Not happy with Canon FD Lenses

C

climber

Member
So I picked up 35mm and 50mm Canon FD lenses from a craigslister the other day. The 50mm looks ok but has a different look to it than my panasonic lenses and I think it is too much zoom for the work that I do. The 35mm really looks bad, I'm guessing it's because there is some fungus or dust in the lens.

Now I'm trying to decide what to replace it with. I can find another copy of the same lens that is in mint condition but I don't think the video will match up closely with my Panasonic lenses. Currently I have the kit lens, 20mm f/1.7(LOVE this lens), and the 7-14mm(on order, haven't tested yet).

Other options are:
Panasonic 45mm macro. The biggest problem with this lens is it's $800 and max aperture is only f/2.8.

Olympus 50mm macro. This is a little cheaper at $550 with 4/3's adaptor. Still expensive but is brighter at f/2. Unfortunately autofocus doesn't work so it seems overpriced for what you get.

Nikon 35mm lens? Lots of different models ranging from cheap to expensive. Manual focus only. Unsure on how well they would match up with the Panasonic lenses.

Sigma lens 30mm lens? Expensive, manual focus only.

Anyone have any suggestions?
 
Your thread title is misleading -- what you're not happy with is the 100mm short telephoto perspective of an adapted 50mm manual lens, but that's going to be true of any 50mm legacy glass you try, hardly a unique shortcoming of the Canon. And instead of guessing that your 35mm has some dust and/or fungus, have you actually held the lens up the light and looked through it when it's not mounted to your camera? There's no need to guess about such things, they're easy to spot with the naked eye.

Yes, legacy glass has a different look to it than modern Panasonic lenses. That's kind of the point. If you want a lens that looks like your new Panasonic glass, buy more new Panasonic glass.

And by all means, be a good underwhelmed legacy glass newbie and practice "catch and release", so that great old glass can find someone who will better appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
I have purchased a number of Canon FD and Konica AR lenses from KEH. All were in fine condition, backed up with a no hassle return policy.
 
I shoot exclusively with my Canon FD prime set:
20mm f/2.8
24mm f/2.0
28mm f/2.0
35mm f/2.0
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8
100mm f/2.8

and was intially quite surprised on how well they matched in colour, contrast and look. The two that differs a bit from the rest are the 20mm and 100mm.

The 35mm I love so much I got two, one geared for my follow focus and one without for basic street style shooting with just lens and body.

Sounds like you got hold of a mistreated one - just like I have, a couple has not been perfect and thus sits on the shelf. That's to be expected when getting old second hand lenses and for the cost I can't complain. I've paid less than what I spent on the GH1 with kit lens for the whole kit above including those dust collectors.
 
+1 for KEH, they have great gear.

I love the Sigma 30mm 1.4. Easier to walk around and shoot with than the 50mm as well as it is sharper. Also it is a whole lot easier to focus than the 20mm IMO.
 
I think the original poster (climber) is not happy with the two FD lenses he bought, not FD lenses in general so the thread title can easily be mis-interpreted.

FD lenses have a different look to modern lenses, its hard to match them. A lot of people prefer the look of FD lenses as they have a cream soft look in the bokeh that you can't create in post.

An earlier poster already said this but another 50mm will have the same 'zoom' as your current 50mm.
 
shaveblog said:
Your thread title is misleading -- what you're not happy with is the 100mm short telephoto perspective of an adapted 50mm manual lens, but that's going to be true of any 50mm legacy glass you try, hardly a unique shortcoming of the Canon. And instead of guessing that your 35mm has some dust and/or fungus, have you actually held the lens up the light and looked through it when it's not mounted to your camera? There's no need to guess about such things, they're easy to spot with the naked eye.

Yes, legacy glass has a different look to it than modern Panasonic lenses. That's kind of the point. If you want a lens that looks like your new Panasonic glass, buy more new Panasonic glass.

And by all means, be a good underwhelmed legacy glass newbie and practice "catch and release", so that great old glass can find someone who will better appreciate it.
Click to expand...

I don't know why some people on this forum feel the need to be rude and condescending.
Of course I realize that the 50mm lens has too much reach for my needs and that has nothing to do with FD lenses.

Sorry, I should have been more clear with this; what I am not happy with is the look of the FD lenses, especially since they won't match up with my Panasonic lenses. I love my 20mm lens and I'm pretty sure I'm going to love the 7-14mm lens as well. It seems like it will be difficult to shoot a project with Panasonic lenses + the Canon FD lenses and get them to match up in post. The Canon's just look a bit too soft for me. I guess they look more 'filmic' but I shoot action sports so that doesn't work as well for me.

I would love to buy the Olympus 50 but it is expensive so I'm wondering if any other lenses from Nikon, Canon, or Sigma will match up with the Panasonic lenses or if I just need to spend the extra money for the Oly.

An earlier poster already said this but another 50mm will have the same 'zoom' as your current 50mm.
Click to expand...

Since the Olympus 50 is four third's it won't have the same telephoto as the canon or nikon 50mm. It should be a good match for what I'm looking for, just trying to make sure that is the only option for me.

Thanks for the help,
Alex
 
Martti Ekstrand said:
I shoot exclusively with my Canon FD prime set:
20mm f/2.8
24mm f/2.0
28mm f/2.0
35mm f/2.0
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8
100mm f/2.8

and was intially quite surprised on how well they matched in colour, contrast and look. The two that differs a bit from the rest are the 20mm and 100mm.

The 35mm I love so much I got two, one geared for my follow focus and one without for basic street style shooting with just lens and body.

Sounds like you got hold of a mistreated one - just like I have, a couple has not been perfect and thus sits on the shelf. That's to be expected when getting old second hand lenses and for the cost I can't complain. I've paid less than what I spent on the GH1 with kit lens for the whole kit above including those dust collectors.
Click to expand...

What do you use for WA?

20mm is way too tight.

climber said:
Since the Olympus 50 is four third's it won't have the same telephoto as the canon or nikon 50mm.
Click to expand...

What? No.

50mm is 50mm... It doesn't matter the format.

The AoV that it's going to wield in a given format is another story.

50mm in FF35 = Standard.
50mm in 4/3 = Telephoto.
 
grimepoch said:
I shoot with a 30mm F1.4 on my 7D and love it. (Sigma) I really recommend this lens!
Click to expand...

Two votes for the Sigma 30mm! I'm assuming even if I buy the four thirds lens with the panasonic adapter that the autofocus wouldn't work. Sounds like a good lens; it would be brighter than the olympus.

+1 for KEH, they have great gear.

I love the Sigma 30mm 1.4. Easier to walk around and shoot with than the 50mm as well as it is sharper. Also it is a whole lot easier to focus than the 20mm IMO.
Click to expand...
Which adapter are you using with this lens?
 
The Panasonic converter had pins in it the picture I saw, so I'd think it could control it.

I also plan on picking up the 25mm F0.95 when I get my AF100 as that looks like a NICE lens (there are a few varieties) but not having used it yet, I cannot comment yet.
 
Apologies, wasn't trying to be rude. But you're right, my response was pretty condescending. I just see a lot of movement lately with m43 newbies diving into legacy glass without really knowing why, they just saw some cool pics on Flickr and thought they'd get them some of that old lens voodoo too, except when the lens arrives from eBay or craigslist and the very first shot isn't somehow sprinkled with cool vintage pixie dust, the lens gets tagged FAIL and then sits in a drawer unused. I personally know guys like this and it's a drag. But for all I know you're Ansel Adams so sorry for the proxy bile.

Okay, if apologies are accepted, here's my take on the FD-m43 thing. At this point I have the FDn50/1.4, FD35/2, FL50/1.4, and the FL85/1.8. They are all gorgeous, just breathtaking. It's a crime we're able to score these lenses for cheap now.

The "problem" I see many newbs having with old Canon glass is that unlike the modern Panasonic and Oly m43 lenses which are quite sharp wide open, few of the FDs and FLs are that sharp until you stop them down a bit. In some cases, more than just a bit.

So guys slap on an old Canon, or a Konica, or some funky Russian c-mount, open that sucker up to take advantage of natural light and get that super-shallow depth of field all the cool kids on Flickr get, and the result is a soft, not terribly contrasty image. "Dreamy" if you dig it, "amateur" if you do this for a living. Maybe my FD35/2 is as sharp wide open as the pancake, but the rest of my Canons sure aren't.

I think you need to forget about "matching up" old glass to your new m43 lenses, unless you plan to spend some time in post averaging things out, and even then you're not really going to make an FD50/1.4 look like the same lens as the pancake except zoomed in. Best to stay with FDs for a given shoot, or modern m43 glass, but not both combined if your project requires consistency of look.

At this point I shoot stills almost exclusively with the pancake, and video almost exclusively with the Canons. I'm not above shooting stills with the Canons and video with the pancake, but I just happen to prefer the way my stills and video look the other way around.

Apologies again for the proxyizing. Good luck with your lens hunt.


climber said:
I don't know why some people on this forum feel the need to be rude and condescending.
Of course I realize that the 50mm lens has too much reach for my needs and that has nothing to do with FD lenses.

Sorry, I should have been more clear with this; what I am not happy with is the look of the FD lenses, especially since they won't match up with my Panasonic lenses. I love my 20mm lens and I'm pretty sure I'm going to love the 7-14mm lens as well. It seems like it will be difficult to shoot a project with Panasonic lenses + the Canon FD lenses and get them to match up in post. The Canon's just look a bit too soft for me. I guess they look more 'filmic' but I shoot action sports so that doesn't work as well for me.

I would love to buy the Olympus 50 but it is expensive so I'm wondering if any other lenses from Nikon, Canon, or Sigma will match up with the Panasonic lenses or if I just need to spend the extra money for the Oly.



Since the Olympus 50 is four third's it won't have the same telephoto as the canon or nikon 50mm. It should be a good match for what I'm looking for, just trying to make sure that is the only option for me.

Thanks for the help,
Alex
Click to expand...
 
climber said:
Which adapter are you using with this lens?
Click to expand...

I am using the Nikon G adapter from Rainbowimaging. It allows aperture control. I will be posting a short piece that I shot with this lens in the next day or so. I love the look from this lens!

EDIT: Oh and if you buy the adapter from rainbow, send him an email in advance and if you skip ebay you can get a discount. I have done this with all of my adapters with him...
 
Pietro Impagliazzo said:
What do you use for WA?

20mm is way too tight.
Click to expand...

I'm a old school film maker and don't particularly like using wide angles for motion work so the 20mm is about as wide as I want to go. Can't recall I've ever used a wider lens than that on a 35 mm movie camera. As much as I can I use the 35mm FD for medium and close-ups, it's FOV is perfect for my taste.
 
Regarding mixing FD with panasonic, this video is shot with FD55mm and pancake 20mm: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=223570

A combo the author reccomended (and based on the quality of his work, I'd tend to listen to him).

What many people are saying is that the new panasonic lenses are more sharp and contrasty. Interestingly, this poster is talking about the same thing, but from the other perspective: http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=224556 (he doesn't like sharp and contrasty, it appears).

My suggestion, having taken part in some discussion about these lenses, is that we focus on systemizing our knowledge about what technology produces what effect, rather than boldly and subjectively "liking" or "disliking" some of the tools. Similarily as one would expect to find painters discussing different types of colours or materials. I'm not saying you shouldn't take a stance, but it's the WHY that's helpful to the discussion, not the WHAT about our likes and dislikes.
 
Ungh..feel...snarky retort coming........must....resist urge...to post condescending reply about eliminating subjectivity from inherently artistic subject like lens choice....

Phew! Almost let loose there. Better, yes?

Arnarfjodur said:
My suggestion, having taken part in some discussion about these lenses, is that we focus on systemizing our knowledge about what technology produces what effect, rather than boldly and subjectively "liking" or "disliking" some of the tools. Similarily as one would expect to find painters discussing different types of colours or materials. I'm not saying you shouldn't take a stance, but it's the WHY that's helpful to the discussion, not the WHAT about our likes and dislikes.
Click to expand...
 
helping each other understand characteristics of lenses is helpful.

that thread convinced me to order a 52mm diffusion lens for a pancake. hopefully it mitigates aliasing issue.
 
Hey Shaveblog. There's nothing wrong with using subjective methods in artistic production. How much it's instinct and how much it's concious is a fun discusson and by all means chip in your thoughts.

The problem, however, is when they are expressed in a forum like this. Then they become quite useless. One guy posts something about Panny lenses being ugly and FD being nice. Two days later someone posts something about being "disapointed" wih FD and liking Panny. Someone posts that FD and Panny are a good combo. Next someone reccomends us to "forget about it". See what I mean?

By all means, pick your lenses by subjective instinct. But whats the point in discussing it like this? At the end of the day, the difference between lenses is not magic.
 
climber said:
So I picked up 35mm and 50mm Canon FD lenses from a craigslister the other day. The 50mm looks ok but has a different look to it than my panasonic lenses and I think it is too much zoom for the work that I do. The 35mm really looks bad, I'm guessing it's because there is some fungus or dust in the lens.

Now I'm trying to decide what to replace it with. I can find another copy of the same lens that is in mint condition but I don't think the video will match up closely with my Panasonic lenses. Currently I have the kit lens, 20mm f/1.7(LOVE this lens), and the 7-14mm(on order, haven't tested yet).

Other options are:
Panasonic 45mm macro. The biggest problem with this lens is it's $800 and max aperture is only f/2.8.

Olympus 50mm macro. This is a little cheaper at $550 with 4/3's adaptor. Still expensive but is brighter at f/2. Unfortunately autofocus doesn't work so it seems overpriced for what you get.

Nikon 35mm lens? Lots of different models ranging from cheap to expensive. Manual focus only. Unsure on how well they would match up with the Panasonic lenses.

Sigma lens 30mm lens? Expensive, manual focus only.

Anyone have any suggestions?
Click to expand...

Can you return the Canon lenses to the craigslister?

Also, as others have said, KEH is a good place to look for legacy glass. They stand behind what they sell, and they grade equipment conservatively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top