FL 55mm f/1.2

[mark_pierlot]

<p>I have a chance to pick up an FL 55/1.2 that's had its mount modified to Canon EF. I thought it might be fun to use this lens on my EOS DSLR.</p>

<p>Does anyone have experience with the lens generally, or specifically with a modified version on a digital body? My perusal of the FD archives suggests that it's soft wide open, but there seems to be some disagreement on the issue.</p>

[User_502260]

<p>I have a 55/1.2 FL and use it only on film cameras. From what I can tell it is the same lens, optically as the original 55/1.2 FD. A later FD version had better coating. If I compare the 55/1.2 FL to my 57/1.2 Konica Hexanons, the Hexanons are sharper at or near wide open. Both of my Hexanons are chrome & black with the EE lock pin. Later models were all black, had rubber covered focusing rings and improved coating. To get good results with any f/1.2 lens at 1.2 everything has to work perfectly. The mirror must be adjusted properly, the focusing screen must be exactly in place, the pressure plate must be perfectly flat and your focusing must be right on. It also helps to have a subject with an area large and flat enough so the whole image doesn't look out of focus. I would actually like to get a 58/1.2 FL but collectors have pushed up prices for them. Part of the reason so many 55/1.2 FLs are around is that they were popular with people who bought Pellix cameras.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>If it is really converted to a EF mount (I presume that this is a real mount conversion, not merely adding a $30 adapter?) the Canon might be good. If it's just with an ring+lens adapter, not worth it, I think.</p>

<p>You can also get very good performance on either APS-C or 35mm sensors with Nikkor 55mm f/1.2 lenses. The non-AI versions often go fairly cheaply. I did cave photography with it on on my EOS 20D and still use it on my newer cameras as well. It might be (depending on the vagaries of the market) cheaper at any given time than the Canon FL or FD.</p>

[doug_nelson3]

<p>This lens was widely available on the late 60's FT-QL through the military PX system. I loved the lens and regret selling it. It is as sharp as any 50 from f4 on. If the modification allows wide open metering, I'd be tempted, otherwise, no. Here is an in image taken with an FL 55mm f1.2 wide open or nearly so, with a screw-on close-up lens. Not a sharp combination, but it was a matter of "do ya want the picture or not?"<br /><a href="http://www.dougnelsonphoto.com/-/dougnelsonphoto/detail.asp?photoID=7744&cat=107">http://www.dougnelsonphoto.com/-/dougnelsonphoto/detail.asp?photoID=7744&cat=107</a></p>

[smc1]

<p>I've converted two of these to EOS mount so far (with another three on the way). Some of the photos taken with them on my two 10Ds are here: <br>

<a href="http://scottmacraecollingwood.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=23">http://scottmacraecollingwood.com/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=23</a><br>

It is a pretty soft animal OOF at 1.2 - really great for babies, some portraits and flowers.<br>

The light collecting ability is incredible. In the gallery linked above there's a photo of a theatre ceiling backstage, with the ropes, - it seriously was dark, but wow, doesn't look like it at all. On many occasions the light-collecting capacity of this lens wide open has left me staggered. For example photographing a car under cover, and the inside of it looks lit!<br>

Stopped down its a beauty, as you would expect. </p>