FD lens reduction program

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Hi guys. I'm trying to offload some of my "redundant" FD lenses, and was wondering whether you think these two qualify for redundant status.</p>

<p>The first is the FD 24/2.8 SSC. I also have the wonderful FDn 24/2, and thought that the slower, elder sibling should be the one to go.</p>

<p>The second is the FD 80-200/4 SSC. I honestly have never used this zoom since acquiring the FDn 80-200/4 L, which is my all-time favourite zoom, so the decision is somewhat of a proverbial "no-brainer." My one qualm about getting rid of the elder sibling is that it's in pristine condition. And not worth a lot</p>

<p>I assume that, generally speaking, faster FD primes are more valuable and usable than their slower siblings. So should I just offload all of my slower primes (with a few exceptions, such as the FD 135/2.5 SC)?</p>

[awahlster]

<p>That would generally be the way to do it Mark. That is what I did only keeping the fastest or lenses with special character. The only exceptions were the lenses I kept that were the fist FD lenses I owned the 35mm f3.5 S.C. and 100mm f2.8 S.S.C.</p>

<p>BUT I caution you NO SELLING in the forum. Or I have to pull the thread.</p>

<p>As long as the discussion remains on which to keep I'll let this slide.</p>

[Lou_Meluso]

<p>I think for every person that says sell them old heavy BL lenses you'll get others that say keep those beautifully made beauties, so there you are. I did the same thing myself some years ago and moved to mostly the newer bayonet mount lenses. No regrets, overall lighter and super quality. However looking at pictures, I can't tell the difference between most Bay and BL lenses. The nFD 24 f/2 is one of the best WA in any camera system, 'nuff said. Ditto for the L zoom. The older BL lenses I did keep were the ones that offered unique qualities like the 135m F2.5 and the Chrome-nosed, Pre-SSC, radioactive 35mm f/2. The older ones got either kicked out to eBay, stayed with my beater "car kit" or got passed along to friends, with an old body, to help them get a system going.</p>

[flatulent1]

<p>I would say yes, they're redundant, especially if they're not being used. They're certainly not "to die for" lenses. I have several redundancies, and for whatever fool reason can't bear to part with any, except once. A friend's daughter was getting into photography and wanted a manual camera, so I bundled together three unwanted primes with a spare AT-1 and sold the kit for $70. I couldn't have got much more than that selling at auction, and it saved me the trouble.</p>

<p> </p>

[dave_s]

<p>I bet many of us on this forum have the same dilemma as Mark. The question becomes: 'Does the slower lens have any advantages that make it worth keeping?' </p>

<p>I think in a very few cases, the answer is 'yes'. I keep the 35/2.8 FDn for travel, because it's tiny and good, and I like that focal length if I'm only carrying one lens. In the 50s, my favorite for an everyday walking-around lens is usually an 1.4 FDn, even though I have a 1.2L. I bet we each have a few preferences like that.</p>

<p> </p>

[jtk]

<p>Here's an alternative: http://images.google.com/images?q=trebuchet&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=4BeLSf_NOYTUMcT4hMoH&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title</p>

[jtk]

<p><img src="file:///C:/Users/JOHNKE~1/AppData/Local/Temp/moz-screenshot.jpg" alt="" /> I think that if we start trimming our FD kits on the basis of the relative utility of one or another piece, we'll wind up with no film cameras. I actually tried to give an FD kit to a school's photo instructor and he didn't want it because they were working with Holgas, for simplicity's sake.</p>

[rwbowman]

<p>What if you want to shoot in a sandstorm or a hurricane? </p>

[jtk]

<p>In a sandstorm or hurricane you want a sealed camera...such as some of the DSLRs...or a Nikonos.</p>

[joachim]

<p>Many of the slow FD primes are dirt cheap these days. FD 135/3.5 seem to go below £15 on ebay these days (if at all). The faster ones 2.0 and 2.5 still seem to fetch a bit of money. Selling off slow primes will not generate much money. You could view is as an act of charity though. If they go to a good home and see some use again, I take it someone will be happy and they serve a purpose again.</p>

[fixcinater]

<p>From someone on the side of wanting to start an FD collection, I'd wholeheartedly recommend that you sell them off. I know of a few people that are looking to expand rather than reduce their stock of FD gear.</p>

[baris_john]

<p>I recommend keeping the stuff you regularly use. Its quite simple. If you´re not sure, have a shoot out between comparable lenses and keep the sharper ones. (My feeling is that the 24/2.8 will eat the 24/2 but some will disagree... let the pictures speak.)</p>

[User_502260]

<p>I've gone in the other direction. I have four sets of Canon lenses: FL, FD chrome front, FD black front and New FD. On sunny days I like to carry the slower lenses because they are smaller and lighter. My only Canon zoom is a 70-150 New FD. I have a number of Canon mount zooms but I prefer single focal length lenses. I enjoy using lenses that are close in focal length but that different characteristics. The100/2.8 chrome front FD or black front FD or New FD is nice for general work. The 100/4 New FD is better for macro work and the 85/1.8 New FD is easier to focus in low light. The 100/3.5 FL is small and light and has its own nice look. There are some lenses I like too much to have just one of. Some of these are the 35/2 New FD, 50/3.5 FD SSC, 50/3.5 New FD, 50/1.8 chrome front FD, 50/1.4 FD SSC, 135/3.5 chrome front FD. </p>

[mark_pierlot]

<p>Thanks for your insightful responses, gentlemen.</p>

<p>I really do agree that usability should be the paramount consideration. And I also agree that it's not the <em>selling</em> of the "redundant" lenses that's important, but rather letting someone else make use of and appreciate them. After all, keeping FD alive is what this forum is all about.</p>

<p>The only "special" FD lens I've ever sold was a 35/2 SSC concave with the thoriated element. I sold it for two reasons. First, I don't do any b&w photography (and the guy who bought it does <em>only</em> b&w), and that lens is optimized for that use. (I also have the FDn 35/2, which suits me fine). Second, I have young children, and did not want to risk exposing them to any more radiation than I have to. (We don't have a TV or a microwave oven partly for that reason).</p>

<p>And yes, I do have some old favourites that I'll never part with, regardless of the fact that I also have faster lenses at their respective focal lengths, including an FD 50/1.4 SSC, FDn 50/1.4, FD 28/2.8 SC, and FD 135/2.5 SC.</p>

[fixcinater]

<p>Question for you guys that have decent sized FD collections, did you buy them new and have hung onto them, or are they recent acquisitions? I'm young, and got my first gear as a hand-me-down to shoot B&W in high-school with, and have just started to slowly add to my collection and wonder how you guys got started with it. I haven't persued it very hard, but I very rarely see FD gear in thrift stores, and hesitate to buy before seeing it in person.</p>

[dave_s]

<p><em>did you buy them new and have hung onto them, or are they recent acquisitions?</em><br>

<em></em><br>

Both, sort of. I think there's a number of original FD users here. I bought an AT-1 with a 50/1.8 and a 135/3.5 in 1979. The camera body bit the dust a long time ago-- I used to be rough with my cameras and I trashed it accidentally. I still have the lenses, but I don't use 'em anymore, for exactly the reason discussed in this thread: I have faster versions of each, which I would always use first.</p>

<p>About the only stuff bought new that I still use are bits and pieces: an Action Case A (1980), a 50/3.5 macro (1981), a 400/5.6 Vivitar tele (1981). Once I started having kids in the 1980s I was too broke to buy more gear. Everything else I've bought second-hand since 1995.</p>

[timwitt]

<p>I started in 1981 with an AE-1 and AT-1 with 50mm f1.8, 28mm f2.8 and 70-210 f4. That was it until I had the cameras CLA'd two years ago. Since then I have been fighting the desire to purchase more FD, it has been a loosing battle. I have too many but I'll only part with a few duplicates or lenses that were replaced by others that I rather have. I could not afford or justify the purchase of more back in the 80's and 90's. I have also branched into EOS and some old timey cameras.</p>

<p>REO Speedwagon, 1984, "I Can't Fight This Feeling Anymore", so I don't fight it, I just give in!</p>

[peter_rhalter]

<p>I bought a slightly used F-1 new version in about 1983. To go with it I bought new 20mm f/2.8 and 100-300mm f/5.6L lenses. I stll have and use both camera and lenses. My other Canon FD lenses are either hand-me-downs from my father (who got them new), or eBay buys.</p>

[awahlster]

<p>I bought an AE-1 35mm f3.5 S.C. And 100mm f2.8 S.S.C. along with a Sigma 600mm f8 mirror and Braun 23BC flash. New in the winter of 1977 just 3-4 months after the camera took the Photo world by storm.</p>

<p>I used the kit for a few years before selling it off to buy a Motorcycle I think.</p>

<p>I then used Pentax Spotmatic's for a while and finally bought another AE-1 body and 50mm f1.8 added a 100-200mm f5.6 (which I still hate) and a 28mm f3.5 Vivitar.</p>

<p>I used that small kit for a while And then in the Summer of 2000 I got on line and for the next 4 years bought and sold Camera gear on eBay to build up my kit.<br>

At the hieght of my collecting I had 13 Bodies and 42 lenses. I've had 35+ bodies and maybe 80-90 lenses. Not all at the same time. I'm now down to 11 bodies and 38 lenses.</p>

[stefan_moss]

<p>I started back in 1978 with an AT-1 and a 1.4/50. A year later I added a 2.8/100 and a 2.8/24. The latter became my favorite lens until I lost it and replaced it with a 2/24. Over the years I kept on buying and replacing lenses. I have to admit I definitely prefer primes. I once read in one of the photo.net forums - I forgot in which one: "I hate zooms, they give me too much of a choice."<br>

Currently I have 4 bodies (AT1, A1, FTb, F1new) and 13 lenses. Despite some redundencies and although I shoot much more digital I am reluctant to sell any of these.<br>

Stefan</p>