Which lens system is best bang for buck? Canon FD? Minolta? Nikkor?

stephenvv

stephenvv

Well-known member
I sold my old Canon SLR and EOS lenses years ago - all I have is K10d with kit lens which will go on eBay shortly.

So - I want some lenses for the GH1 and unsure which direction to invest. Obviously want some fast normal and wides for lowlight but would prefer nice glass with good sharpness wide open, low distortion.

Any thoughts on Canon FD vs. Nikkor vs. Minolta etc. if you are buying from scratch?
 
I personally don't invest in one single system. But if it's between those three, the consensus seems to be that overall, the Canon FD lenses are slightly better than the old Nikkors and Rokkors. Some Canons are better, some Nikkors are better, some Rokkors are better. That's why my choices come down to individual lenses, rather than mounts or brands.
 
I have Nikons and Minolta rokkors. Optically both are fine sets of lenses. Nikon AI/AIS have better build quality but focus the wrong way. Minolta MD's are probably the cheapest lenses of the major three. I really like the Minolta 50mm's and 135mm's. Nikons will work on most cameras with adapters because of their longer focal flange distance. Minoltas will work on the GH1 with an adapter, but not on a Canon EOS.

I and many other shooters don't like to mix lens manufacturers when shooting drama. A set of lenses uses consistent coatings and glass, and so the coloration and characteristics will be a better match for when you use various focal lengths for Wides - CU's, etc that are cut together later.
 
If you're interested in Primes, Pentax primes are of stellar quality. The Pentax "limited" (and star/*) lenses are probably some of the most underrated lenses around and, fortunately, their pricing generally reflects this.
 
I've used the nikkor primes on my D90. The best bang for buck 50mm is the minolta rokkor f/1.4 MC. Why? The bokeh is really nice and creamy and it's sharp. I bought one myself in mint condition on ebay for $60. The look is a lot nicer than the nikkors and yes the minoltas are the cheapest. The pentax super takumar SMCs are also very good and cheap too.
 
I have soft spot for Rokkor lenses, particularly the 58mm F/1.2, but I have to go with F-mount Nikkors from pragmatic perspective if its a bang-for-the-buck criteria.

The thing about the F-mount is that it has a relatively large focal flange distance, which means that it can be adapted to pretty much any camera with a shorter FFD. If you invest in an old Nikkor you can mount it on an EOS body, or a Pentax, or a Sony Alpha mount, or 4/3rds or micro-4/3rds camera. As an investment it offers more flexibility and utility, beyond that there are a lot of newer F-mounts available that still have the aperature ring and are optically excellent.

With that said, if you have a good collection of FD lenses or Minolta lenses you should defintely get an adater for it. There are some real gems hidden in both Rokkor and FD lens collections that are well suited for the u43rds system. For instance, the FD 24mm f/2 which is very affordable and offers a 48mm-equiv on a u43rds system. More suitable is the FD 24mm f/1.4 L Aspherical which is very difficult to find but is very well regarded lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top