Canon FL lenses compared (Bokeh)

[baris_john]

<p>http://www.pbase.com/prosaic/image/107664348/original</p>

[User_502260]

<p>I don't have the 19 or the 58 but I have all of the others as well as other versions of the 50/1.8, the 50/3.5, the 55/1.2, the 100/3.5, the 100/4 FLM and both versions of the 200/3.5. Both the 100/2.5 and the 135/2.5 are nice for portraits and have pleasing bokeh. Of my standard lenses I think the 55/1.2 has the nicest bokeh.</p>

[baris_john]

<p>Hi Jeff, thanks for your feedback. Hard to compare FD to FL, because they draw differently. The 58/1.2 has a signature closer to the Noctilux than the later 55/1.2 or even the FD ASPHERICAL. The whole lineup performs pretty close to Canons rangefinder lenses of that era.<br>

The beautifully crafted FL 50/1.4 II is another gem, much cooler than the FD 50/1.4 or anything currently available in autofocus. At least to my eyes.</p>

<p>Good to have a lot of affordable options in FD mount.</p>

<table border="0">

<tbody>

<tr>

<td > </td>

<td > </td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td > </td>

<td > </td>

</tr>

<tr>

<td > </td>

<td > </td>

</tr>

</tbody>

</table>