CANON FDn 80-200/4 L

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1685

I bought this lens because it´s cheaper than any of the EF zooms.

Used it with a Sony a1 camera. and the IQ seems to be very different than Sony zoom (24-70/2,8 GM II)

What can I wait for the IQ of the Canon lens.

which aperture is the sweet point of that lens?

I know there are many Canon connoisseurs here

BrianSVP · Joined: 09 Jun 2023 Posts: 440 Location: Philadelphia

It's a very well-regarded lens, but bear in mind that the Canon was released four decades before the Sony, and does not have a lot of the advantages in coatings, ED/ASPH elements, or in-body profile corrections that the Sony does. It also doesn't communicate focal length values to the body for optimized stabilization. As a result, it will take much more refined technique to use the Canon and get pictures approaching those from the Sony lens.

I've not personally used the Canon, but I'm sure others can help you out with recommended technique.

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1685

stevemark · Joined: 29 Apr 2011 Posts: 4288 Location: Switzerland

Best performance in the 100-120mm range, at f8 ... no CAs, no distortion, very clear and clean images. Better than all other vintage primes I own ...

My sample has pretty weak corners at f4 and f5.6 and needs to be stopped down to f8 or f11 for best performance at the long end; the Zeiss CY Vario-Sonnar has much sharper at f4, but also much more lateral CAs ...

For perfect wide open performance you'll need a modern zoom ...

S

papasito · Joined: 09 Jan 2015 Posts: 1685

LittleAlex · Posted: Sun Feb 09, 2025 7:05 am Post subject:

kathala · Joined: 13 May 2022 Posts: 147

Optically, the Canon L is still very high up there (of course, IS, AF, ... is something else).
I tested a pristine 80-200L against TWO copies of the nFD 70-210/4, one battered, one pristine. No clear unequivocal winner!
I also tested the L against the EF70-200/4L pre-IS, which is marginally better in the long end, but not overall better.
dpreview, IIRC, had a direct comparison in a forum, of your FD L vs a Sony FE, IIRC the 70-200/4, and the Sony was weaker!
Ditto a comparison with the mentioned Zeiss alternative, IIRC on DP as well, and they were more or less identical in sharpness, but the Zeiss had more CA.