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

Testing Canon FD 100 2,8
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2023 9:53 pm    Post subject: Testing Canon FD 100 2,8 Reply with quote
This lens is new to me. It is the breech lock version. Short distance and wide open. Looks like a sharp cream machine.

Tulipe | Parc de Saint-Cloud by lumens pixel, sur Flickr


PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2023 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Like 1 Like 1

Very nice!


PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2023 4:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks very good 👍


PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2023 8:10 am    Post subject: Re: Testing Canon FD 100 2,8 Reply with quote
lumens pixel wrote:
This lens is new to me. It is the breech lock version. Short distance and wide open. Looks like a sharp cream machine.


Very nice picture. While other lenses like the Nikkor 105 mm f/2,5 and the Minolta 100 mm f/2,5 draw a lot more acclaim, my Canon nFD, FD SSC 100 mm f/2,8 (as well as the Konica AR 100 mm f/2,Cool seem to be every bit as good as the above mentionned "legends".


PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2023 3:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
More of the same. Wide open.

Tulip by lumens pixel, sur Flickr


PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2023 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
lumens pixel wrote:
More of the same. Wide open.

Tulip by lumens pixel, sur Flickr


Very nice. Maybe I should get one as well, now that they’re still affordable.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2023 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Very nice images ,can you confirm us the front element has colour coatings? Because I've found one without coatings (at least that's how it looks like in the pics from the seller) ,is the FD S.S.C. version ,so I suppose it should be coloured ,unless coatings might have been removed by some cleaning


PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2023 9:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
Very nice images ,can you confirm us the front element has colour coatings? Because I've found one without coatings (at least that's how it looks like in the pics from the seller) ,is the FD S.S.C. version ,so I suppose it should be coloured ,unless coatings might have been removed by some cleaning


I've got two copies of the Canon FD 100 mm f/2,8 :

* FD 100 mm f/2,8 S.S.C (1973) with amber colored coating in the front and blue, green and purple reflections in the back group.

* (n)FD 100 mm f/2,8 (1985) with blue/purple reflections in the front and green/amber reflections in the back group.

The flare resistance is good to very good with both of them, using the lens hood is nethertheless recommended (BT-55 and BT-52 respectively).

Since the FD 100 mm f/2,8 was one of the first lenses of the FD line (it replaced the equally excellent FL 100 mm f/3,5), it exists in a first, single coated (S.C.), version with amber colored coating.

Note that the coating colors are quite discrete with my two lenses, so you don't necessarily find them in photos of the lens (the lighting matters a lot).


PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2023 9:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Quite difficult to see the coatings. Very light amber and blue. I doubt you could see them on a pic.


PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2023 11:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thank you both, this version has no S.S.C. mentioning on the front of the lens , it this valid for all this model ? Or could it be the first single coated version?


PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2023 6:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
Thank you both, this version has no S.S.C. mentioning on the front of the lens , it this valid for all this model ? Or could it be the first single coated version?


I am no authority as to Canon manufacturing but my recollection of what I have read is that all lenses where multi-coated in the FD era except the 50 1,8. When you see the quality of the results of the 50 1,8 you consider the differences in coatings with a grain of salt.

Provided you equip your lens with an adequate hood you should be fine except in extreme situations, I mean here situations where it would have been better not to pull on the trigger.


PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2023 6:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
Thank you both, this version has no S.S.C. mentioning on the front of the lens , it this valid for all this model ? Or could it be the first single coated version?


According to the "Canon handbook" by Bob Shell, the first version (March 71) was slightly heavier (430 vs.360 g) than the following second version (March 73) and only Spectra (single) coated. The mention S.C (Spectra Coating) only appeared on the lenses later on when S.S.C (Super Spectra Coating) was becoming the "standard" coating procedure among FD lenses.


PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2023 7:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Alsatian2017 wrote:
kiddo wrote:
Thank you both, this version has no S.S.C. mentioning on the front of the lens , it this valid for all this model ? Or could it be the first single coated version?


According to the "Canon handbook" by Bob Shell, the first version (March 71) was slightly heavier (430 vs.360 g) than the following second version (March 73) and only Spectra (single) coated. The mention S.C (Spectra Coating) only appeared on the lenses later on when S.S.C (Super Spectra Coating) was becoming the "standard" coating procedure among FD lenses.


Good info. Mine is SSC if that helps.


PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2023 7:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
lumens pixel wrote:


I am no authority as to Canon manufacturing but my recollection of what I have read is that all lenses where multi-coated in the FD era except the 50 1,8. When you see the quality of the results of the 50 1,8 you consider the differences in coatings with a grain of salt.


All nFD lenses were multi-coated except the 50 mm f/1,8 as well as the 50 mm f/2 Wink


lumens pixel wrote:

Provided you equip your lens with an adequate hood you should be fine except in extreme situations, I mean here situations where it would have been better not to pull on the trigger.


That's right. I've got lots of single coated FL and FD lenses and as long as you shield the front lens with an adequate lens hood, you won't see a big difference between them and their multi-coated peers (the FL lenses seem to be less contrasty though but that might be due to an earlier lens making philosophy which was striving to maximize resolution...).

While Asahi (SMC), Fujifilm (EBC) and Zeiss (T*) have been making a big fuzz about their multi-coating technologies since the mid seventies, other lens makers like Canon, Konica, Leitz, Nikon, Minolta and Olympus were much less outspoken about it. For example, Minolta has been one of the first to deploy multi-coating (achromatic coating) in photo lenses and Canon was using SSC starting in 1960s television lenses. Most lens makers use multi-coating where it makes sense (high refractive elements don't need it) and in conjunction with passive anti-flare measures (black paint, flocking, etc.).


PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2023 7:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Alsatian2017 wrote:
kiddo wrote:
Thank you both, this version has no S.S.C. mentioning on the front of the lens , it this valid for all this model ? Or could it be the first single coated version?


According to the "Canon handbook" by Bob Shell, the first version (March 71) was slightly heavier (430 vs.360 g) than the following second version (March 73) and only Spectra (single) coated. The mention S.C (Spectra Coating) only appeared on the lenses later on when S.S.C (Super Spectra Coating) was becoming the "standard" coating procedure among FD lenses.


Was the heavier one a different formula lens (maybe more FL type ?)


PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2023 7:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
kiddo wrote:
Alsatian2017 wrote:
kiddo wrote:
Thank you both, this version has no S.S.C. mentioning on the front of the lens , it this valid for all this model ? Or could it be the first single coated version?


According to the "Canon handbook" by Bob Shell, the first version (March 71) was slightly heavier (430 vs.360 g) than the following second version (March 73) and only Spectra (single) coated. The mention S.C (Spectra Coating) only appeared on the lenses later on when S.S.C (Super Spectra Coating) was becoming the "standard" coating procedure among FD lenses.


Was the heavier one a different formula lens (maybe more FL type ?)


No, the formula was the same.


PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2023 8:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
As I already showed in the other thread, it's almost impossible to differentiate between the center performance of the Kaleinar, Minolta and Topcor. I bet the same will be the case for the Nikkor and Canon. The best give away is probably the shape of the aperture. In most circumstances, even differences in bokeh seem to be minimal, despite different lens schemes being used.

It's only when corners are taken into account, that real differences show. If that's important or not, depends on the intended use. Fact is, that the Nikon is not the best in this regard either (check http://www.artaphot.ch/systemuebergreifend/objektive/663-100mm-lenses-canon-fd-minolta-mc-md-af-nikon), despite their asking price in the 80's for the 105/2.5 was almost twice that of the competition. http://forum.mflenses.com/some-1980s-legacy-lenses-prices-t77129.html

The Minolta, Canon and Hexanon were similarly priced.


PostPosted: Sun Mar 31, 2024 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Does anyone know if there are differences in the computation of the FD and the nFD versions?


PostPosted: Sun Mar 31, 2024 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
lumens pixel wrote:
Does anyone know if there are differences in the computation of the FD and the nFD versions?

Both are five elements in five groups.
The FDn has a minimum aperture of f32 as opposed to f22 for the FD.
The Maximum Magnification changed from (x) 0.13 to (x) 0.12 so the lens arrangement might be slightly different

https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/fd165.html
https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/nfd217.html

Tom


PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Oldhand wrote:
lumens pixel wrote:
Does anyone know if there are differences in the computation of the FD and the nFD versions?

Both are five elements in five groups.
The FDn has a minimum aperture of f32 as opposed to f22 for the FD.
The Maximum Magnification changed from (x) 0.13 to (x) 0.12 so the lens arrangement might be slightly different

https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/fd165.html
https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/nfd217.html

Tom


Thank you Tom. I wondered if the difference in size and weight was only due to a different housing or if the glass had been shrunk.


PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
lumens pixel wrote:
Oldhand wrote:
lumens pixel wrote:
Does anyone know if there are differences in the computation of the FD and the nFD versions?

Both are five elements in five groups.
The FDn has a minimum aperture of f32 as opposed to f22 for the FD.
The Maximum Magnification changed from (x) 0.13 to (x) 0.12 so the lens arrangement might be slightly different

https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/fd165.html
https://global.canon/en/c-museum/product/nfd217.html

Tom


Thank you Tom. I wondered if the difference in size and weight was only due to a different housing or if the glass had been shrunk.


Yes, the FDn is more polycarbonate and the FD is mostly metal. But apart from that there could also be a re-design to vary the maximum magnification.
Just because they are both 5/5 designs doesn't necessarily mean that they are identical.
Cheers
Tom


PostPosted: Mon Apr 01, 2024 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I was unimpressed with nFD version on Fuji's old sensor, which normally likes vintage lenses.

however I did not photograph flowers


PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 7:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
alex_d wrote:
I was unimpressed with nFD version on Fuji's old sensor, which normally likes vintage lenses.

however I did not photograph flowers


Same here


PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ultrapix wrote:
alex_d wrote:
I was unimpressed with nFD version on Fuji's old sensor, which normally likes vintage lenses.

however I did not photograph flowers


Same here


non bella fiori in bella italia











Wink


PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2024 2:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
alex_d wrote:
Ultrapix wrote:
alex_d wrote:
I was unimpressed with nFD version on Fuji's old sensor, which normally likes vintage lenses.

however I did not photograph flowers


Same here


non bella fiori in bella italia











Wink


Laugh 1
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2