy a zoom lens in the future? Is there a certain brand/mount that generally has the best zoom lenses for adapters?

Perhaps I should just go with the Nikon because they seem to be the most generally accepted among dof adapter users...
 
Shook, I've bought from ebay and sometimes you get great deals, sometimes a total rip. Mixed bag. If you're sketchy about buying from ebay, just buy from keh.com. They give very fair prices on used lenses, they have conservative ratings on the quality of lenses, and you can always return them if you're not happy with their condition. It's a fast way to get a good set of lenses for 35mm adapter user. Problem is they sometimes don't have the lens you want.

The Nikon lens you were looking at an amazon.com: if you're going Nikon and you want a cheap 50mm, get the AIS version at keh.com for cheaper and its not as plasticky as the AF version which is now made in China.

Canon FD vs Nikon: Not for me to say, I don't own any. If you're on a budget, go with Canon I would say, but they probably won't be adaptable for some other Cameras like the 5D and perhaps not the RED as well. I've been tempted to buy a few Canons but I think my girlfriend would probably throw them at me along with a few pans.
 
chiming in for FD. i haven't seen a bit of difference between these and the older nikon glass image-wise. however, you can usually get FD lenses a little cheaper and the big difference, they don't focus backwards like the nikons do. if you are using a follow focus you roll forward to focus closer, just like cine lenses. nikons are backwards. pisses ac's off bigtime.

shoook. if you don't know fd, here's what you want to look for to start with.

28mm 2.8 around $25
50mm 1.4 around $60
85mm 1.8 around $200
135mm 2.5 around $100

or if you want to spend some serious cash,

50mm 1.2 around $400
85mm 1.2 around $700

also, there are two fd mount types. one has a silver ring that rotates to lock down the lens. the other has no ring, and you twist the entire lens onto the mount like the nikons. i prefer the latter. i think they lock tighter which is important for wiggle free operation.

last thing. don't go for the off brands. i have never had any luck with them. canon glass only.
 
Last edited:
I'm becoming a fan of Tamron's new lenses. I think they're kicking Nikon's butt in terms of new lenses -- probably because more and more Nikon lenses are made in China (not that that's necessarily bad), and Tamron are still made in Japan.

But yeah, Zeiss... MMMmmmm...
 
Nikon is the best bet.

Nikon is the best bet.

I shoot on Nikon lenses from the 50's, 60's and 70's. (I own a lens that was made in occupied Japan!) All of my lenses make beautiful images, but there are some differences.

Using a standard focus chart and scopes I can say this about the lenses I have used:

AIS lenses allow the most light through (marginal) with the least vignetting. The straight F-mount Nikon lenses are the sharpest (marginal).

Not all AIS lenses are made the same so test your lenses before shooting. My 35mm 1.4 Nikon AIS is the best lens I own for light loss and sharpness.

I also own a Sigma 28mm 1.8 AF. I bought this lens on an impulse off of eBay because I really wanted something faster at that focal length. I was really nervous right after I bought it, but when I finally received the lens and ran it through the tests it turned out to be a decent lens. It is the least sharp lens I own (marginal), but it has very little vignetting and it was cheap! The only thing I don't like about the lens is the crappy focus ring which is "clicky", but I do get half stops on the apeture so I guess it washes out in the end.

Then there is Zeiss.... No lies in this thread about Zeiss lenses: they are king of the mountain. I rented a Zeiss ZF 100mm Macro for a month and the results are stunning....STUNNING! The scope measurements were incredible for vignetting and shapness. So much that I actually thought something was wrong with my computer when I did the measurements. However, the Zeiss lenses lose more light through them then the Nikons. If you calculate T-Stops for your lenses you'll be dissappointed in how much light you lose through the Zeiss. Bottom line: have good lights.

As for eBay; be careful. I was ripped off several times, but I also scored some great deals. When I need to buy a lens quickly for a shoot and I don't have the time or money to waste I just go to my local camera store and pick up the lens I need. It costs more, but I get to inspect the lens before I buy it and that makes a huge difference.
 
cheezweezl said:
shoook. if you don't know fd, here's what you want to look for to start with.

28mm 2.8 around $25
50mm 1.4 around $60
85mm 1.8 around $200
135mm 2.5 around $100

or if you want to spend some serious cash,

50mm 1.2 around $400
85mm 1.2 around $700
Click to expand...

How do those FD prices compare to used Nikon prices? Also, where do you guys mainly buy your lenses from?
 
cheezweezl said:
also, there are two fd mount types. one has a silver ring that rotates to lock down the lens. the other has no ring, and you twist the entire lens onto the mount like the nikons. i prefer the latter. i think they lock tighter which is important for wiggle free operation.

last thing. don't go for the off brands. i have never had any luck with them. canon glass only.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly with your second point. Don't even waste the time looking at off-brand Canon FD mount lenses.

On the first point, though, with the older breechlock (silver ring) style, there's a huge advantage: built-in manual aperture lock! Just push the big silver lever counter-clockwise until it clicks into position and presto, your aperture ring works just like it should. With the newer twist-on style, you have to wedge the lever with something. (Canon made an official little plastic part to do it, but you never find those for sale any more - I guess all the adapter owners snatched them up! I have two, for my two newer-mount lenses...)

Duncan
 
What about f1.8 vs. f1.4 lenses? I realize that is twice as much light but in most shooting scenarios is a faster lens always going to serve you better?
 
shoook said:
What about f1.8 vs. f1.4 lenses? I realize that is twice as much light but in most shooting scenarios is a faster lens always going to serve you better?
Click to expand...

Well, beyond the extra stop of light, in most cases the quality difference between the two is astonishing. I know in the Canon FD world the 1.8 was the cheapie little lens they gave away with the bodies by default, while the 1.4 is a serious piece of optical design. I believe that was roughly the same in the Nikon world back in the day.

At this point, in used prices, the 50/1.4 isn't going to cost you very much money anyway, so why not go for that? (Admittedly you can get the 1.8s for nearly nothing at all, but $50 more for the insane jump in optical quality is well worth it in my book.)

Duncan
 
canon 1.4 costs as much as five canon 1.8 lenses , so is it really worth it and where we can see the difference ? Some pics ?
 
In an adapter for optical reasons no one has explained there is often not a full stop difference between a 1.8 and a 1.4 lens .
With a Brevis CF1L there is no difference at all. It depends on the adapter. Please don't ask for a full accounting of the differences - you won't get that here.
 
bwwd said:
canon 1.4 costs as much as five canon 1.8 lenses , so is it really worth it and where we can see the difference ? Some pics ?
Click to expand...

But the 1.4 can be had for $50 all day long, so who cares that the 1.8 is only $10? Neither one is very much money.

All I can say is hold both in your hands, then look through both in the viewfinder of a Canon FD SLR, and you will be sold. The difference in build quality and optical sharpness is that obvious. Especially if the 1.8 in question is the miserable little hunk of plastic they pretended was a lens when they came out with the "new FD mount" (bayonet style) version. It wouldn't look out of place on a point-and-shoot camera.

You can compare some of the differences in them here, though I wasn't specifically doing a quality shootout between those two lenses:

http://www.betlikeduncan.com/duncan/redrock/lenscharts/canon_fd/

Duncan
 
Yes, the FD 50mm f1.4 is simply amazing. It's the sharpest lens I own and also the cheapest. The jump in quality from the 1.8 is just stunning.
 
10 $ ? and 1.4 for only 50$ ? Are you serious ? I checked on ebay and 1.8 is for not less than 20 GBP (about 30 $) and 1.4 is for 100 GBP(147 $)
---
wow great tests ill watch them now,thanks Duncan
 
Last edited:
bwwd said:
10 $ ? and 1.4 for only 50$ ? Are you serious ? I checked on ebay and 1.8 is for not less than 20 GBP (about 30 $) and 1.4 is for 100 GBP(147 $)
---
wow great tests ill watch them now,thanks Duncan
Click to expand...

We are talking about Canon FD lenses not EOS or EF. Are you looking at Canon FD?
 
Last edited:
i posted all those prices based on what i paid on ebay. i just bought a whole set over the last week. these are current going rates.

here are the auctions i won....

135mm f2.5

85mm f1.8

50mm f1.4

28mm f2.8

i had this exact same set before and i sold them with my old redrock m2. i just got the new m2e and bought all the same lenses.

i also have a 200mm f2.8 that i kept from before and i am currently looking for a FL 14mm
 
bwwd said:
10 $ ? and 1.4 for only 50$ ? Are you serious ? I checked on ebay and 1.8 is for not less than 20 GBP (about 30 $) and 1.4 is for 100 GBP(147 $)
---
wow great tests ill watch them now,thanks Duncan
Click to expand...

I see 50/1.4 lenses go for $50-ish in the US all the time. (The post a couple below yours shows an auction where he did a Buy It Now for one at $65, but if you're willing to bid on open auctions, they do frequently go for less.) If they are that much higher elsewhere, perhaps it's worth the extra shipping to buy them from the US?

This wasn't supposed to turn into an ad for a lens I have for sale, but I actually have one I'll sell for $40 including shipping anywhere in the world. It's not usable without repair on an SLR because of the slow-moving aperture blades, but of course that doesn't matter if you are only ever using it on an adapter.

http://redrockmicro.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7111&sid=d57ef114197e70a459ca01d91999b3c2

Duncan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top