bob_hartemink

I own both and use them on my Sony A7III. The 400mm is really very sharp and the internal focusing makes it a joy to use. My copy is the nFD version that takes the 1.4x extender making it effectively 560mm, at the cost of only one stop. The 500mm mirror lens is nice for its relatively small size and weight but it is less sharp and lacks contrast and is of course fixed at f/5.6. Only if size matters I take the mirror lens.

I read this article about someone owning a FD 17mm f/2.8, most likely a one-of-kind prototype. [•] Canon FD 17mm F2.8 lens information Update and feature on Japan Camera Hunter bag 1500 — Steemit

Note that the earlier versions of the FD breech lock lenses do not have a spring inside the breech lock and must be closed by hand. Perhaps yours is an early version and is working as it should.

Here is the Converter B in action with the wonderful FL 19mm on my Canon P LTM rangefinder.

A solution for the eveready case could be the case for the New F-1 called N.F-1 S. It fits the New F-1 (but not with the AE finder), the original F-1 and the EF like a glove. It’s secret is that it doesn’t have a tripod receptacle, making life much easier. I happen to own one, it still looks like new with no deterioration as some other cases have. Oh yeah, the interior is dressed with lush black velvet...

Congrats Gabriel! I'm also a happy owner of this lens and use it on my Sony A7. I can't compare it with the later white version, however I think it is a great lens, Very sharp already at f/2.8, incredibly sharp at f/8. It has a lovely, creamy bokeh, also stopped down. But because of its weight, my FD 300mm f/4L sees more use.

<p>As far as the Canon R (Canomatic) lenses are concerned, I managed to do some servicing on them myself. I repaired and cleaned a stuck aperture, fixed a bent aperture arm, removed some haze from inner lens elements and lubed a very stiff focusing ring. This on my so called Super-canomatic lenses 50/1.8, 35/2.5 and 135/2.5.<br> To my experience, these lenses are very easy to open and, more important, to put back together again.<br> On the other hand, I also have a Canonflex R2000 that needs servicing because the shutter times are way off. But doing that myself is way too complex for me.</p>

<p>Bill, these are easy: W600: W=1982, 6=June, whereas Y1008: Y=1984 and 10 is October.<br> Regards from Holland as well, Bob</p>

Gorden, funny that you mention the mysterious 50mm f/2, since I have one. It came with a T50 (sold in Europe). The date code indicates this elusive lens was made in september 1985... A little off topic, maybe: the f/2 is actually a nice lens, very sharp and at f2 the corner sharpness is better than the New FD 50mm is at f/1.8, to my experience.

<p>Thank you for your replies. I'm still surprised Canon made FD lenses well into the nineties.</p> <p>Bill, I think you are tricked by a change Canon made to their date code system. Starting in 1986, the first letter indicates the factory where it was manufactured and not the year. So the first letter, <strong>"U"</strong> from your 80-200L indicates that the lens was made in Canon's Utsunomiya, Japan factory. The F indicats it is from 1991, (as is mine, BTW).</p> <p>Michael, couldn't UB0601 mean it was manufactured in June 1987? I have a 80-200L with code UB0500, which I think is from May 1987. Then the date code system was probably changed in that respect in 1986 too. Maybe some Canonologists here can confirm this.</p>

<p>Recently I acquired a FDn 80-200mm f/4L lens (now I have two copies of my favorite zoom). The date code of UF1000 suggests it is manufactured in October 1991. So I now actually own a FD lens from the nineties! In fact I didn't know Canon still manufactured FD lenses in that decade, apart from the odd 200mm f1.8. This makes me wonder: does anybody here know when Canon stopped producing FD lenses? In other words, what is the latest date code you encountered?</p>

<p>For what it is worth: I found a matching collar fo my 300/4 L on eBay that was advertised as "Tripod Mount Ring A(B) for Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L USM" It is black, fits perfectly and cost me less then $7, including shipping. It also fits my 200mm f/4 Macro.</p>