Manual Focus Lenses Forum Index
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch|Quick search    MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  Rss feed   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Canon FL vs Canon FD

 
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Manual Focus Lenses Forum Index -> Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
iangreenhalgh1



Level 4

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 12809

Expire: 2014-01-07

PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 3:42 pm    Post subject: Canon FL vs Canon FD Reply with quote

Hi folks

My experience of Canon FD lenses has been that they are pretty mediocre (2.8/28, 2.8/35, 1.4/50 SSC, 1.8/50, 3.5/135) but my sole experience of Canon FL glass (2.5/35) was highly positive.

So what I'm wondering, are Canon FL lenses better that the later FD ones?
_________________

bokeh | boh-kay |

1. noun
....an excuse for bad photography
2. a village in Iran
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
fermy



Level 3

Joined: 17 Feb 2012
Posts: 2235


PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find FD lenses excellent: great colors, contrast and resolution. FD 50mm/f1.4 in any incarnation is definitely up there with best 50's one can buy short of aspherics. FD 35/f2 and FD 85/1.8 are one of the very best in their focal length as well. FD 28/f2.8 is a super bargain.

FL lenses have much weaker coatings and smoother rendering (due to more aberrations), which often is great for portraiture. I prefer FL lenses aesthetically: they are slimmer and look more elegant, front aperture ring is cool and A/M switch is great. However, FDn lenses are more practical: lighter, great coatings, a bit higher contrast, much more common filter size (52mm v 48mm).

Overall, I don't think the differences are dramatic, coatings and aesthetics being the greatest one.

Oh, yeah, FL 35mm/f2.5 is a daddy of 35mm/f2 SSC and a granddaddy of 35mm/F2 FDn, these are all great lenses, no wonder that you liked it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
casualcollector



Level 3

Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 651
Location: Spaced out on Florida's Space Coast


PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 6:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Canon FD normals, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 55/1.2 are their immediate FL predecessors in FD mount. Optically identical. Coatings were revised with the advent of the S.C. and S.S.C. designations. The 135/2.5 FD is a new optical design and only shares specification with the FL equivalent. The 28/3.5, 35/3.5, 135/3.5 may also be direct carryovers in the new mount, but I'm not certain without checking the Canon Museum site. Just about all the others are new designs with the possible exception of the very long teles.

I own many R, FL and FD lenses and consider them all very good. No stinkers. Your opinion may vary.
_________________
In Search Of "R" Serial Soligors
Found: 135/2.8 #R407660, 200/4 #R405526, 300/5.5 #R411127
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website  No rate
Share
iangreenhalgh1



Level 4

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 12809

Expire: 2014-01-07

PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks guys.

Sounds like my question should have been 'which other Canon lenses are as good as the FL 2.5/35?'

Which is a cracker...


_________________

bokeh | boh-kay |

1. noun
....an excuse for bad photography
2. a village in Iran
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
ManualFocus-G



Level 4

Joined: 29 Dec 2008
Posts: 6480
Location: United Kingdom

Expire: 2014-11-24

PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 7:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I found the 100/2.8, 35/2 and 20/2.8 to be excellent in FD mount. The 20/2.8 in particular, which blew away the CZJ Flektogon 20/2.8 for sharpness Shocked

Hate the mount though Laughing
_________________
Graham - Moderator

Shooting things: Canon EOS 6D, Fuji X-E1 and Olympus E-PL5 with Carl Zeiss T*

See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g and my blog at http://backtothefuturephotography.wordpress.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
RTI



Level 1

Joined: 15 Jul 2011
Posts: 238
Location: Moldova, Chisinau


PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 9:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Thanks guys.

Sounds like my question should have been 'which other Canon lenses are as good as the FL 2.5/35?'

Which is a cracker...


I can definitely say FD 35/2 (concave front element or not) is very good, and I think better then 35/2.5. The main donwside for me was it's size; but I loved it on my nex-5.
_________________
Cameras: Canon 5DIII, Zorki-4, Canon AE-1
MF: Rokkor MC 58/1.2, M39 Jupiter-9 (silver 1955), M42 Jupiter-9, Canon FD 35mm f2 SSC converted to M42, Oly G Zuiko 28/2, 135/2.8
AF: Sigma 50/1.4, EF 135 F2L
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
iangreenhalgh1



Level 4

Joined: 18 Mar 2011
Posts: 12809

Expire: 2014-01-07

PostPosted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Cheers guys. I happen to have my eye on an FL 2.8/100 so that's good to know.

I also hate the mount...
_________________

bokeh | boh-kay |

1. noun
....an excuse for bad photography
2. a village in Iran
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  No rate
Share
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Manual Focus Lenses Forum Index -> Manual Focus Lenses All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group