My EF lenses... FD better option?

The FD lenses seem to lack good, fast zoom options. However, I think the primes are pretty good. I've got a 50mm F1.4, a 35mm F2 and a 28mm F2.5. All three are really good in my opinion. Big plus of course is the price, only about $50 each and also the adapters only cost like $18 since they are 'dumb' adapters as you control iris and focus on lens. So double cost savings as no expensive adapter needed. Of course, I had no 'library' of still glass as I came to the FS100 as a video shooter, not a DSLR shooter. If I had an investment in glass, I think I would figure out how to use it on the FS100 as you already have it and presumably it's paid for. For people just coming to the FS100, I think vintage FD glass is a really good way to get into some great lenses at a very inexpensive price. I've kind of become an ebay addict scouring for good deals on fast glass.
 
Sigh - may as well throw this one into the mix:


Still can't decide what I like the least... Just keep them all...
 
well i was going to use fd at 1st but then i found out that the good ones are coast too much to invest in something 30yo..... i dont know just dont feel right about it..... plus if u already have some why to change it... get the metabones as its seems like working! cant find it - get the mtf. the only thing about metabones is that i dont understand why is there a glass inside (looks like it has one)?
 
No glass inside Metabones adapter. Email them at perorder@metabones.com, thats how I got mine. The adapter is great, and tje IS works like a charm. In my opinion the IS on quality zooms, like 24-105mm F4, is the biggest reason to get Metabones and use EF glass. Otherwise manual Nikon and Canon FD lenses are great with the FS100. Good luck!
 
anatusa said:
well i was going to use fd at 1st but then i found out that the good ones are coast too much to invest in something 30yo.....
Click to expand...

Part of the fun of buying older lenses is tracking down a great value lens. :) Not to mention the "look" of an older lens can be a benefit or change to the uber precision of modern lenses.

I have just bought a mint nikkor mount Vivitar 28-105 and nikkor 43-86 (very flary and soft and considered rubbish) both cheaply so looking forward to playing with them later this week.
 
Last edited:
anatusa said:
well i was going to use fd at 1st but then i found out that the good ones are coast too much to invest in something 30yo..... i dont know just dont feel right about it.....
Click to expand...

Vintage MF glass gives you a manual aperture and some incredibly good glass for a lot less than any modern version of the lens. Many Olympus, Nikon, Minolta, Canon and Zeiss lenses are easily as good as any modern lens, and you get much more precise focusing since there are hard stops in the dampened focusing rings, you get manual aperture and you get IMHO a more defined look. Most modern lenses have very neutral (boring) rendering style. The high end versions of these lenses were top of the line optics and they're still stellar by today's standards. Lots of still lenses were converted to cine lenses because the optics were so good.

I guess it depends on your standard of "good" - if you're talking about lenses like the 24/1.4 and 50/1.2, those will cost you - the fastest lenses are always going to cost you. But there are a ton of 24/2.8, 35/2, 50/1.4 and so on in the $100-200 range if you're patient. KEH has a lot of great lenses. The Zooms are typically dirt cheap too because they're usually a stop slower than modern versions, but with the FS100 a single stop is no big deal. I paid $400 for a 58/1.2 Rokkor, the cheapest current lens I can think of in this range is the CV 50/1.1 which sells for about $1200.

I have 6 Rokkors that cover focal ranges from 24-135mm and all of them combined cost $1000. My Sony 16-50 and LAEA1 adapter was $900. I love the way the Rokkors look for both stills and video. They have a signature look that my Sony lenses can't match. They're very sharp, but also high contrast lenses with great bokeh, so your in focus subject has great separation from the background and the transition from focus to out of focus is very smooth. So you can get a modern, cheap, plastic 50/1.4 or an all metal optic that will easily last another 30 years.
 
Straight to the point, thanks for the share. I have a good feeling about my 58mm 1.2 and 70-210mm 4.0 Minoltas.

Whats your take on this - I purchased a Canon 70-200 4.0 to cover the top range of my focal lenghts as I am not purchasing the Sony kit lens after reading bad reviews. The sony offers from 18mm to 200mm though, for quite a similar price. I can still get a refnd on my Canon zoom if needed. Should I go with the Sony or work with the Canon? In other words, will the Canon perform better to the extent that I would not want the extra flexibility of the sony kit.

Oh and by the way I found one used metabones adaptor for sale, and the same day the company emailed me saying they had a brand new one ready for me to order. Quite some luck on that side!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top