help on canon FD lenses (from nikon user)

[blueisland]

Hi. Wondering if people could offer a little help. I'm a nikon user

so I know nothing about the Canon cameras. However my Da picked up a

Canon A1 recently and needs some lenses for it. I was given the task

of buying them for him.

I need to know if there are any FD lenses that are not compatible? I

was looking at a 28mm & a 50mm. One or two I saw advertised

stated "this is an oem lens" what does this stand for?

Also there seem to be a lot of tokina 35-70mm zooms around, does

anyone have an opinion on quality of these?

[chris_waller]

OEM means 'original equipment manufacturer'. There are a couple of lenses which can't be used but without my handbook I can't remember which they are. I'll try to find it and get back to you.

[miles_feigenbaum___dallas_]

http://www.keh.com/shop/class.cfm?bid=CA&sid=newused&crid=10017517

[doug_nelson1]

I think some FL lenses don't work, among them the 58mm f1.2. Fifty-mm f1.4's are about your best buy, very plentiful and cheap. If you want the very best of 50's, look at a 50 f 1.2L, but I've never felt I needed a $500 50mm. You might consider a 50mm f 1.2, non-L version. If you're half blind, as I am, the extra fraction of a stop of brightness will be welcome. Some may disagree, but I think the 1.2's are every bit as sharp as the 1.4's at f4 on. Among 28's, you may as well get the f2, but a real sleeper is the older 28 f2.8 SC. It has barrel distortion so mild as to be unnoticeable, and is quite sharp, even at wide apertures.

[trw]

An OEM lens is made by Canon. A non OEM lens is made by Vivitar, Bushnell, Tamron, or some other company.

[Rob_L1664876404]

I had one the Tokina's - it was OK but didn't come near the Canon 35-105 (two-ring version). It's hard to go terribly wrong with Canon FD lenses unless a particular lens just doesn't suit your purpose for some reason.

[trw]

I have 2 Bushnell "Automatic" prime telephotos. They're both very nice.

 

I also have 1 Vivitar "Series 1" 70-210mm zoom. It's a piece of crud; it may be that model in general, or mine may be broken, I don't know. It won't focus at less than ~150mm.

[mozart 2]

Below is one of the best resources that I have found with regard to Canon FD lenes.

 

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/

 

If I were you, I'd stay away from non-Canon lenses as they aren't worth the money, especially as there was little difference between the then original price of a Canon FD lens and the then price of a lens made by a secondary manufacturer.

 

Decades ago, when I was a clerk/salesman in a camera shop, we offered both an array of Canon FD lenses and a few Canon compatible lenses made by an independent manufacturer. When one of our Canon customers inquired about adding a lens to his/her array of equipment, say a 135mm lens, I would turn off the lights in the back of the store; load up a Canon FTb - then a current model with a Canon 135mm lens; and load up a Canon F-1 with a 135mm lens made by someone else and then have them focus on something in the back of the store.

 

The Canon 135mm lens had a lens opening of F/3.5; while the independant lens had a lens opening of F/2.8. One might assume that the extra half stop would produce a slightly brighter image in the eyepiece.

 

Not so, the Canon FD 135mm F/3.5 lens definitely exhibited a brighter image in the viewfinder, which made for accurate focusing, especially under low light conditions, like around the house. There were other differences as well, i.e. the diaphram mechanism sounded smoother and was far less "gritty" than the sound emited by the secondary manufacturer. There were also noticeable differences between the quality of construction in both lenses; again, the Canon lens was better constructed.

 

At that time - mid to late 1970's - there wasn't much of a difference between the price of the two 135mm lens and the Canon lens was obviously the far better investment.

 

In choosing your array of Canon lenses, I would recommend that you head towards the "newer" Canon FD "A" lenses, which do not have the "chrome" breech locking mechanism to mount the lens. I'd also recommend obtaining the widest aperature available, i.e. a 50mm F/1.4 over a 50mm F/1.8 - since there will be more light transmitted to the viewfinder to better enable more accurate focusing under poor light conditions. The same is true for wide angle lenses.

 

I would also stay away from zooms as prime focal length lenses will give you far better results; but if your father wishes to add a zoom lens for his camera, I'd recommend the Canon FD 70-150 - since it will give him a nice range of focal lengths to choose from. Anything longer will add weight, camera movement, etc.

 

Hope this is useful.

 

Bill

[peter_white2]

While most of the Canon lenses are far better than most aftermarket lenses, there are some trully exceptional aftermarket lenses for Canon FD mount. Tamron made some fine zooms and even a few fixed focal length lenses that are every bit as good if not better than similar Canon offerings.

 

The Tamron 90mm macro is spectacular. The Tamron 80-200 F2.8 zoom has virtually no distortion, something the 80-200 Canon f:4L certainly can't claim. I switched from the Tamron to the Canon due to the higher weight of the Tamron, and due to the fact that I needed the lens for landscapes and I need to carry it on my arthritic back for many miles in rough terrain. The distortion in the Canon is of no consequence for my landscapes. But if I were shooting buildings or anything with straight lines, the Canon would be a source of frustration. Build quality of these Tamron lenses is as good or better than Canon.

 

The Tamrons use their Adaptall II mounts which give you full compatibility with all metering functions. So if you find one of these with a Nikon or some other mount, you can use it on a Canon simply by switching the mount, which is readily available used.

[greg_campbell1]

AFAIK, any FD lens will work 100% with an A1.

 

I'm not sure the nFD lenses are necessarily better than the later breechmount designs. By the time Canon's breechmount lenses reached the 'SC' or 'SSC' deign level, they were working very well. The nFD mount is fractionaly easier to use, but it's not a big issue (for me, at least.)

 

Fast lenses are nice, but not generaly worth the $ That 1.2 50mm will cost several times more than a 'boring' 1.4. The same goes for the 'L' glass - yea, the things are VERY sharp but are they worth the $ for a first lens?

 

A 28mm is a fine (and underappreciated) lens, but you might give the 24mm/f2.8 lenses a look. The extra 4mm makes quite a diference, IMO. If you're patient, you can find clean examples on Ebay for ~$100.

 

A 50/1.4 should be more than enough. The 1.8 is just as sharp and costs next to nothing.

 

While I'm not familiar with any specific lenses, the Tokina AT-X line is generaly well thought of. Watch the speed, depending on your dad's vision, a slower ( <= ~f/3.5 ) zoom might not be a good idea.

 

FWIW.

 

-Greg

[pensacolaphoto]

Peter,

Are you sure about the distortion with the 80-200/4L Canon lens? I have never before heard such a claim. I just got one of these zoom lenses based on lots of praise for it in this forum.

[peter_white2]

I own it. And mind you I intend to keep it. But as I bring it from 200mm to 80mm, the distortion goes from rather pronounced pincusion to very subtle barrel. Otherwise, it's a fine lens.