Canon FD starter lenses

[rudolfkremers]

I bought a nice little Canon AE-1 camera for very little money, with a kit 50mm f1.8 lens.

I'm hoping, since FD lenses are hard to adapt, that I can buy some high quality bargains to get a nice rounded set for the old beast.
Any recommendations or must haves for this camera?

Thanks!

[listera]

My humble offer

- FD 50mm f/1.4
- FD 24mm f/2.8

If you are into macro
- FD 100mm f/4
-or a Panagor / Vivitar 90mm f/2.8

For long range

FD 100mm f/2.8 (100mm f/2 is even better but more expensive)
FD 200mm f/4

For convenience

FD 35-70mm f/4

Most superteles in FD line are quite stong but if you arent specialist they would be of little use

[LifesShort]

I have the FD 24mm 2.8, nFD 35mm 2.8, and FD 50mm 1.4 and find them all to be excellent lenses. I use them on a Sony A7II, if that makes a difference to you. From what I've read, there isn't that much difference in image quality between the 50mm 1.8 and 1.4, unless you just need that extra half stop for some reason.

[Gardener]

Hard to adapt was true a few years back, but now there're plenty of cameras that can use FD and people caught onto the fact that these lenses are of excellent quality. My budget-conscious suggestions:

nFD 28/2.8 for wide - relatively cheap and very very good
if you want 24/2.8, go with breech lock (silver ring) - they seem to weather time a bit better
if you want 35, get a 35/2 - 35/2.8 is fairly uncommon which drives up the price

nFD 50/1.4 for standard

any 100/2.8 and/or 135/3.5 for tele

nFD 70-200 or 100-300 for long tele

You can get the entire set for anywhere in $50-250 range depending on how well you shop.

[uhoh7]

I'd consider: 24/2 or 28/2

35/2 the radioactive one.

Your 50/1.8 is OK but worth about 10 USD, for just 100 or so you can get a very nice FL 55/1.2

nFD 85/1.8 or the famous 85/1.2

100/3.5 is very strong and small.

[Excalibur]

Nearly all the Fd and FDn primes are very good, but a few zooms I don't like.....so you can't go wrong. If still going cheap the fdn 35mm f2.8 is worthy of a mention.

[rudolfkremers]

Thanks all!

[rudolfkremers]

[Attila]

I didn't like any of 1.2 Canon lenses I did try three different types, I did like 35mm FD f2.0 85mm FD f1.8 , 85mm f1.8 FL, FL 19mm was extremely good. 135mm fd 2.5 was excellent

[Gardener]

[Oldhand]

There are still bargains to be had in the FL/FD range
All of the following are excellent
The FD 28mm f2.8, FL 35mm f2.5 (be careful of its protruding rear flange which may or may not be an issue for your intended camera), FL 50mm f1.8, FD 50mm f1.4 of course, FD 135 f2.5, FL 135mm f3.5, FDn 200mm f4, FD 300mm f5.6
The FD 35mm f2, FD 24mm f2.8 and the FD 20mm f2.8 are excellent, but no longer bargains

Sometimes these lenses can be found as selling for parts or repair because the aperture does not work.
What some sellers fail to realise is that unless the lens is mounted on a camera, the aperture looks stuck at around f5.6 and does not respond to movement of the aperture ring.
Canon FD lenses are well made, and it is rare for them to fail in the aperture dept. So you might like to take a punt on the fact that the seller is simply ignorant of this feature and perhaps purchase the lens on spec. I have done this and found that the lenses are fine when connected to camera or adapter. No guarantees of course but sometimes the asking price is worth the risk.
Cheers
OH

[jamaeolus]

Canon FD lenses are still quite inexpensive by comparison to many other brands. Price a Fuji EBC 50mm 1.4 to Canon FD SSC or nFD 50mm 1.4. As the popularity of EVIL cameras increases thy will only increase as well. Get 28 2.8 and 135mm hint see here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-Canon-FD-135mm-And-Canon-FD-28MM-1-28-S-C-/331856038910?hash=item4d44294bfe:g:0VIAAOSwInxXN2qA

Both can be found really cheap if you miss that auction. The 50 1.4 can be had for 40-50 usd. the 85 1.8 in the 125 range. the 35-70 zoom is really cheap.

Note the bayonet mounts nFD or new FD are much easier to use and are all with the newer better coating than the breech locks which can be fussy. In the older lenses the SSC (super spectra coating) is the best but sc (spectra coating) is pretty good as well.

Also you could search the "as is" FTb and FT auctions for kits with multiple lenses for bargains.

[Roka]

I have the FD 50mm f/1.4 but I personally like my Minolta Rokkor-X 50mm f/1.4 better. But I do like the FD telephoto lenses. I have the nFD 200mm f/4 and the FD 300mm f/5.6. Both produce excellent results. There were many versions of the 200mm but the nFD 200mm f/4 is by far the lightest of the group.

I ended up having to adjust the infinity hard stop on both of my FD telephotos. Thinking back I had assumed that they were both set wrong but now I'm think the problem was due to the cheap adapters I use. Luckily the hard stop adjustment is pretty easy on these lenses.

[Lee|Ratters]

From experience, I can only offer the FD 85/1.8 SSC, FD 50/1.4 SSC [both silver breechlock] & the Sigma Super Wide II 24/1.8 - All are still, fully working, well built, nice to use & more than sharp enough wide open on a Sony A7

I paid £38 for the 24mm, £27 for the 50mm & I think just over [or around] £100 for the 85mm - I can't remember back that far ]

Forgot to add - The Canon FD's seem to be quick & easy to strip & clean too

[cooltouch]

I've been using Canon FD and FL lenses since 1982. Over this time period I've developed a few favorites.

My first real favorite was the FL 35mm f/2.5. It is still one of my most favorite 35mm lenses.
Next was the FL 19mm f/3.5. A fantastic ultra-wide.

I'm also very fond of the 24mm, either the SSC breechlock or the nFD version. Same goes for the 50mm f/1.4 -- I like both the SSC and nFD versions.

The 50mm f/3.5 macro is a very sharp lens, but it suffers from the problem that all 50mm macros do -- the lens has to be so close to the subject that it is not always so practical to use. So for this reason, I prefer the 100mm f/4 macro. The 200mm f/4 is an even better choice, but it gets rather spendy.

Canon's 85mm f/1.8 and 100mm f/2.8 lenses are both outstanding optics. The 100mm f/2.8 can usually be found for quite a bit less than the 85mm f/1.8, probably because it's a stop slower.

I like the nFD 135mm f/2.8 and the nFD 200mm f/4 because they are very compact and they have internal focusing. It's worth mentioning that the latest version of the nFD 200mm f/2.8 is also IF and an excellent lens.

The FD 300mm f/4 is outstanding, but if I were to do it over again, I'd spend the extra bucks and get the "L" version. It's a much better lens.

As for zooms, Canon's 35-105mm f/3.5 is a favorite, as is the 80-200mm f/4 two-ring zoom. This lens was originally much more expensive than the 70-210mm f/4 push-pull zoom, but clean copies can be found on eBay these days for ridiculously cheap.

But here's what I used for my walking around kit that I took everywhere for several years: the Vivitar Series 1 28-90mm f/2.8-3.5, Tamron SP 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4, and FL 19mm f/3.5. Later, I substituted the Tokina-made Vivitar 17mm f/3.5 for the FL 19mm. The Tamron 17mm f/3.5 is also a good choice in an ultra-wide 3rd-party lens. This kit met almost all my needs and if there was something specific that I felt I would need, like a fast 50 or a macro lens, for example, I'd just add it to the kit.

[Raxar]

[sceptic]

Having previously collected all kinds of lenses, I've decided to go all FD (less adapters to carry around, for one)

The extent of my problem by scepticswe, on Flickr
The 300/4L is amazing; sharp, great bokeh and virtually free from CA.
I wish I could say the same for the 200/4 macro, but it has quite a lot of purple fringing when shot wide open (which I like to do at non-macro distances).
The 55/3.5 macro is great, and performs as well as my 55/2.8 micro-Nikkor (my reference lens in that category).
Not seen here is my 35/2, which is quite usable at f/2 (heavy vignetting and a little soft) but improves dramatically already at 2.8.
Same goes for the 50/1.4; at f/2 it's as sharp as I'll ever need.

[rudolfkremers]

[Raxar]

[Gardener]

[barryreid]

I used to shoot Canon FD on film, until going over digital in 2005. I had some very nice Canon glass over the years from the 17mm out to the 400/4.5. My final settled kit was; 50/1.4, 20-35L, 28-85/4, 85/1.8, 135/2. All great lenses.

There are a couple of those lenses I think deserve a lot more credit than they get -

The 28-85 which I found to be better than the 35-105 and is pretty much on a par with the Contax 28-85VS - the VS is better at 28 but the Canon is better at 85 with not much to chose in the middle. Also the humble 70-210/4. Sure it's no 'L' lens but my current copy of which cost a tenner and bested my Tamron SP 70-210 #19AH due to massively lower colour fringing - so much so I sold the tamron.

On the other hand the 20-35L and 17 were only decent with overly warm colours and limited micro contrast. So much so that and even the prime was completely blown away when I got an EF 16-35L ( the first f/2.8 version - now seen as quite a weak lens).

[stevemark]

Low price kit:
nFD 2.8/28mm
nFD 1.4/50mm
nFD 2.8/100mm (excellent lens!!) or 2.8/135mm
nFD 4/200mm IF (excellent lens) or nFD 4/70-210mm
nFD 5.6/300mm IF (excellent lens, very little CAs, at f5.6 image quality comparable to FD 2.8/300mm Fluorite, easy to focus)

Medium price kit:
nFD 2.8/24mm (very good)
nFD 2/35mm
nFD 1.8/85mm (very good)
nFD 2.8/135mm (similar to many 2.8/135mm from that time, eg Tokina RMC 2.8/135 or Yashica 2.8/135mm C)
nFD 4/300mm IF (faster, but much more CA than nFD 5.6/300mm)
nFD 4.5/400mm (very good detail resolution, quite visible CAs depending on subject; lightweight, easy to focus)

Luxury kit:
nFD 2.8/20mm (strong vignetting at f2.8!) & 2/28mm or nFD 3.5/20-35mm L
nFD 1.2/50mm or 1.2/50mm L
nFD 2/100mm (at f2.8 slightly worse corner resolution than nFD 2.8/100mm)
nFD 2/135mm (very useable at f2, though with reduced contrast; ideal for portrait)
nFD 2.8/200mm IF (not as good as the 2/135mm or the 4/300mm L; quite pronounced CAs)
nFD 4/300mm L or 2.8/300mm L IF
nFD 2.8/400mm L or 4.5/500mm L

Cheers, Stephan

[memetph]

I am very happy with IQ of all my Canon nFD lenses mounted on a Sony A7.
20 2.8, 24 2.8, 85 1.8, 100 2.8. Some of them were stolen during a trip and ....I bought them again.
The build quality is not as impressive as for the FD ssc but if you get a good sample it is quite acceptable .
Being light they fit very well the A7.

[rudolfkremers]

Great stuff peeps!

[stevemark]