joseph_dickerson Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 Anyone out there know which nFD 35mm is the sharper of the two. I want the nFD due to the smaller size, will be using it with an adapter on an EOS M5/6. I understand the best of the series is the SSC version, but it seems unbalanced on the M series cameras. Thanks in advance. JD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_bielecki1 Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 Optically, it's much harder to design a faster lens than a slower lens, so the F2.8 version is probably sharper (disclaimer: I haven't used either lens). Maybe the question should be whether you need the extra stop or not. F2.0 can be quite helpful in dim-light situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCL Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 I've had both and found that the f/2 is not only better constructed, but also sharper both wide open and stopped down. Photozone reports similar findings in their lens performance survey results, although the sample size is small. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_dickerson Posted September 5, 2019 Author Share Posted September 5, 2019 Thanks to you both... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barryreid Posted September 7, 2019 Share Posted September 7, 2019 Pretty much everything I've read does concur with SCL's comment and the photozone review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crowe Posted September 10, 2019 Share Posted September 10, 2019 Yes, generally the wider the aperture the more money Canon, and others, put into the glass to make it better than the "consumer" versions. When they would get really carried away they would use "L" glass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian_hand1 Posted December 3, 2019 Share Posted December 3, 2019 The nFD 35mm f2.8 is excellent optically and nice and lightweight. I have the original chrome nose 35mm f2, but I use the nFD f2.8 a LOT more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_sowsun Posted December 3, 2019 Share Posted December 3, 2019 I found this website that has some FD lens test results and it does say that the nFD 35mm f/2.0 is slightly better than the nFD 35mm f/2.8 when shot at similar apertures. Wayback Machine Canon FD 35mm f/2 bayonet mount Canon EF with mirror and aperture prefire Vignetting = B @ f/2, A- @ f/2.8, A thereafter Distortion = slight waveforming with slight barrel tendency Aperture Center Corner f/2* B C+ f/2 B B- f/2.8 A- A- f/4 A A- f/5.6 A A f/8 A A- f/11 A- B+ f/16 B+ B f/22 B- B Notes: * = tested with a Quantaray UV filter. Moderate contrast images at f/22; moderately high contrast images at f/2 (with and without filter) through f/4 and at f/16; high contrast images at f/5.6 through f/11. Canon FD 35mm f/2.8 bayonet mount Canon EF with mirror and diaphragm prefire Vignetting = B- @ f/2.8, A- @ f/4 & f/5.6, A thereafter Distortion = barrel Aperture Center Corner f/2.8 B+ B f/4 A- B+ f/5.6 A A f/8 A- A- f/11 B+ B+ f/16 B B f/22 B- B- Note: high contrast at f/4 and f/11 through f/22; very high contrast at f/5.6 to f/8; moderately high contrast at f/2.8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barryreid Posted December 3, 2019 Share Posted December 3, 2019 Having just bagged a New F-1 with zero brassing :) and an even tidier Winder FN I'm going to add the FDn 35/2 in 2020. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now