What is your favorite FD lens?

[david_smith110]

<p>Barry, I believe you will absolutely love the A7 when you demo it. It is a powerful photographic tool that is nothing less then a 24mp full frame digital back for every lens ever made. I shoot almost exclusively with old film glass and the A7 is hands down the best camera I have ever owned for that. Short of the original film bodies for those lenses of course, but even that is arguable. I have gone digital some time back however so this is a non issue for me.</p>

<p>You may veiw my A7 folder on flick here if you like. https://www.flickr.com/photos/8539414@N07/sets/72157641534772013/</p>

<p>As for the FD adapter, I finally lucked up on finding what I did not think anyone would ever produce. I have avoided FD glass on my A7 (and NEX 7 previously) mainly due to the fiddly breech lock ring required. The ones that I have owned inevitably get loose and start to slip over time. Plus changing lenses in the field is just more of a hassle with this mount and I have to many other excellent lenses (Yashica ML, Minolta) which are simply much easier to use and of equal or better quality. You will see examples of these lenses in the link above.</p>

<p>But looking again thru the auction site the other day I found one with a unique one piece design. Finally! Somebody went and made one. Here is a video link showing how it is used.</p>

<p>

<p>Looks to be good quality and if it works as advertised I will most likely do a small write up on it for pnet. I have high hopes since it is manufactured in Poland instead of China and the seller states it is made to very high tolerances (0.005mm). I have found some web reviews of this and other adapters from the seller (cieceo7) and they seem to be universally positive. I may have found a new supplier for all my adapters if this is the case.</p>

[rick_janes]

The FL-F and FD Fluorites lenses are exceptional optics which outperformed standard models where they existed.

Fluorite elements continue to be used in many of today's very best high-speed telephoto optics, including the vast majority of Canon's L

series fast super-teles. Its major downside is cost, as the production of artificial fluorite crystals is more expensive than making glass.

[Bill C1664885404]

I be used the CIECIO7 Tripod Adapters on my NEX-7s for a year and a half...outstanding adapters.

[SCL]

<p>Barry - the nice thing about the 50/3.5 macro is that not only is it a terrific macro lens, but performance at distance (infinity) focus is very good as well, so that when I'm out hiking with the intent of doing some macro nature work, I don't have to change lenses to have a terrific 50mm normal lens on the body. Being able to use all these old FL/FD lenses on a good digital body is just wonderful! Hopefully you'll enjoy them in the digital realm as much as many of us have.</p>

[jim_bielecki1]

<p>Favorites? My personal favorites are the FD 55/1.2 aspherical, the FD 35/2.0 (concave front element version), the FL-F 500/5.6, the FD 15/2.8 full-frame fisheye, and the FD 100/2.8 chrome-nose. As you would imagine, these are the lenses I currently own, and use.</p>

[jochen_busch]

<p>Cannot decide the 1,4/50 or the 2,0/35, if I have to keep only 1 lens. May be the 1,4/50, because I have an outstanding 2,0/35 with my Hexar AF.</p>

[Bill C1664885404]

<p>LOL...well, this is an unrecoverable typo due to the edit timer:<br>

"...<strong>I be</strong> used the CIECIO7 Tripod Adapters on my NEX-7's for a year and a half...outstanding adapters..."<br />Should read: <strong>I've</strong> used..............................</p>

[barry_hatfield]

<p>Ben:<br>

I'm having a hard time keeping up with all the great information. I like your description of your 3 primary lenses. I have the 85/1.8 and it is my favorite. I have since acquired a number of additional standard lenses to play with so I can get an idea of what I like. I have always looked upon the aspherical lenses as the best. As I get back into photography I will most likely sell the lenses I don't care for and upgrade to fluorite lenses. </p>

 

[barry_hatfield]

<p>Bill:<br>

Based on the prices that the fluorite lenses are commanding I think that speaks for itself.</p>

[barry_hatfield]

<p>David:<br>

I will post my experience with the A7 on Wednesday.</p>

[barry_hatfield]

<p>Rick:<br>

I think that I need to find someone close by with a fluorite lens so I can try it and compare it with a standard lens. I think that will be the tipping point for me. </p>

[barry_hatfield]

<p>David:<br>

The photos are great. Thanks for the youtube video. It looks very simple to use. </p>

[barry_hatfield]

<p>Stephen:<br>

I will try out the 50 macro next time I am out.</p>

[barry_hatfield]

<p>Jim:<br>

You have an enviable collection. I've looked at the specs on the 35/2.0 concave. In what situations do you use this lens? I am curious why the chrome nose lenses pop up. Is there a significant difference? </p>

[barry_hatfield]

<p>Jochen:<br>

It seems that so far the 50/1.4 tops the list of favorites with the 35/2.0 a close second. I think I will try to compile a list from everyone's favorites. </p>

[craigd]

<p>Barry: I don't suppose the chrome filter ring matters other than as an indicator of an early FD lens. In this case, the early 35mm f/2 is the one with the radioactive rare earth element(s?). It's a famously sharp and contrasty lens. Mine has a strong yellow cast to it at this point; I'm told I could correct that by leaving it in the sun for a few weeks, but I haven't tried it, and anyway it's great for B&W work -- sort of like having a built-in yellow filter.</p>

[rick_janes]

Craig, all of the 35/2 versions (4!) with concave front elements are extremely sharp (and prone to yellowing of thoriated

glass elements). Breech lock mounting rings AND an f/16 minimum aperture distinguish these from other 35/2 types.

[barry_hatfield]

I read, on this forum, of an individual who placed his lens in a

window for 2 weeks and the lens became clear again. For some

reason he wrapped the lens with aluminum foil. I presume that

this protected the barrel from fading.

[Alex_Es]

Hi, Barry. Good question. Strangely these favorite lenses tend to end up on mirorless cameras, which includes my Leica

M 240. The super fast ones, 85/1.2L, 55/1.2, 135/2 are for low light and night work, as to be expected. They are great on

Fuji XP1 and XE1 cameras. I have had a blast using to 85/1.2 on the Leica M. Ditto for the 80-200/4L in daylight. The

24/2 I have primarily used With my EFs. I really got a kick using the 17/4 before my mirorless life on various Leica RFs.

But mirrorless radically changed my FD life. I want to get the Metabones Speed Booster for FD to Fuji X.

[jim_bielecki1]

<blockquote>

<p>You have an enviable collection. I've looked at the specs on the 35/2.0 concave. In what situations do you use this lens? I am curious why the chrome nose lenses pop up. Is there a significant difference?</p>

</blockquote>

<p >Like any of the thorium 35/F2.0 lenses, mine has yellowed. I mainly use this lens for B&W work (on film) so the yellow tint adds a bit of contrast, which I like. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >As for the chrome-nose FD lenses, mainly a personal preference I suppose. Canon spent five years developing the F-1 system and the FD lens line so, to me, the chrome-nose lenses are the most original and most true to what the engineers intended. </p>

[jim_bielecki1]

<blockquote>

 

 

<p>I read, on this forum, of an individual who placed his lens in a window for 2 weeks and the lens became clear again. For some reason he wrapped the lens with aluminum foil. I presume that this protected the barrel from fading.</p>

 

 

</blockquote>

 

<p >You can also use a UV lamp to remove the yellow from a yellowed lens. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >You wrap the barrel in foil to control heat build-up. A black barrel can get plenty warm if left in the sun for a few hours. Warm to the point where lubricants can melt (or so I hear).</p>

 

[chris_roberts10]

<p>I agree with the several recommendations of the 50/1.4 lens. All of the versions are beautiful and good value. The 50/1.2L (if money's no object) bests them significantly with greatly increased sharpness at wide apertures. When I shot film, there was no other FD lens that came close to it for me.<br>

<br /> The 100/2 is beautiful if you like something longer. It is better than any other 85-135 range lens that I have ever used. Many people comment that it should have been an L-series lens and I agree.<br>

<br /> Since moving to a crop sensor, however, there is only one FD lens that I'd put at the top of the list: the 24/2. It's just perfect.<br /> <br /> I'll give an honourable mention to my favourite FL lens: the 55/1.2. Cheap for a 1.2 lens, gorgeous rendering, built like a tank.</p>

[richard_brown1]

<p>The FDn 50mm F1.4 which is one of the best lenses I have ever used. And the 35mm F2.0 FDn follows shortly behind it...</p>

[richard_brown1]

<p>A.</p><div></div>

[richard_brown1]

<p>B.</p><div></div>