View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010 Posts: 755 Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 6:12 am Post subject: Canon FD 200 f/4.0 S.S.C. |
|
|
tikkathree wrote:
I bought this on Ebay for the huge sum of £9.67/US$15.63. I then had to get it across the Atlantic; luckily I have a good friend in the US who could post it on - we send stuff back and forth from time to time.
I bought it out of curiosity having not seen one in the UK, never mind at such a favourable price.
I've only taken a few test shots so far to see how it copes with a glazed adapter. What do you think? These images are converted from RAW to jpeg and otherwise straight from the 5DII.
Maintenance question: the front element is "milky" in places and though I need to shoot a plain, one-colour background to confirm this it doesn't seem to affect the results. How easy would it be to pop the front element out, how easily might it clean and importantly how easy would it be to replace it exactly in the correct place?
crop of same image:
_________________ I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit |
|
Back to top |
|
|
trifox
Joined: 14 May 2008 Posts: 3614 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-05-29
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
trifox wrote:
wow! --
The results are fantastic
tf _________________ Flickr.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5017 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
***I've only taken a few test shots so far to see how it copes with a glazed adapter. What do you think?***
erm you have a Canon 70-200 f4 L, so you should be telling us if your purchase is a good copy _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
tikkathree
Joined: 19 Jun 2010 Posts: 755 Location: Lovely Suffolk in Great Britain
Expire: 2012-12-28
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
tikkathree wrote:
what'ya mean is it a sharp copy: I haven't had chance yet to take it back to jesso#s fifteen times! _________________ I used to think digital was fun but then I discovered film, then I found old lenses and then, eventually I found rangefinders.
EOS 5DII, loadsalenses
Canon G9 IR conv,
MF: TLR, 645 and folders
35mm: Oly OM Pro bodies 1, 2, 3 and 4; Soviet RF kit |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ChromaticAberration
Joined: 23 Dec 2010 Posts: 819 Location: Portugal
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ChromaticAberration wrote:
Very nice, wanna see more! _________________ Body: Fujifilm X-E1
Landscapes: Samyang 12mm f/2 NCS CS
Macro: Vivitar Series 1 105mm Æ’/2.5
Portrait: Helios-44 58mm Æ’/2.0
Low-light: SMC Takumar 50mm Æ’/1.4
_________________
Marketplace feedback
_________________
a pнoтograpн ιѕ neιтнer тaĸen or ѕeιzed вy ғorce. ιт oғғerѕ ιтѕelғ υp. ιт ιѕ тнe pнoтo тнaт тaĸeѕ yoυ. one мυѕт noт тaĸe pнoтoѕ.†– нenrι carтιer-вreѕѕon |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rolf
Joined: 02 May 2009 Posts: 4123 Location: NRW/Germany
Expire: 2015-12-26
|
Posted: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rolf wrote:
Nice lens, focus length very usable. I use this lens only with my F-1.
_________________ Rolf |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dnas
Joined: 14 Nov 2008 Posts: 488 Location: Japan
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 12:03 am Post subject: Re: Canon FD 200 f/4.0 S.S.C. |
|
|
dnas wrote:
tikkathree wrote: |
I bought this on Ebay for the huge sum of £9.67/US$15.63. I then had to get it across the Atlantic; luckily I have a good friend in the US who could post it on - we send stuff back and forth from time to time.
I bought it out of curiosity having not seen one in the UK, never mind at such a favourable price.
I've only taken a few test shots so far to see how it copes with a glazed adapter. What do you think? These images are converted from RAW to jpeg and otherwise straight from the 5DII.
Maintenance question: the front element is "milky" in places and though I need to shoot a plain, one-colour background to confirm this it doesn't seem to affect the results. How easy would it be to pop the front element out, how easily might it clean and importantly how easy would it be to replace it exactly in the correct place?
|
It's actually the second from front element that gets hazy/cloudy (milky). I have 3 of these, each with the haze, and in each case, it was not possible to clean. I suspect it's actually a change in the glass surface or coatings. I even tried to REMOVE it along with the coating using metal polish (!!!!!), but I was unable to do so.
Every time I see one of these for sale, I check the front(looking for a good sample to swap the element), and every time it has the same problem.
It's not so difficult to remove those elements and reposition them, but I don't think it's worth the trouble. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
I have the later New FD 200mm f/4 IF. I guess Canon may have fixed this issue between the two versions? Because the glass in my 200/4 is crystal clear. BTW, this is a very underrated lens. Mine is absolutely tack sharp. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dnas
Joined: 14 Nov 2008 Posts: 488 Location: Japan
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
dnas wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
I have the later New FD 200mm f/4 IF. I guess Canon may have fixed this issue between the two versions? Because the glass in my 200/4 is crystal clear. BTW, this is a very underrated lens. Mine is absolutely tack sharp. |
Yes, I was talking about the older FD. I guess they found out that a lot of those had problems and fixed the glass/coatings before the New FD.
Nevertheless, if you get a crystal clear old one, the results are still sharp. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5017 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
Well I have a Canon FDn 200mm f4, but don't use it as my Kiron 80-200mm F4 is more useful, esp when after tests (inc crops) when I can't see the difference between Kiron at 200mm and the Canon.
e.g. same film and camera and shot within minutes of one another... one is the Kiron at 200mm and the other the Canon.
_________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
So, which one is which? And were you using the same aperture settings on both lenses? _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5017 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
So, which one is which? And were you using the same aperture settings on both lenses? |
The 2nd one is the Kiron and an interesting point mentioning apertures as although I used a camera T70 (tv) at IIRC propped on a post at 1/500 sec the camera might have chosen (because of tolerances) the best aperture for the Kiron which might have not been the best for the Canon, but then with other tests over a few days it confirmed that the Kiron was a match for the Canon.
Of course disagreeing with people who praise a lens, could sometimes be that the person disagreeing has a poor copy AFAIK the Kiron shouldn't be equal to the Canon as the Kiron doesn't seem to be on the list of "must have" zooms. _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9096 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
Okay I had a good reason for asking the above questions. When I look at the above two photos, it appears that the depths of field are occurring in different ranges for each lens even though the cows are in focus in both images. You'll note that more of the foreground is in focus with the Canon than it is with the Kiron. But if you view the fence, far in the background, there is slightly more detail with the Kiron than there is with the Canon. Now, when I first saw the fence, I was about to pronounce the second photo as being taken with the better lens, but then I noticed the foregrounds, so I don't want to make that claim. All I'll say at this point is that the Kiron appears to be an excellent zoom. But then, Kiron zooms do have a great reputation. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5017 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2011 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
***But then, Kiron zooms do have a great reputation***
Indeed and only two so far have not impressed me:- 28-70mm because of cheap plastic construction (like the Canon FD 35-70mm kit lens), and the 70-210 f4 zoomlock..heavy well built lens and the KironKid would probably praise it, but there ya go I'm not impressed with the results on film even though it's in mint condition and powerful looking. _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|