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 Zoom lenses
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2016 6:41 pm    Post subject: Canon FD Zoom lenses Reply with quote
Are Canon FD zooms worth considering?

For example:

FD 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5
FD 70-210mm f/5.6
FD 100-300mm f/5.6

I generally avoid zoom lenses.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:05 pm    Post subject: Re: Canon FD Zoom lenses Reply with quote
kyrcy wrote:
Are Canon FD zooms worth considering?

For example:

FD 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5
FD 70-210mm f/5.6
FD 100-300mm f/5.6

I generally avoid zoom lenses.

FDn 35-105/3.5 Macro
FDn 28-85/4
FDn 100-300/5.6 Macro
these 3 are cheap and also very good. i never tested the 70-210/4 macro (and 80-200/4) but people say it's also very good. 28-85/4 is the best mid-range zoom i ever tested.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Are we talking about the same lenses? The ones I listed I found them in a shop and could inspect them before buying.


PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:40 pm    Post subject: Re: Canon FD Zoom lenses Reply with quote
kyrcy wrote:
Are Canon FD zooms worth considering?

For example:

FD 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5
FD 70-210mm f/5.6
FD 100-300mm f/5.6

I generally avoid zoom lenses.


I've never heard about a FD 70-210mm 1:5.6, and i don't think it exists.
I don't know the nFD 3.5-4.5/35-105mm, but it has a pretty good reputation.
I do know the nFD 3.5/35-105mm, and it is certainly not as good as the Minolta MD 3.5-4.5/35-105mm (both versions); the Canon nFD 3.5/35-105mm has much more corner problems than the two Minolta 3.5-4.5/3MD 35-105mm lenses.

The Canon nFD 4/28-85mm is roughly on par with the Minolta 3.5-4.5/28-85mm. Both are quite OK, but good primes from the same time certainly are better. In fact there are very few 1980 zoom which have the same quality levels as contemporary primes. The Minolta MD-III (!) 3.5/35-70mm is quite OK, the Minolta 4/70-150mm is excellent (apart from distortion and maybe bokeh it equals the best Minolta primes such as MD 2/85mm and MD 2.5/100mm). The MD-III 4/70-210mm is excellent between 100mm and 150mm.

Of course the Canon lenses 3.5/20-35mm L, 2.8-3.5/35-70mm and 4/80-200mm L are excellent as well.

I don't own that many Nikkor zooms, but those i have are nothing special. My AF Nikkor 2.8/80-200mm ED, for instance, can't compete with the contemporary Minolta AF 2.8/80-200mm APO.

Stephan

Stephan


PostPosted: Fri Jun 10, 2016 8:57 pm    Post subject: Re: Canon FD Zoom lenses Reply with quote
stevemark wrote:

I've never heard about a FD 70-210mm 1:5.6, and i don't think it exists.
I don't know the nFD 3.5-4.5/35-105mm, but it has a pretty good reputation.
I do know the nFD 3.5/35-105mm, and it is certainly not as good as the Minolta MD 3.5-4.5/35-105mm (both versions); the Canon nFD 3.5/35-105mm has much more corner problems than the two Minolta 3.5-4.5/3MD 35-105mm lenses.

The Canon nFD 4/28-85mm is roughly on par with the Minolta 3.5-4.5/28-85mm. Both are quite OK, but good primes from the same time certainly are better. In fact there are very few 1980 zoom which have the same quality levels as contemporary primes. The Minolta MD-III (!) 3.5/35-70mm is quite OK, the Minolta 4/70-150mm is excellent (apart from distortion and maybe bokeh it equals the best Minolta primes such as MD 2/85mm and MD 2.5/100mm). The MD-III 4/70-210mm is excellent between 100mm and 150mm.

Of course the Canon lenses 3.5/20-35mm L, 2.8-3.5/35-70mm and 4/80-200mm L are excellent as well.

I don't own that many Nikkor zooms, but those i have are nothing special. My AF Nikkor 2.8/80-200mm ED, for instance, can't compete with the contemporary Minolta AF 2.8/80-200mm APO.

Stephan

Stephan


I think it was a FD 70-210mm f/4 (Macro?).


PostPosted: Sun Jun 12, 2016 12:32 pm    Post subject: Re: Canon FD Zoom lenses Reply with quote
kyrcy wrote:
Are Canon FD zooms worth considering?

For example:

FD 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5
FD 70-210mm f/5.6
FD 100-300mm f/5.6

I generally avoid zoom lenses.


The 35-105 3.5-4.5 is an interesting lens as it has a mounded glass aspherical element so should have good performance for its price & size. I like the FD 28-85/4 best in that range and would put it's sharpness close to the Contax 28-85 Vario-Sonnar, with the VS better at the wide end and the Canon sharper at the long end. I did, however prefer the colour transitions and overall look of the Zeiss.

There is no FD 70-210 f/5.6 three is a 70-210 f/4 which is a reasonable performer, good enough that I sold my Tamron SP 70-210 #19AH. Sharpness was a close run thing but colour fringing was much better controlled with the Canon.

I've not tried the 100-300/5.6 as I held out for the L version of that lens which is reputed to be much better, but never got one before mostly switching my film system to Contax/Yashica a few years back.

Of the FD zoom lenses I have owned I reckon the best to be the 28-85 & 35-105/3.5. Personally I don't rate the 20-35L, at the price you have to pay now: It's a great demonstration of how far zoom lens design has come - the EF 17-40 absolutely wipes the floor with it on sharpness and colour for similar more money.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 12, 2016 1:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Just to comment on the FD 100-300/5.6
It is slow, so not as popular as the faster lenses - and so canoften be found very cheaply.
Here are some images from it so that you can see that it is quite a reasonable performer
OH


#1


#2


#3


#4


PostPosted: Mon Jun 13, 2016 3:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have both the 70-210mm f/4 Macro and the 80-200mm f/4. I don't have any photos to post but I tested both and between the 2 I found the 80-200mm to be a little better. Both are decent especially for the reasonable price for which they can be had. I bought them as an experiment to see if I could use one and a shorter zoom for a "light weight" travel combo. But given their decidedly un-light weight, and the fact that they aren't as good as my primes, I'll probably be selling them and sticking with my primes.


PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Get the 20-35mm f/3.5 L or 80-200mm f/4 L, you won't be disappointed.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1