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

Couple of FD Lenses - Worth it or not?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 2:08 pm    Post subject: Couple of FD Lenses - Worth it or not? Reply with quote
I have an opportunity to get few FD lenses, and am curious if price is right:

Canon FD 35-105mmm F/3.5 with Macro - for $70-$80
Canon FD 70-210mm F/4 - for $70-$80
Canon FD 80-200mm F/4 - for $70-$90
Canon FD 100-300mm F/5.6 - for $80-$100
RMC Tokina 28-85mm F/4 - $60-$80.


Prices are given in average, meaning that hustle is accepted and it's negotiable within given price range. All lenses are in very good to excellent condition with just minor surface dust (due to storing)... Has anyone have any experience with these on digital and are they really worth that much?


PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I personally would only go for the first. That one is known for it's quality. Price is about right if it's in excellent condition.
All the others seem too expensive to me!!! You can easily check prices on the sold ebay listings.


PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I agree with Karen, the first definitely. The rest you can obtain on eBay for a lot less.


PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Karen & Edgar,

Will get the 35-105 this weekend then. BTW, i hear some good things about FD 80-200, some claiming it to be far superior to canon's 70-210 (even series 1 vivitars). Is this lens something i should keep an eye out for (i like the focal length of it).


PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 5:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
DigiChromeEd wrote:
I agree with Karen, the first definitely. The rest you can obtain on eBay for a lot less.


+1


PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Jvg wrote:
Thanks Karen & Edgar,

Will get the 35-105 this weekend then. BTW, i hear some good things about FD 80-200, some claiming it to be far superior to canon's 70-210 (even series 1 vivitars). Is this lens something i should keep an eye out for (i like the focal length of it).


If it is Canon's L series version then possibly, but I have never used one personally.


PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
DigiChromeEd wrote:


If it is Canon's L series version then possibly, but I have never used one personally.


Thanks Edgar


PostPosted: Mon Aug 11, 2014 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've been trying to sell the Canon FD 35-105mmm F/3.5 with Macro and a Canon FD 100-300mm F/5.6 for ages, and not had any interest at all, both have slight fungus but I've used the lenses and they are fine. Perhaps we don't like Canon FD quite as much over here in the UK? Confused I'd certainly like those USA prices!Shocked
They are both excellent lenses, especially the 35-105, it's a great lens in every respect.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2014 1:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
If the 80-200 is the f/4L version, then it's a steal as the L version was a great lens. If the 100-300mm f/5.6 is the L version, then I also think fondly of that lens. Otherwise, the strength of the FD system is in its primes and your money would be much better spent grabbing some of those.

As a bundle, your package there is $350-430. For that price, you could get a mint condition FD 24mm f/2 which is an astounding lens. You can get a mint FD 50mm f/1.4 for $100 which is a perfect standard lens. An FD 100mm f/2 for $350 gets you one of the nicest portrait lenses ever. $200 will get you an FD 35mm f/2 which takes beautiful shots. I think any of these lenses will make you a happier photographer than all of your package lenses put together.

If you're a zoom kind of person, then you could spend that money on an FD 80-200 f/4L for $225 and have cash left over. A $35 Vivitar Series 1 70-210 will outperform any of those Canon zooms. Equally, the Vivitar Series 1 28-90 f/2.8-3.5 is a way better (and faster) lens than the FD 35-105 or the Tokina and can be had in great condition for $85.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2014 1:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
DigiChromeEd wrote:
Jvg wrote:
Thanks Karen & Edgar,

Will get the 35-105 this weekend then. BTW, i hear some good things about FD 80-200, some claiming it to be far superior to canon's 70-210 (even series 1 vivitars). Is this lens something i should keep an eye out for (i like the focal length of it).


If it is Canon's L series version then possibly, but I have never used one personally.


My got my 80-200/4 L version with $100, it's an outstanding lens, even better than many modern lenses, so I expect that the non L version is also good, as some said. However, I would go with only the first lens in your list, the prices are a bit high for the rest.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 12, 2014 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks all for your responses. The 80-200 & 100-300 FDs are not L series, just regular FDn lenses. And yes, the prices for them did strike me to be bit steep. Especially considering that the same guy sold me biotars, iscos, meyers, tessars, ebc fujinons for $15-$30 each. Even just a week ago, i picked up from him sweet breach lock, chrome nosed FD 50/1.4 for $40, and i must say this lens is way better than my EF 50/1.4 in terms of sharpness and the way it handles CA & coma (which is non-existent in FD 50/1.4 but infested in EF).

To be honest, 35-105 isn't really the focal range i'm after, as it's neither wide or long enough, but i guess as a walk around lens on nex-6 it will do just fine.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eeec wrote:


If you're a zoom kind of person, then you could spend that money on an FD 80-200 f/4L for $225 and have cash left over. A $35 Vivitar Series 1 70-210 will outperform any of those Canon zooms. Equally, the Vivitar Series 1 28-90 f/2.8-3.5 is a way better (and faster) lens than the FD 35-105 or the Tokina and can be had in great condition for $85.

I have to disagree with this.
The Vivitars are not on par with the best Canon FD lenses. The series 1 is very nice but you are going way over board with that comment. You can read a lot about Canon FD lenses at Photonet the Canon FD forum if you dont believe me. The 80-200mm F4L is indeed a legend and some claim even sharper at 200mm than the 200mm F2.8 IF prime! Quite an amazing thing to beat a prime.
The Vivitar Series 1 28-90 f/2.8-3.5 is NO way better and faster than the 35-105mm! I mean is not even a full stop faster at best, and better no way. Again, not saying they are not good lenses, they are, but you are comparing it to a highly regarded Canon FD lens there mate.


OP, I do agree that the only fair price in the lot is the 35-105mm. I really like that lens. While I rarely work around with one lens, that is usually one of my top 3 choices if I must do that. Great IQ. Even the macro can be useful if limited.
As far the as the 70-210 and 80-200mm (not the L version), the comments I have read are confusing....some claim the 70-210 was tested on some old magazine and rated higher and others claim the 80-200 is not that far off the L version...hard to know who to believe and also a lot depends on how good or bad your copy is.
But at least the 70-210 can be found cheap. I got mine for $25 locally and usually see them in the $40s or so. I dont use it a lot to be honest, as I prefer Primes myself and plan to get the 80-200 F4L soon.
Good luck! Smile

Regards


PostPosted: Wed Aug 13, 2014 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Jvg wrote:
Even just a week ago, i picked up from him sweet breach lock, chrome nosed FD 50/1.4 for $40, and i must say this lens is way better than my EF 50/1.4 in terms of sharpness and the way it handles CA & coma (which is non-existent in FD 50/1.4 but infested in EF).


Your EF 50/1.4 must be a duffer then as the optical formula is the same as the FD and the coatings on the EF should, in theory be better. Personally, I'd also avoid the 35-105 for use on a NEX as it's a big and heavy lens (72mm filter thread) that IMO just won't balance well with the body.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 13, 2014 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
barryreid wrote:
Jvg wrote:
Even just a week ago, i picked up from him sweet breach lock, chrome nosed FD 50/1.4 for $40, and i must say this lens is way better than my EF 50/1.4 in terms of sharpness and the way it handles CA & coma (which is non-existent in FD 50/1.4 but infested in EF).


Your EF 50/1.4 must be a duffer then as the optical formula is the same as the FD and the coatings on the EF should, in theory be better. Personally, I'd also avoid the 35-105 for use on a NEX as it's a big and heavy lens (72mm filter thread) that IMO just won't balance well with the body.


I love my 35-105mm, it is big but at least for me that is no issue, of course we are all different. Smile


PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi all, don't forget the 35-105 has the super spectrum coating as standard but only on the constant f3.5 version.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 8:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Should have read 35-135mm


PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lloydy wrote:
I've been trying to sell the Canon FD 35-105mmm F/3.5 with Macro <...> and not had any interest at all <...> slight fungus.


Well, truth be told, I am not surprised. I received a 35-105 recently which needed some cleanup. OMG! Whoever designed that thing was probably out to give Kiron designers a run for their money, and I am not talking IQ here.


PostPosted: Thu Aug 14, 2014 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Gardener wrote:
Lloydy wrote:
I've been trying to sell the Canon FD 35-105mmm F/3.5 with Macro <...> and not had any interest at all <...> slight fungus.


Well, truth be told, I am not surprised. I received a 35-105 recently which needed some cleanup. OMG! Whoever designed that thing was probably out to give Kiron designers a run for their money, and I am not talking IQ here.


Disagree. I have had 3 of them and had no issues selling two of them, one stuck at max aperture still sold for $40 plus shipping and the other in good condition for $60. The key is neither of mine had fungus. Wink This is a a highly regarded lenses by Canon FD fans.


PostPosted: Mon Aug 18, 2014 7:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
shaolin95 wrote:

OP, I do agree that the only fair price in the lot is the 35-105mm. I really like that lens. While I rarely work around with one lens, that is usually one of my top 3 choices if I must do that. Great IQ. Even the macro can be useful if limited.
As far the as the 70-210 and 80-200mm (not the L version), the comments I have read are confusing....some claim the 70-210 was tested on some old magazine and rated higher and others claim the 80-200 is not that far off the L version...hard to know who to believe and also a lot depends on how good or bad your copy is.
But at least the 70-210 can be found cheap. I got mine for $25 locally and usually see them in the $40s or so. I dont use it a lot to be honest, as I prefer Primes myself and plan to get the 80-200 F4L soon.
Good luck! Smile

Regards


So, i picked up the 35-105 last saturday, and had a chance to take few shots with it. I can see the hype behind this lens, it's pretty good at what it does, and results didn't disappoint, but somehow i can't seem to get attached to it. So, now i'm thinking about selling it Smile), since seller doesn't accept returns, but at least i got it cheap, and shouldn't be a problem selling it at that price.

barryreid wrote:

Your EF 50/1.4 must be a duffer then as the optical formula is the same as the FD and the coatings on the EF should, in theory be better. Personally, I'd also avoid the 35-105 for use on a NEX as it's a big and heavy lens (72mm filter thread) that IMO just won't balance well with the body.


It could be. I had it repaired and serviced by canon few months ago, but even before it had severe case of coma in highlights, especially wide open.

P.S>The weight of 35-105 on nex is all right, manageable.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1