Objective information required by Nikon guy

[daviddbfotoart]

I'll make this brief but concise.

 

I am a wedding and portrait photographer. I use 2 Nikon digital bodies, I have

an old Nikon Fm2 and some pro lenses. I love shallow DOF, using natural light

with as little flash as possible. I use Metz flashes, all set to manual.

 

Recently I found my old Canon Ftb QL (?) given to me years ago by my father. It

reminded me of some of my favorite photos which were taken with this camera. It

has rekindled my love for the FD mount canon camera.

 

Now, some questions.

 

Do I repair this one, (ie foam inside gone, possible tuning issues)

 

OR

 

Go for a used F-1, AE-1, AE-1 program or T90 ? (but in my view, an ugly

camera to what I want in a film camera)

 

And, what is great (ie: legendary) glass available for these mounts. ie: wide

to mid zooms, wide, mid and portrait primes. Not really interested in anything

above 200mm.

 

And lastly, should I forget it, get a Nikon F3 with motor drive, use all my

current glass from my digital gear, and leave you good people to your learned

conversation?

 

Thank you in anticipation.

[14mm 2.8l]

Any F-1 are pro system cameras.

 

I sold all my Ftb incarnations years ago when they still had resale value. The last one I owned I traded for a leica chest pod and head since the dealer would give me no store credit for it. As time passed the leica chest pod and head was a very useful trade for it

 

;^)

 

since the camera has $10 value locally nowdays.

 

Great and well designed camera but worthless thesedays.

 

Lindy

[summitar]

If you have a substantial investment in Nikon lenses, F100s seem be going very cheap these days, $200-400. If you want to get into FD, the T90 is a gem. Since I believe that form follows function, I think the T90 is quite handsome as well as being a tremendous performer. I own FTb's, F-1s. and an FT-QL I bought in vietnam 40 years ago, but the T90 is the pick of the litter. The Nikon F3 is an elegant camera and a joy to use, but the F100 is more capable. I have no experience with F4-6.

[daviddbfotoart]

Thank you Kerry. If I went with the f100, may as well go f5, they sell for under $500 these days. What I really want is a great, bullet proof film camera. I shoot everything manual, and believe the lens maketh the photo. (with some help from a button pushing finger and a shutter) so all the auto bells and whistles are of no use to me what-so-ever.

 

I dont know my around a canon camera other than the manual basic controls found on late 70's early 80's cameras.

[gman]

Hello, David,

 

I used Canon FD for years and now I use Nikon MF. I have three F2?s and a bunch of non-AI, AI and AIS glass. When I shot with Canon FD, I had two of the newer F1?s with the AE finder and the older F1. I also at various times used the AE-1, A-1, and AE-1 Program. By far my favorite camera to use was the F1 with the AE finder. It is well built and feels good in the hands. I also liked the match needle metering.

 

Any of the L series glass will be outstanding. I never used any of the L glass...it was out of my price range. Some other lenses that are highly rated and thought of are: 17 f4, 20 2.8, 24 2.8, 135 f2, 200 2.8 if, any of the macro lenses, 35-105 305 zoom, and the 28-85 f4 zoom. I am sure some others could chime in on some that I forgot. The lenses I had and used were: 24 2.8, 35 f2, 50 1.4, 55 3.5 macro, 85 1.8, 100 2.8, 100 f4 macro, 200 2.8, 400 4.5, 35-105 3.5, and the 80-200 f4. All of mine were the older breech mount lenses...they had a big silver colored ring and the filter size was 55. I really liked all my lenses.

 

I think the FTB QL is a great camera and if you can get a CLA that won?t break the bank then get it done. It would be a nice backup camera to any of the F1?s. I wish we had the for ten bucks around here.

 

Anyway, just some food for thought. I think you will enjoy using any of the Canon FD cameras and lenses that you purchase. Since the prices have been so low, I have been thinking of picking up another F1 and some lenses.

 

Wayne

[steven_clark]

Personally I kinda like the charm of an AE-1. It's light and doesn't have any redundant features. I'm kinda inclined to think you should just get a CLA on the Ftb and go with it as I'm not convinced anything short of a T-90 will actually give you a real advantage in a body.

[george_prescott]

David, I also own a Canon FTb, purchased new around 1977 when I was a kid. Although I have "better" cameras (including digital and medium format) I am very attached to this camera and will never part with it. A couple of years ago I sent it in to Essex for a CLA, they fixed many minor issues, and also recalibrated the meter to take alkaline batteries instead of the mercury and still give an accurate meter reading (when I checked against my 20D). The price ran around $120.00, and it functions like brand new. Probably any of the other cameras you mentioned would require a CLA as well, plus of course the purchase price. There were some good lens recommnedations in earlier responses, some of which I own as well. My recommendation is if you are attached to the camera, invest a little money and keep a part of your past...

 

George

[douglas_vitello]

Since you are a nuts and bolts type of guy who doesn't need or want a lot of features I would suggest a CLA (clean,lube adjust,voltage correction or CRIS battery adaptor)on the FTb - if your eyes are still good,if not, I would suggest a later model F1N with laser matte focusing screens (much brighter for focusing).Since it was a gift from dad I think if it were mine I would go ahead and get everything done and use it on special occasions and purchase a "user" F1 for everyday abuse.

[summitar]

When I had a CLA on my FTb, it included adjusting the meter to take silver oxide 1.5v batteries. The additional cost was trivial.

[george_prescott]

OOPs, meant silver oxide, not alkaline.

 

George

[daviddbfotoart]

Cannot thank you enough for the time spent telling me this info.

 

I am thinking the CLA on the Ftb is the way to go. It still has the old 50 1.8, but the fungus is getting a bit much.

 

Much appreciative of the list of lenses to look out for.

 

Funny thing about the lens thing is that I've forgotten costs on film lenses compared with APS sized sensor lenses, with crop factor and everything, it makes it a whole new ball game.

[steven_clark]

Costs on used FD equipment should be a drop in the bucket compared to anything new.

[gnashings]

Maybe I got it wrong, but, it seems like this gentleman is an accomplished photographer who a) knows what he wants and b) has what he NEEDS. He found a camera with far more emotional than practical or monetary value, and is wondering if its worth his time to get it "on the road". My answer would be a resounding YES. I doubt there is anything very wrong with the camera mechanically, the foam, if rotten (as has been repeatedly discussed here) is an easy and cheap fix (look up interslice on eBay, brew a cup of coffee and by the time the coffee is gone, the camera is done:)).

Shoot a roll of film through it and see how it does, if everything is working, etc.

As far as lenses, there are some top end "L" lenses that still command prices in the $500 range, but I think you would be ok without them - more than ok (not that they are not wonderful lenses).

My picks for glass;

24mm f2 - still pricy by FD standards, but well worth it.

35mm f2 - any version is great, some are legendary, like the early concave element SSC

50mm f1.4 SSC or nFD - I doubt you will want anything else out of a standard lens, and they can be had for less than $50 in great shape.

100mm f2.8 - I have the new FD version, the older SSC versions still carry a bit of a premium due to the perception that their greater number of apperture blades renders better "bokeh" and such. Perhaps, but any version you get will blow you away.

Now, this is a kit that could be had for not much money, would give you uncompromising optical quality and allow you to enjoy a stroll down memory lane with a camera that`s near and dear to your heart.

On the longer end, up to the 200mm mark, I would highly reccomend the 80-200mm f4 L lens. Its a great and versitile lens and a bargain in the L line up.

Enjoy.

[User_502260]

I am familiar with 35/2 FD lenses with a concave front element. When did Canon make a 50/1.4 FD SSC lens with a concave front element?

[awahlster]

Budget

 

28mm f2.8 S.S.C. or nFD

 

50mm f1.4 S.S.C. or nFD

 

100mm f2.8 S.S.C. or nFD

 

Top dog:

 

24mm f2.0 nFD

 

35mm f2.0 ANY VERSION

 

50mm f1.2L nFD AWESOME COLOR AND RAZOR sharp

 

85mm f1.2L any version

 

100mm f2.0 nFD one of my favorite wedding lenses beautiful color.

 

135mm f2.0 nFD FAST

 

check out KEH.com or ebay to see just how little some of these lenses can cost.

[keith_lubow]

If you can find the original Canon N adapter, or a knockoff of it, you can mount Nikon lenses to the FTb. Might as well try some test shots before you CLA it, unless it is in obvious need of repair. Common problems are a shutter that will not open all the way and/or as quickly as it should, leading to part of your frame being dark. On one of FTbs, this only happens at '250 and above. On one of my F-1s, this only happens at '60 and below...go figure. For a Nikon user, Canon FD stuff is a bit of an expense unless you get the adapter, because you'll need to get lenses specifically for the Canon. That being said, the FD glass is generally a lot cheaper across the board.

[gnashings]

Jeff,

 

Canon never did make a 50mm with a concave element. My punctuation was on the other hand full of dents and holes that day:) Please forgive me, it was rather confusing now that I looked at it. The 35 f2SSC had a concave front element version, the 50mm had more conventional design in all its iterations, but I can attest to the f1.4 as being bang-for-your-buck leader in terms of speed and optical quality.

[mark_ryan2]

I have no idea on the cost, but if I had my fathers camera, I'd keep it an for under $100 bucks CLA it.

 

I've had AE-1, A1 and F1N cameras, and it is hard to beat the 85/1.8 for portraits, but if you can get a 85/1.2L cheap that would be cool too.

 

The old cameras get more attention now a days since everyone has seen a dRebel or D50. Younger people look at it weird that it doesn't have a screen in it.

[John Crowe]

I'd stick with Nikon since you already have the lenses. Why duplicate? Canon makes some lenses better and Nikon makes some lenses better. In my opinion no reason to do both. Instead of investing in Canon FD glass upgrade your Nikon system!

 

 

Or, for something completely different, a medium format film system. Far superior image quality and certainly a new challenge! Good luck.