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 85 1.8 SSC or FDn ?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 2:19 am    Post subject: Canon FD 85 1.8 SSC or FDn ? Reply with quote

Canon FD 85 1.8 SSC or FDn ?
Anyone know if there are differences in quality between the two? I mean image quality. The FDn is conversible to EF without rectifying the barrel?
Thank you very much to all.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 2:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

trifox wrote:
ZoneV, this lens can't be converted without a damage...

I have tried to do it and it's impossible task.

The same applies on FD 85 f1.8 SSC - that's another one.

I think the 85 f1.8 SSC is the worst I have ever tried.

tf


Better to chose a lens that doesn't need complex and difficult conversion.

The Samyang 1.4/85 has a good reputation and comes in EF mount.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 3:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
trifox wrote:
ZoneV, this lens can't be converted without a damage...

I have tried to do it and it's impossible task.

The same applies on FD 85 f1.8 SSC - that's another one.

I think the 85 f1.8 SSC is the worst I have ever tried.

tf


Better to chose a lens that doesn't need complex and difficult conversion.

The Samyang 1.4/85 has a good reputation and comes in EF mount.



You are right, but I like the character of the old manuals, ha ha ha!
I have converted 4 lenses FD. The most difficult are certainly the OLD FD chrome nose (SSC) but I can do it and the satisfaction is greater. In these days I'm surprised by the quality of a 135 f2.5 FD SS I myself converted., as well as a 2.8/24mm ssc. In both had to rectify the barrel.
Thanks for your advice. Best Regards


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 3:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I never had FDn only S.S.C I did like it, great lens.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 3:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
trifox wrote:
ZoneV, this lens can't be converted without a damage...

I have tried to do it and it's impossible task.

The same applies on FD 85 f1.8 SSC - that's another one.

I think the 85 f1.8 SSC is the worst I have ever tried.

tf


Better to chose a lens that doesn't need complex and difficult conversion.

The Samyang 1.4/85 has a good reputation and comes in EF mount.

I agree, OM 85/2, Pentax S-M-C 85/1.8 Takumar, Nikkor 85/(2 or 1.4), Leica R 90 APO would be my first choices.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I own a Canon New FD 85/1.8, but instead of trying to convert it to EF mount, I would rather find a Nikkor 85/1.8 or /2 and just use a cheap adapter. The Nikkor 85's are plenty good enough. And they're plentiful, too. The /2's seem to be cheaper than the /1.8's. Or, like you guys say, get a Samyang 85/1.4 and be done with it. The Samyang is a fine lens anyway.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
I own a Canon New FD 85/1.8, but instead of trying to convert it to EF mount, I would rather find a Nikkor 85/1.8 or /2 and just use a cheap adapter. The Nikkor 85's are plenty good enough. And they're plentiful, too. The /2's seem to be cheaper than the /1.8's. Or, like you guys say, get a Samyang 85/1.4 and be done with it. The Samyang is a fine lens anyway.


Never Sanyang. I don't like this lens.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

francotirador wrote:
cooltouch wrote:
I own a Canon New FD 85/1.8, but instead of trying to convert it to EF mount, I would rather find a Nikkor 85/1.8 or /2 and just use a cheap adapter. The Nikkor 85's are plenty good enough. And they're plentiful, too. The /2's seem to be cheaper than the /1.8's. Or, like you guys say, get a Samyang 85/1.4 and be done with it. The Samyang is a fine lens anyway.


Never Sanyang. I don't like this lens.


Yeah, you're right. It's a terrible lens . . .



PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I had FDn, now I have SSC. I didn't notice a huge difference. Both are good.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FD is the last mount to think about trying to convert to EF because its flange distance is greater. If you want a good 85mm manual prime I'd recommend looking into Contax (Zeiss), Nikon Ai-S, or M42 mounts, all of which are convertible to EF much more easily than FD.

If you're on a budget, go M42 (Helios 40-2, Jupiter 9, Takumar 85/1.8, CZJ Sonnar) since cheap M42 adapters are much more stable and secure than cheap Nikon or Contax adapters. If you go Nikon or Contax you'll get nice lenses but I'd highly recommend getting a Leitax adapter (best) or at the very least one of the "pro" adapters with good tolerances. 85mm lenses are heavy and you don't want to risk a crappy adapter releasing your lens onto the ground.

Samyang is also an option for a very decent ready-made EF-mount manual prime at a reasonable price. It is made of plastic though, although better plastic than the crap Canon uses in their non-L lenses.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fermy wrote:
I had FDn, now I have SSC. I didn't notice a huge difference.


Thank you very much Fermy, if you can inform me of your tests.

The problem for me with the Samyang is the density of the image. The character, I'm uniforming the lens type that I have. Thank you very much Michael.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 5:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wuxiekeji wrote:
FD is the last mount to think about trying to convert to EF because its flange distance is greater. If you want a good 85mm manual prime I'd recommend looking into Contax (Zeiss), Nikon Ai-S, or M42 mounts, all of which are convertible to EF much more easily than FD.

If you're on a budget, go M42 (Helios 40-2, Jupiter 9, Takumar 85/1.8, CZJ Sonnar) since cheap M42 adapters are much more stable and secure than cheap Nikon or Contax adapters. If you go Nikon or Contax you'll get nice lenses but I'd highly recommend getting a Leitax adapter (best) or at the very least one of the "pro" adapters with good tolerances. 85mm lenses are heavy and you don't want to risk a crappy adapter releasing your lens onto the ground.

Samyang is also an option for a very decent ready-made EF-mount manual prime at a reasonable price. It is made of plastic though, although better plastic than the crap Canon uses in their non-L lenses.


For me it is easy to convert an FDn EF. I've done with an, 100-300 5.6 macro, 35-105 3.5, (great zoom) by 135 f 2.5 SS (awesome) and one 24mm 2.8 SSC.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Canon FDn 85/1.8 and SSC 85/1.8 are optically the same,very good lenses.I chose FDn when need smaller size ,quicker mounting/unmounting,and the SSC for more solid feel.

BTW:I like 100/2.8 FDn/SSC more than 85/1.8 for it's 3D IQ and a little better overall sharpness/contrast.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

francotirador wrote:
cooltouch wrote:
I own a Canon New FD 85/1.8, but instead of trying to convert it to EF mount, I would rather find a Nikkor 85/1.8 or /2 and just use a cheap adapter. The Nikkor 85's are plenty good enough. And they're plentiful, too. The /2's seem to be cheaper than the /1.8's. Or, like you guys say, get a Samyang 85/1.4 and be done with it. The Samyang is a fine lens anyway.


Never Sanyang. I don't like this lens.



+1. 100% agree.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why do you not like Samyang ?


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, why? Are there any proven facts about it? Please share if any.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 3:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Attila wrote:
Why do you not like Samyang ?


The high light area, it burns easily. The colors are not always real. . Has good BOKEH, is very sharp, has virtues, but all together leaves me unsatisfied.

It is my personal impression. And photography is very personal.
I know that in this forum there are many people who have this lens and love it. And possibly have very good reasons for this.
But my favorite lens in this focal is the Pancolar 80/1.8. But it's too expensive. The Canon FD could be closer and give me an image similar to the rest of my lenses, which makes it possible to change in the same job.

Best regards
Sergio


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why would one lens be more susceptible to burnt highlights than another? I'm pretty sure the lens makes no difference and it's exposure that matters when it comes to burnt highlights.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Why would one lens be more susceptible to burnt highlights than another? I'm pretty sure the lens makes no difference and it's exposure that matters when it comes to burnt highlights.


But I do not like.
Please, this POST is to help me with views between the FD and FDn 85.
Thanks


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Why would one lens be more susceptible to burnt highlights than another? I'm pretty sure the lens makes no difference and it's exposure that matters when it comes to burnt highlights.


Well, some lenses have more macro-contrast than others. For instance, a photo that is taken with an uncoated
or single coated lens, and has readable whites placed in zone 8, may have them fall in zone 9 if taken with
a multicoated contemporary lens.
We're speaking however of a little difference, and once you know how your lens behaves, it's easy to adjust your
metering habits to it.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

francotirador wrote:

Please, this POST is to help me with views between the FD and FDn 85.


The optical scheme of these lenses is very similar to the EF 1.8/85
which in fact is regarded by some as one of the best EF lenses in current
Canon catalogue.
So perhaps if you like the image rendering of the Canon 85s, it may be
worth considering also the autofocus version (which may incidentally also
happen to be found cheaper).


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Orio.
I wonder any difference between these two lenses FD And FDn. Because in Ebay the FD SSC costs twice.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is a photo that I took in 2010 at the mediaeval Palio of San Secondo with the EF version of the lens.
It was chosen by the organization for the official poster of the following year's edition.
It displays the features of the lens (brilliant rendering, very good bokeh)



PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

francotirador wrote:
Thanks Orio.
I wonder any difference between these two lenses FD And FDn. Because in Ebay the FD SSC costs twice.


I often notice the SSC lenses costing more. For sure the SSC version of the 1.2/85 is better
(optically different) than the non-SSC. But we're talking of a completely different lens.
Try asking in a Canon-dedicated forum.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 06, 2013 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Orio wrote:
francotirador wrote:
Thanks Orio.
I wonder any difference between these two lenses FD And FDn. Because in Ebay the FD SSC costs twice.


I often notice the SSC lenses costing more. For sure the SSC version of the 1.2/85 is better
(optically different) than the non-SSC. But we're talking of a completely different lens.
Try asking in a Canon-dedicated forum.


Thanks Orio.
This is the best forum to ask.
I meant the 85 1.8 FDn (is SSC) and the FD Brecht Loock, SSC red in the front ring.
The FDn purchase for U $ S 150, the oldest SSC, U $ S 300. - And up to U $ S 500. -