gabriel_gerena

<p>I am really looking for max aperture performance. I did have the Macro as well but is not what I need for this, really want the 1.4, 1.2 performance. :)</p>

<p>Thanks guys.<br />That is what I thought when reading about the comments in this forum so it makes sense. That means if I want to better my 50mm 1.4 then my real choice will be the 50mm 1.2L'</p>

<p>Hello!<br> I keep reading conflicting info so just wondering if the FL 55 or 58mm non aspherical lenses are actually any better then FD 50mm 1.4 wide open in sharpness and other image qualities.<br> Thanks!</p>

<p>Alan, Philip and really everyone here, thanks a lot for all the comments. Really a great community here! :)<br />I am going to start saving for it indeed. Worst case I can sell it back as it seems to be always a desired lens by many people. Just need to wait for the right seller and price to minimize loses if I sell it. <br />Yes I will be using a NEX-6 at least for now with the Lens Turbo2 speed booster.</p>

<p>I a agree Rick, I have never felt that faster lenses, when speaking exclusively about light fathering capabilities, are not as useful now due to better ISO technology on cameras. :)</p>

<p>hahah such a true statement "On the other hand, if you really, really "want it", then there will be ways to rationalize the choice."<br /><br />I must try to be practical about it. Prioritize my needs first then when money is not so tight I can go for it and sell it if I dont really love it afterwards. :)<br> </p>

<p>I guess that is my main problem. I will need to sell the 100mm F2 to get that one at the very least but I agree, while the 100mm is stunning on its own, there is something about the 85mm :)<br />Well, I guess it will be wiser for me to wait for my wife to start working soon then with more $$ I can get the 85mm 1.2 and see if I can let go the 100mm after that or keep both.<br> Aside from that the 50mm 1.2L and the 80-200mm F4L are both in my list as well. :) FD lenses are so adictive :D </p>

<p>Among the many lenses in my head right now, suddenly this 85mm 1.2L (expensive as it is) came up and got my attention big time.<br />Now, I do own a very nice portrait lens on the FD 100mm F2 and even the 200mm F2.8 but there is something about that 85mm 1.2L!<br> Owners..is that super thing DOF something you get "tired" off soon or do you keep enjoying that (plus the benefits of the low light advantages at 1.2?<br> I will need to make some sales to get it so that is something to consider too.<br> Thanks!</p>

<p>Someone indeed suggested the Voigtlander to me on another forum indeed. I guess when it comes to super wide lenses, newer ones have the upper hand? <br />I ask because for other more normal lenses, the FD lenses I have been buying are better from my personal tests like FD35mm F2.8 vs my previous SEL35F18 or FD 50mm 1.4 vs the SEL 50F18...resolution was higher and overall just a nicer rendering in my opinion.<br> Thanks!</p>

<p>Hi all!<br /> I have decided to get one of those as my ultra wide lens to upgrade from my current SEL16F28 with ultra wide adapter which has nowhere near good corners and wide open is a joke.<br /> You can see the resolution test here:<br />http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=1230&page=2<br /> and the 20mm does a lot better:<br />http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=4155<br /> Unfortunately I cannot find the same test for the 17mm F4 so I am left wondering how it will compare. My SEL16F28 with the ultra wide adapter was giving me focal range of about 18mm (35mm equivalent). Either Canon lens will be used with a Lens Turbo 2 adapter, meaning it will act almost as a FF instead of having a crop factor of 1.5 thus I will end with about 18mm for the 17mm and about 21mm for the 20mm. <br />So my preference would be the wider lens. <br />I currently have an FD 24mm and and a 35mm F2.8 (amazingly sharp!), so likely I will sell the 24mm and stick to one super wide lens so MAYBE the 20mm will be wiser choice as to not have such a huge gap in my lenses from 17mm to 35mm or maybe I will keep the 24mm IF I buy the 17mm.<br /> In any case, anyone has seen any resolution tests between the 17mm and the 20mm or have actual real life experience between the two?<br /> Thanks!<br> PS Or will a FD 20-35mm L lens be better than either the 17mm and 20mm in IQ? Usually zooms cannot match primes with exceptions like the 80-200mm F4L of course<br> <br />(I know this is a film forum but my question is relevant to the lenses not really how they will behave on my digital..that I will figure out myself) :)<br /><br /></p>

<p>Sorry I should have provided more info.<br />I am using this on a Sony NEX-6 camera with a Lens Turbo 2 adapter.<br> I have the 100mm F2 already and to the person that says is quite soft wide open...maybe you had a very bad copy because I bought this lens at a good price to resell it and was so amazed by how sharp it is that I kept it. My favorite lens right now!<br> I had the FD 50mm 3.5 before and sold it and now I am getting some regrets of selling it but thought that maybe I could improve by getting either the 100mm Macro or an adapter for my 100mm F2.0 but it seems most people are against normal lenses turn to macro.<br /> I guess still that trying with a cheap macro adapter will not be a bad idea and if that fails to amaze me then I can sell it and go for the macro lens.<br />I am not HUGE into Macro, specially when it requires me to add a flash etc so is not crucial but I would like to have the option for when I want to do some macro images.<br />Currently my Only macro options are my 35-105mm F3.5 and 70-210 F4...not exactly awesome macros :D</p>

<p>Just wondering if that will make more sense than getting a 100mm F4 macro lens and what to expect. :)<br> Thanks for any suggestions.</p>

<p>I have had 2 IF versions and both were really nice. I still have one as I use it for low light fast sports like hockey, rodeo (when the sun dies) and for portraits it is just too sweet.<br />I do have a 70-210 F4 for its flexibility so eventually I plan to find that 80-200 F4L gem that so many people love. I dont see myself selling the 200mm even after that though.</p>

<p>Here is one from the zoo with the FD 100mm F2.0 on NEX-6 and using Lens Turbo 2.<br /><img src="http://i59.tinypic.com/66bs00.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I fully agree. It has become one of my top lenses for sure! Just such nice rendering and details even fully opened. :)</p>

<p>Thanks. That is the NEX-6 with Lens Turbo 2. I took it to the Rodeo just for fun as my main lenses there were the 200mm F2.8 IF and the FD 100mm F2 but I was surprised I was able to use it and get some good results. :)</p>

<p>Are we even allowed to post images here NOT taken by a real FD camera?<br />I have been very active in this forum lately but I noticed a bump on the Rules about this area and I thought they were sort of directed at me since I am using a NEX camera...so whats the story..can we or can we not if we used FD lenses?</p>

<p>Yes it looks like a long shot for sure :)</p>

<p>Me again keeping the forum active LOL<br /><br />I am a sucker for BIG lenses and I own the Vivitar 120-600mm which surprised me with pretty good IQ I feel but of course, if I can improve without breaking the bank I can always do that :D<br /><br />The Tokina is faster but shorter range by a bit, and I read that it gets pretty soft after 300mm but that was one user only.<br /><br /><br /> On the other hand, I also know that with old lenses it all depends on the condition of the one you get so maybe I am risking something workable for something unknown just to gain some speed. Then again, since the Lens Turbo 2 I gain one F stop so I will end up with a pretty cool effective 150-500mm F4 lens..not bad! <br /><br />So what you guys think? Not worth the trade? I know of another impressive looking Tokina 80-200 F2.8 that turned out to be disappointing based on what I have read so that worries me too.<br /> I added some images I took from a Rodeo Event shooting with a monopod from the other side of the stadium after editing and cropping when needed. An one bird on my backyard :D<br /><br /><img src="http://i62.tinypic.com/ok4bk8.jpg" alt="" />[</p> <p>IMG]<img src="http://i60.tinypic.com/2qi1d89.jpg" alt="" /><br /> <img src="http://i59.tinypic.com/67tgqt.jpg" alt="" /><br /> <img src="http://i59.tinypic.com/yia38.jpg" alt="" /><br /> <img src="http://i62.tinypic.com/11tlpwn.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Thanks! :D<br />Just went out today and took some more pics...now I dont see myself being able to part with it lol</p>

<p>Was hoping to test the lens more today but weather is not cooperating. In any case here is a quick samples I took of my wife on the backyard. I am planning to test some lenses for portrait and bokeh etc if weather allows me tomorrow :)<br /><img src="http://i57.tinypic.com/mrpxep.jpg" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p>For low light like hockey or even some Rodeo events I have tried, the extra speed of 2.8 comes in handy so I can keep the shutter speed high without going into ultra high ISO though. :) But yeah, the thought of selling all those and getting the 80-200mm F4L is surely very active in my mind :D</p>

<p>I see, so its not going to be easy getting an aftermarket metal one to store reversed I guess. I will try finding the 52 but darn people as a lot for those :D</p>

<p>I tend to agree about that after using the 200mm and 135mm on my last rodeo!<br /><br />Do you know if I need any special hood to be able to store it by installing on reverse on the lens? I got some lenses like that which makes it easy for me to store. :)</p>

<p>Now I feel very lucky of getting this one myself! Tomorrow cant come fast enough :D</p>