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

FD lenses on EOS: is this normal?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
trev wrote:
Firstly I'd get an Canon FD camera to use those lovely FD lenses with and secondly Canon did produce an adapter to use FD lenses on EOS camera's BUT --- alas they are like rocking horse poo and when available bloody expensive
...

... and you can use this one only for few lenses and not the complete FD range ! Latest I saw was price idea around 600 $.

Wink


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Mal1905 wrote:
It would be interesting to photograph the steps and more interesting to see the resulting images, but make sure you have a firm plan in place before any butchery begins Wink

Stan (member Trifox here) and his man did the conversion of my FD 1.2/55 S.S.C. to permanent EF mount, and did an amazing job - I didn't have the tools, patience or courage to do it myself Embarassed

francotirador wrote:
Well, I've bought yesterday a 100-300 f FD 5.6. As new. Never been opened.
I removed the mount and is ready for conversion. It would be interesting to photograph the steps?
Greetings


Yes, Trifox has done very good work with good results. I already I have the plan, first disarming, is easier Laughing .
Now I'm looking for materials to make it work the diaphragm. Changing the Mount is not a problem. Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
francotirador wrote:
trifox wrote:
I am really do not like writing this;

the solution is conversion Wink

tf

+1


Sorry to say this, but I agree.
I can't really say, if a very expensive adapter with superior quality helps. Try first. But the cheapos adapter lens is made of plastic.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 6:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
trev wrote:
Firstly I'd get an Canon FD camera to use those lovely FD lenses with


Yes, this T70 came my way but I've not used film, and I have hobbies enough without buying a dark room thank you very much. Laughing


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Rolf wrote:
martyn_bannister wrote:
You can, of course, get adapters FD to EOS which have no lens, but don't allow infinity focus. For the longer focal lengths, this might not be too much of a problem?


Even with longer focal lengths you can have only few meters, so that is not a question of getting infinity or not - you will not reach 10 meters.

Wink


You can easily test how much of a problem the lack of infinity focus for your lenses would be with glassless FD/EOS adapters. Hold your FD lens 1 cm in front of the mount of your Eos camera. All commercial glassless adapters are at least 10 mm thick. This turns all but the longest focal lengths into macro only lenses - whether that is a problem you have to decide yourself. I've made a thin FD/Eos adapter:

http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic.php?t=17993&start=15

This helps a little.

Options are:
- use it on FD cameras
- use it as macro only with a glassles adapter
- use it with reduced IQ with a optical adapter
- convert a teleconverter (1.4 or 2x) to FD/Eos
- convert the lens to FD or have it done
- use it on (micro) fourthirds cameras with adapter
- use it on Leica M cameras with the Canon FD to M39 adapter (highly impractical due to lack of LiveView)
- sell it

Did I miss anything?


PostPosted: Tue Sep 21, 2010 11:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It seems to me that you are using these FD lenses for mainly macro, is that right??

Well, if that's the case REMOVE the glass element in the adapter!!!!!!!

You won't get infinity focus, but you don't NEED that with macro!!


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 12:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
eggboy wrote:
About the only company that's really succeeded in keep compatibility is Pentax.

One nice thing about obsolete lens mounts is that you can pick up nice Canon FD and Minolta MD kits for next to nothing and keep right on shooting film.


I wish I could use K mount lenses on a Spotmatic! Wink

I agree completely about using the FD lenses as they were designed - on a Canon film camera. You don't need a darkroom, there are still plenty of places where you can get film developed and printed.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 5:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
I agree completely about using the FD lenses as they were designed - on a Canon film camera. You don't need a darkroom, there are still plenty of places where you can get film developed and printed.


I know it, but for me film is about childhood p&s and holds absolutely no interest for me. I realise that this will be heresy to some for which I apologise. I'm just a digital developer!

I've got a glassless, focus confirm chipped adapter coming: I'll give that a try and then review my relationship with FD lenses. If they don't work for me they'll be going.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
tikkathree wrote:
I'm just a digital developer!

You're missing so much. I've said this before, but shooting on film is so much more satisfying and fulfilling than digital. Digital shots are throw-away, you can take many in the hope that one comes out OK. With film, each shot is precious and it forces you to think about it and take more care = more fun.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 4:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
tikkathree wrote:
I'm just a digital developer!

You're missing so much.


Yes. Buying film. Having the optimum ISO film in the camera at the time I want to do something with it. Paying some lab to turn my filmm into prints and a negative which I then have to store.

peterqd wrote:

I've said this before, but shooting on film is so much more satisfying and fulfilling than digital. Digital shots are throw-away, you can take many in the hope that one comes out OK. With film, each shot is precious and it forces you to think about it and take more care = more fun.


To each their own chap, to each their own. Perhaps your approach is spray and pray in the hope that something works, mine is definitely not. I use MF lenses to get that "hard crafted" moment but you know, I can see my results immediately and learn from it without having to write down camera settings against a day in the future when I can go and collect my developed film.

Sigh... I clearly don't get it. Rolling Eyes


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
peterqd wrote:
tikkathree wrote:
I'm just a digital developer!

You're missing so much. I've said this before, but shooting on film is so much more satisfying and fulfilling than digital. Digital shots are throw-away, you can take many in the hope that one comes out OK. With film, each shot is precious and it forces you to think about it and take more care = more fun.


I shoot mostly digital, but almost never on continuous. Single shot, and with a manual focus lens. My mind set is similar to how I shoot film.

I did assist in a photo class, and we gave the students a 512MB card, which only allowed them to shoot about 40 or so raw images...so they had to be careful and deliberate.

I for one don't really miss the color darkroom at all, and the B&W darkroom only a little. My time is pretty valuable nowadays with a kid, so spending a whole night to get a single print isn't feasible. Of course, if I ever become a vampire, I'll want to be in dark rooms most of the time...plus most vampires are a little retro, so film would be perfect Confused


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 6:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
@tikkathree, please let me apologize for my previous inane and patently unhelpful comment.

Imho, the wonderful FD lenses are 'sleepers'; someday there will be a digital body they will fit allowing them to provide their excellent qualities, full frame.

For now, the digital use options are clear: use for macro only, use with m43 body and 2x crop factor, use with film body, or collect inexpensively and wait for that digital body. Already there are people using them on some newer video cameras, which has caused market prices to increase.

The way I use film now is in parallel with digital -- I use digital instant feedback to get lens settings and exposure perfect, then set film camera and expose the film. This minimizes the costs of film development. However, I am using this method less and less these days, skipping the digital altogether, as I become more confident. There are factors with film unknowable until you try it -- for example, the color renditions and beauty of a perfectly exposed slide film that digital still (arguably) cannot achieve. A projected slide is phenomenal to behold!


PostPosted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Allow me to post some shots that I took today in our front garden with a Canon FL 3.5/135 adapted to my 5D using an adapter with a lens inside. Nothing special, just to show how "badly" the adapter "deteriorates" the results:













And here a 100% crop:




This shows how the adapted lens deals with metal and glass:


And now this:

Some vignetting, alright. But this plane...

(100% crop) is surely more than 10 km away!

I hope I could show that a good adapter with a multicoated lens does not influence the lens performance too badly.


PostPosted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 2:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
A good adapter into a good lens. Surely the 135 works very well with the glass adapter. With another focal length, is that good?
Greetings
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2