FD 35mm/2 versus ER 35mm/1.8 MACRO ..... on EOS R camera

[ATTACH=full]1275318[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1275308[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1275309[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1275314[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=full]1275315[/ATTACH] FD to EOS adapted lenses without the optical lens/element in the adapter become limited macro lenses.

Two sets here. One at f2.8 and the other at f22.

Not that one would ever shoot wide open for macro but an academic exercise for examination.

The focus point was the 19" mark on the ruler.

 

FD 35mm/2 @ f2.8 1/40 sec ISO 640 on control ring adapter for EOS R camera.

 

[ATTACH=full]1275308[/ATTACH]

 

ER 35mm/1.8 MACRO @ f2.8 1/40 sec ISO 640

 

[ATTACH=full]1275309[/ATTACH]

 

FD 35mm/2 @ f22 1".6s sec. ISO 640 on control ring adapter for EOS R camera

 

[ATTACH=full]1275314[/ATTACH]

 

ER 35mm/1.8 MACRO @ f22 1".6 sec. ISO 640

 

[ATTACH=full]1275315[/ATTACH]

Edited December 14, 2018 by matt_t_butler

Here are the images ......

FD to EOS adapted lenses without the optical lens/element in the adapter become limited macro lenses.

Two sets here. One at f2.8 and the other at f22.

Not that one would ever shoot wide open for macro but an academic exercise for examination.

(Focus point is the 19 inch mark on blue ruler.)

 

FD 35mm/2 @ f2.8 1/40 sec ISO 640 on control ring adapter for EOS R camera.

 

ER 35mm/1.8 MACRO @ f2.8 1/40 sec ISO 640

 

 

FD 35mm/2 @ f22 1".6s sec. ISO 640 on control ring adapter for EOS R camera

 

 

ER 35mm/1.8 MACRO @ f22 1".6 sec. ISO 640

 

 

Lens comparison

 

Edited December 14, 2018 by matt_t_butler

The FD 35 performs very well in this evaluation- which viewfinder aid was used for manual focusing, if any?

 

It looks like you're all set to have fun with combinations of old and new! I look forward to acquiring an EOS R soon to do the same.

The FD 35 performs very well in this evaluation- which viewfinder aid was used for manual focusing, if any?

 

Fairly conventional manual focusing on the 19 inch mark, I employed the x10 magnification in Live view and manual focusing for both lenses.

I'm still getting used to the R camera with its focusing bar distance indicator in the VF seeing there is no visible focusing indication on the barrel of the ER 35mm/1.8.

The new ER lens does display snappier contrast and sharper focus on close inspection with pixel peeping but given the FD 35mm is a nearly 40 year old legacy lens (1979) it holds it own for regular macro applications.

 

LINK: New FD35mm f/2 - Canon Camera Museum

 

A bit off topic ...I do a fair amount of time lapse work and I prefer the legacy lenses with their fixed apertures that eliminate aperture flicker common with newer lenses that open and close the aperture mechanism on every exposed frame. This also creates unnecessary wear because of aperture cycles on each lens.

Timelapsers employ the 'Lens Twist' trick on the newer Canon lenses where one slightly rotates the seated lens to disconnect the electronic feedback.

If Canon did a firmware upgrade where a user could keep the selected aperture open during shooting an extended image sequence - now timelapsers would love that!

I very much enjoyed spending a week with an EOS R from LensRentals. Besides the camera they sent an RF 50/1.2, RF 24-105, battery grip, and EOS-RF Control Ring adapter. In some ways the camera reminded me of a modernized digital T90...most likely I'll buy one, and get the RF 35/1.8 as my "walkaround".

 

Meanwhile, still working on that special adapter to mount a Canon 50/0.95 on the EOS R. Someone's gotta be first, hope it's me!

Erratum ..... oops,on original post ER lens prefix should be RF!

Doesn't this have more to do with EOS R than it does with Canon FD?

 

Why not post it and its cousins in the mirrorless forum?

 

I wouldn't think that those old, bitter persons who abandoned Canon over the EOS change over ( ;)1987--like elephants, photographers have long memories) would have much care about mirrorless bodies and their lenses.

Matt's OK here- like many others, he's using Canon FD glass adapted to a digital camera.

I confess that my "objection" was somewhat intentionally provocative, since so many others, on various fora(ums), lately have got all up tight about "violations" of rule. I hoped to get "wide latitude" comments to use as ammunition in future posts.;)

 

None the less, I do suggest that Matt's postings are rather heavily skewed to the mirrorless side.

 

My personal, true view is simply to not worry over much about it and to avoid those forums which are heavily restricted and "Prussian" :cool:

The Polish Racing Drivers of America even accepts Prussians! Directly from the PRDA website:

 

Members must meet at least one of the following criteria:

 

1. Be a racing driver and be Polish.

 

2. Be a racing driver and not be Polish.

 

3. Not be a racing driver and be Polish.

 

4. Not be a racing driver and not be Polish.

 

Notice: No waivers granted. To maintain our high standards, these rules are strictly enforced.

I do suggest that Matt's postings are rather heavily skewed to the mirrorless side.

 

Contrary to the current social justice Zeitgeist - I am not offended. ;)

I love seeing results of Canon FD lenses on mirrorless compared to contemporary lenses. Lets face it, this is the only practical way to use FD lenses now. I sold off my FD lenses decades ago and switched to Nikon AIS and Canon EF on Canon DSLRs. Last year I got a Sony mirrorless and can now enjoy using my newly purchased FD 50mm f3.5 Macro and FD 800mm f5.6 L to their full extent on it. With the advent of the EdMika FD-EOS adapter and now having a 5DS R I am looking forward to re-investing in FD glass over the next few years. Having had the chance to test a few FD lenses on digital before I sold them all, I know they can easily compete with modern glass. It would be wonderful to have a reference of FD lenses compared to contemporary and even to legacy lenses from other manufacturers.

I was fortunate to acquire several ex special effects 35mm cine cameras that came with an entire set of Canon FD lenses.

During the 1980s and 1990s many special effects film companies used 'hard-fronted' 35mm cine cameras to shoot movie effects elements.

Hard fronted cameras had the existing lens turret removed and replaced by a fixed mount that took 35mm stills camera lenses of the preferred brand.

This particular example is a modified single frame 35mm cine time lapse camera (a Bell & Howell 100 foot load 'Eyemo') with a 135mm/f2 moderate telephoto lens that produced and still produces superbly sharp images.

(This is a non reflex camera - focus by the lens barrel distance scale calibrated after a series of 'blind' focus tests!)

 

LINK : Eyemo - Wikipedia

 

FD 135mm/f2 moderate telephoto mounted on a modified Bell & Howell 'Eyemo' 35mm single frame/1fps cine camera with parallax side finder.

That 135/2 is one of my all time favourite lenses. It’s one that I deeply regret selling when I divested from FD and moved to Contax/Yashica cameras and glass as I transitioned to Eos DSLRs 10 years ago.

 

Would be great to get that 135 and 20-35L again before I get an FF mirrorless.