FD macro lense to EOS or F?

[kawasakiguy37]

I want to buy an FD macro lense because they are much, much cheaper than other mounts. I know I can buy adapter rings that will allow me to use such a lense on EOS or F mount systems. However, infinity focus will not work. My question is:

How much focus am I going to lose? Something close to infinity or half of my focus range? I want to primarily use the lense for macro but dont want to be TOO limited.

Also, will the adapter work as a sort of very short extension tube?

Thanks

[Rolf]

He is a link to another thread (only with Nikon lenses but with the same content)

http://forum.mflenses.com/m42-to-nikon-f-adapter-advices-t29362.html

Save the money and buy a macro lens with eos mount or another mf lens where you have no problems with the adapter - for example leica 2.8/60 macro.

FD with adapter (with or without glass) to EOS is still and will be always a compromise. That´s the reason because the FD lenses are cheaper than others.

[Scheimpflug]

That doesn't really address his question, Rolf.

He wants to use a FD lens on EOS or F with a non-optical adapter, and use it primarily as a macro lens. He is OK with the compromise.

In theory, the "mechanical-only" adapter will do just what he expects - act as a very short extension tube.

The question which needs answering is "How much of the original focus range is retained?"... or in other words, "Acknowledging that it won't focus to infinity, how far away will such a combination be able to focus?"

[kawasakiguy37]

You put it better than me, I was really just to lazy to explain it this clearly.

Ive also heard it is possible to modify the FD mount itself?

edit: O, and my other reason asking about this is I also want to use the lense for video

[Rolf]

@ Scheimpflug

As you can see at his last post that my answer addresses his question.

1. all FD lenses will lose IQ at the corners, with glass adapters more than without and the more wide angle the more loss.

2. For video it makes no sense too because the focus distance is perhaps 1 or 2 meters - or he will make macro videos.

3. It makes no sense to convert a FD lens (price maybe 50-60 €) for additional 150,00 € to EOS- It is better to buy a M42 macro lens (Takumar etc ), or Olympus OM or Leica where you can get a perfect adapter with no infinity issues.

[ZeiEizh]

It's about 30€. FD to EOS with infinty and AF confirm.

[kawasakiguy37]

Why will I lose IQ if I use no glass adapter?

[Rolf]

To make it clear what you will get

All shots with FD 50 macro without extension tube and 1DSMKIII.
All shots handhelded, so with tripod maybe better (sharper) results available.

This shot infinity at the lens into infinity at the botany. As you can see - nothing.



Ok, next shot inifinty at the lens and first distance where the subject will be visible and sharp. Distamce here about 20 cm. Thats with a FF cam the max distance you can shot ( or make a video )



Last shot - minimum distance on the lens (approx 23 cm) and distance to the subject with this cam approx. 8-10 cm. With other words that is the minimum distance you can reach with a FF cam and this lens



Please note again that the results at 2 and 3 will be better if you use a tripod and perhaps Liveview at your cam.

Summary:

all shots with FF cam and adapter without glass
no ininity
with ff cam max distance approx. 20cm (and not infinity)
with ff cam min distance approx 8-10 cm (and not 23 cm)

[ZoneV]

[Scheimpflug]

If you are up for a lens modification, and can find what you need in a Canon FL mount, they are quite a bit simpler than the FD versions. Many people do not know the difference between the two mounts, so you might even find them incorrectly listed as FD.

I converted my 28/2.8 Soligor from FL to Nikon F. You can read about it here: http://forum.mflenses.com/soligor-28mm-f2-8-canon-fl-to-nikon-f-conversion-guide-t24979.html

[cooltouch]

If you're considering an FD macro just because it's cheaper than most others, you might just want to be patient and wait for a deal on a lens that will fit your EOS with adapter and retain infinity focus. For example, the early Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 macro is a tack-sharp optic, and can often be found on eBay for not a lot of money. I have one that I use often on my EOS DSLR and am continually amazed at how sharp it is.

For example:
Click here to see on Ebay

[Scheimpflug]

Here is the type of lens that makes the choice hard: A Canon FL 50/3.5 Macro with the extra "Life Size Adapter" for 1/4 the price of the Nikon macro.
Click here to see on Ebay

[cooltouch]

True enough, but the Nikkor comes with the tube too. Plus it's a BIN ad, not an auction where the Canon's price might get bid up a ways. Plus he would have to consider the cost of getting the FL Macro converted over to EF mount, if he wanted to do things right.

As far as lens quality differences, I suspect they're minimal. I owned a Canon FD 50/3.5 macro back in the 80s when I had a large FD outfit, and it was the sharpest lens in the outfit. I wouldn't be surprised if the FL macro is the same, or very similar, lens formula.

[ZoneV]

[kawasakiguy37]

I may wait for a nikkor mount as I can adapt this to anything....sounds like FD may just be too much work. Now I Just have to wait until a 105 vivitar comes up for sale

[cooltouch]

Somebody posted a link to the Vivitar 105 macro here just yesterday, I think. On UK eBay, I believe it was. 100 British pounds. Not cheap, but really a great deal for what it is. Don't recall the mount, though.

[kawasakiguy37]

[cooltouch]

Well, the BIN is gone on it now. But here it is:

Click here to see on Ebay

Oly mount, though.

[IAZA]