Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Canon FD 200mm f/4 macro
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Feb 27, 2012 9:08 pm    Post subject: Canon FD 200mm f/4 macro Reply with quote

I haven't seen something written about this lens on the forum. I just bought one at a real bargin price. I didn't know anything about the lens I wasn't really into buying at first as it is an FD, so I cannot use it on EOS. But when I checked out some prices on ebay and forums I just couldn't believe my eyes. Seems that this lens is an incredably good 1:1 macro performer... Maybe I will consider buying a glassless FD-EF and use it just for macro as I already have a 200mm f4 from pentacon. For a similar 1:1 macro I currently use a sonnar 135mm f3.5 with an extender but I don't do a lot of macro. Has anybody any ideas how that setup actually performs compared to what looks to be a top-of-the-line macro?
Has somebody experience with the lens?


PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I do, but my experience was in the film days circa 1977-1983. It was an excellent lens that I underutilized (I thought I would do lots of macro with a lens of this length deicated to it, but didn't.) If the lens were available for, say 50-100 Yankee dollars, I'd think it would be great using a glassless adaptor-you would have a very well corrected lens for closeup use (it should go as low as 1:6 reproduction ratio even with the depth of the adapter taken into account), to a bit beyond 1:1 lifesize. Not a bad price indeed for a dedicated closeup/macro lens.

Please remember though, I have never used one on a modern dslr, so i cannot speak for any performance issues that may be more obvious in digital vs. film usage. Good Luck!


PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for info... I might consider buying a glassless adapter just to try the lens. But the prices that it reaches are I just too tempting to sell it. Btw. i paid around 10$ for it Smile


PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

sammo wrote:
Thanks for info... I might consider buying a glassless adapter just to try the lens. But the prices that it reaches are I just too tempting to sell it. Btw. i paid around 10$ for it Smile


I have used a glassless adapter to use a Canon FD 50/3.5 macro and Tokina 90/2.5 macro on a Canon 40D, with superb results. Definitely worth it!


PostPosted: Tue Feb 28, 2012 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just ordered a glassless adapter. Will report results when I recieve it...


PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 8:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,
I recieved the adapter and till now managed to make just a few test shots.

At f/5.6 and about 1:1.5


Same object but shot with a Sonnar 135mm mounted on bellows (similar exposure and distance to object)


Interesting to see how one performs undercorrected and other overcorrected for spherical aberation...Canon is a lot better, better correction of abberations, produces a smoother background (is this over- or undercorrection?) but regarding sharpness I would say that there is not that much difference as I expected.


PostPosted: Tue Apr 17, 2012 7:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have done this one for one of our members here.

Amazing lens - I have got some samples but I have to dig them out Wink

CLICK ON THIS PICTURE:



tf


PostPosted: Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you don't like it, sell it to an FD mount camera owner! *waves* Laughing Laughing Laughing Laughing


PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have searched for a cheap copy of this macro to convert it to EF mount.
But it seems the Ebay prices does not match my price idea.
Now I even bid on the autofocus Tamron and Sigma 180 f/3.5 macro lenses Sad


PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just googled this conversion before I checked this forum Smile Looks very nice, I like it that it is reversible.
Could you provide some more info on the conversion? I did a few till now, currently I am working on one old FD..but it's quite tricky to do it. Is the FD mount just removed and a EF mounted, or some other conversion regarding aperture needs to be done? I also noticed that the square shaped aperture on the back is missing after conversion. What actually is it's purpose?


PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I picked up one of the old breach lock versions recently from KEH one of their "bargain". It does have some dings but overall I'd say "very nice" if I were selling it. Glass and function are flawless. I paid 173 USD. As indicated above it is a bear to hand hold. My technique is the "burst shooting mode". Set A7ii to hi speed continuous, get to the best focus you can and hold the button down until the bug is gone, or the camera runs out of buffer. I get one good pic in 30. Just the sharpness for yourself.

JPG from camera scaled only, and 100% crops:





[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20164/big_7980_DSC09977s_1.jpg]
[/url]

[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20164/big_7980_DSC09868c_1.jpg]
[/url]

[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20164/big_7980_DSC09882s_1.jpg]
[/url]

[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20164/big_7980_DSC09882c_1.jpg]
[/url]



[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20164/big_7980_DSC09902c_1.jpg]
[/url]





[url=[url=http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20164/big_7980_DSC09977s_2.jpg]
[/url]



PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

canon 200mm/4 macro is not that difficult to hand hold and get sharp photos. it's not that heavy lens. it's my auto-include-to-my-bag lens along with nikkor 20mm/4


PostPosted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I found it very difficult to get close ups. Of course I am old and the rock steady grip I had as a youth is long gone. I move to mfd and try to hold that spot, meanwhile the bug is moving, the wind is blowing the plant, even with inanimate objects I can see the peak focus wavering in and out. Especially at wider apertures. Most of those above were taken at F8 or F11. Wide open I couldn't even come close as the depth of field is about a mm thick.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nice shots. I especially like the one with the bee's head inside the flower.

jamaeolus wrote:
I found it very difficult to get close ups. Of course I am old and the rock steady grip I had as a youth is long gone. I move to mfd and try to hold that spot, meanwhile the bug is moving, the wind is blowing the plant, even with inanimate objects I can see the peak focus wavering in and out. Especially at wider apertures. Most of those above were taken at F8 or F11. Wide open I couldn't even come close as the depth of field is about a mm thick.


I know what you mean. I'm not a youngster anymore either but even someone with tripod-like steadiness will have problems shooting macros wide open on live subjects. With my fast lenses it's even tough when the subject ISN'T moving.

As a side note I see that this thread was started in 2012 and the OP paid $10 for their Canon 200mm f4 macro. They're current selling on the Bay in the $300 - $400 range.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is it just me or none of those picture is correct (no sharpness, bad bokeh and lot of CA...), especially for a macro ? Question


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 1:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have received my copy. Will bring it out later when I get the adapter....


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 5:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anybody else agree with Musashichan. I am genuinely curious. As stated these are JPG's unedited beyond resize. So really they show the lens character. Are all those people paying 200 to 300 for this lens crazy. I'll admit my photography is decidedly amateur (that's why I make my money selling drugs......................as a pharmacist) Wink . I have taken photos on a tripod using a remote and they are not remarkably sharper than these so....?


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 6:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jamaeolus wrote:
Anybody else agree with Musashichan. I am genuinely curious. As stated these are JPG's unedited beyond resize. So really they show the lens character. Are all those people paying 200 to 300 for this lens crazy. I'll admit my photography is decidedly amateur (that's why I make my money selling drugs......................as a pharmacist) Wink . I have taken photos on a tripod using a remote and they are not remarkably sharper than these so....?


I'm with him. Moved pics. Shot in sunlight probably around noon. Smudged details.
I know sharpness tend to be overrated but boy, this is a macro lens. Sharpness is a must in this case.
You asked for it.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Even first shoots at 5.6 are really bad for a macro lens, i have a perfect sharpness with my average lenses at 5.6...


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Assume you have set the right focal length in the IBIS setting, I think the sharpness of second last set is OK. A higher shutter speed may be benefit to achieve better sharpness on some of photos.


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, noonish. I don't have many other opportunities as work interferes. I appreciate the feedback. Trying to learn how its done!


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm afraid I must agree that all shots seem to have obvious (movement) blur.
These were handheld and I can't see the EXIF, so what were the shutter speeds?
On my A7 I seem to need at least double the shutter speeds I needed with my Canon 40D (which has about the same pixel density, so that shouldn't matter here), especially with longer or heavier lenses. For a 200mm macro I would try to keep it at least above 1/400 but preferably above 1/800 or even faster if possible!
Did you switch on EFC, that could also help with longer lenses.

But what looks more worrying to me is the state of your sensor, it almost looks like you wet cleaned it with the wrong product?


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The sensor is an issue. What do you recommend?


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To be honest, I have no idea, what happened to it?
I think the safest way is to find a store that can clean it, or perhaps even send it in, but I guess it depends on how it happened, or what's on it, if it could etch the coatings of the sensor, the faster it's cleaned off the better I think..
Good luck with it!


PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 7:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I used a proprietary product designed for cleaning sensors ( I don't recall which one) as it had giant blobs of dust or something that would not come off with air jets or sensor clean function.