James May 31, 2016 at 3:43 pm. Remarkably light if you consider that the one stop slower nFd 2.8/24 is just 45g less. Status: Owned by Phillip for a few months, doesn’t see much use. Recently bought nFD 28mm 2.8 with nFD 50mm 1.8 together for 9 dollars while traveling (his previous owner thought they were broken, but I fixed their aperture rings just follow youtube video lol). … I’d recommend to stop down to f/11 for usable sharpness across the frame although it never gets tack sharp, partially because of the very strong lateral CA. If there's one thing that makes long-time Canon … Shipping and handling. Are you still working on the review? 100/2 Mine seems block adapters if I fasten the last three screws first. It has only 5 aperture blades which affects the bokeh. If you take pictures of fast-moving subjects, then manual focus is probably not for you. You should try and land a copy of the 35-70mm f4. The FDn 50L is on of the sharpest , but the minolta is CA-less at F8.0-11 and very very sharp. At f/1.2 very similar performance to the much bigger FD 1.2/55 Aspherical that is moderate resolution in the center but quite good contrast. Also do you have any experience with mount issue of those FD lens? In what will be music to the ears of Canon/Sony crossover shooters, the Eye Autofocus worked for each of the lenses tested. The rarest and most sought-after version is the older radioactive concave FD 35mm - a much larger lens, that can cost twice as much. Status: Phillip owned it for a short time back in the Nex-days, some reliable information available. There’s actually very little difference in image quality between this and an expensive modern 50mm. Status: Part of Phillips setup for more than two years. Status: Used by Jannik for a short time in the past, 360g + adapter | $200 | technical data | sample images | user reviews. For portraits and shallow depth-of-field work, this is excellent. Right now I have: 24/1.4 L Very good work Phillip, thanks for posting. My only solution now, is to attach adapter first then fasten those screws. I was looking to buy a canon fd 500 f4.5 l lens ..they are around one thousand dollars online. Since it is quite good from f/4 it gains only a little bit at smaller apertures. I honestly don’t feel qualified to answer that question. From f/8 it is very good across the frame. Because of spherical aberrations contrast is quite low but still better than most 1.4/50 lenses wide open. Still you probably won’t see that much improvement, so there’s probably not much point in adapting one. Hi 80-200/4 L This item will ship to United States, but the seller has not specified shipping options. The L version can usually be had for $100 to $200 less than the older Apherical SSC version. Large size and weight, good built quality. Status: Owned by Jannik for a few months then sold to Phillip who has owned it for a few months. So you didn’t compare it to other adapters? I can also provide some sample images if you want. Like Like. Pre-SSC FD lenses may well suffer more. version is much heavier and larger). 235g | $50 | full review | aperture series | sample images | MTF Diagram (FD Version). Hola Phillip Reeve, me parece muy interesante estos artículos. The whole image sharpens up a lot at f/1.6, the center is very good as is the contrast from this aperture. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. 50 Comments. My question is why the FD100f2.8 doesn’t rate a mention, its not that different to the f2 version is it? 565 g | $150 | Phillip’s images | aperture series I’m come from Belgium and I hesitate to buy the Canon FD TS 35mm 2.8, would you recommend it? Haven’t test with the 50mm yet, but the 28mm really surprised me with the center sharpness in f 2.8 when testing on A7RIII. Thank you. This is the fifth-generation version of the Metabones Canon EF Lens to Sony E Mount T Smart Adapter which allows Canon EF and EF-S mount lenses to be attached to full-frame and crop sensor Sony E-mount cameras. 380g | $600 | MTF Diagram (scroll down) | comparison with 1.2/55 Asph. At f/2.8 the center of the image is sharp but quite strong vignetting, busy bokeh, strong coma and soft corners limit the usefulness of this aperture. I have two hobbies: Photography and photographic gear. Otherwise the aperture will be open permanently and will be at the brightest setting. However a great lens from 2019 such as the Sony FE 50mm f1.4 ZA Planar costs about €1,300 while a 1980s Canon FD 50mm f1.4 costs about €100 – the Sony Planar lens is better, but is it 13 times better?The real value proposition is when we compare a modern kit zoom lens (i.e. nFD 5.6/100-300 L on a Sony a6500 is it good? Your email address will not be published. All in all a excellent lens for portraits and for landscape photography. Status: Borrowed by Phillip for a few weeks, some reliable information available. There is some truth in this, but then again many modern wide angles are also quite soft – the modern Samyang/Rokinon 14mm is notoriously soft (though I’ve heard some say that the sample variance is huge), and I found it to be no sharper than my very old FD-mount Tokina 17mm f3.5. Later nFD lenses all included the full SSC coatings. There are two different versions of the nFD 2.8/200 lens, the older one focuses conventionally and has identical optics as the S.S.C. All in all the most balanced FD 35mm lens. Have zero interest to hook them up to digital, I have the same lenses in EF for digital and analog: 1N-RS. Status: Jannik owned the lens shortly but sold it some time ago. Canon FD 135mm f2.8 and f3.5 versionsI found very little difference in image quality between the f2.8 and f3.5 versions of the 135mm. Hi Phillip Reeve, I find these articles very interesting. This depends on what type of photographer you are. How much it affects your image depends a lot on your subject. At f/2 contrast is a lot higher and the bokeh smoother. It is a rare lens (i am surprised it is), I was lucky to bump into one on garage sale. This website uses cookies to improve your experience. All tests are performed with the 24MP full frame Sony a7/a7ii. So using this lens for me ends at f2.8, everything after f2.8 is just mediocre sharpness with hell of a lot curvature in corners. It is very sharp with excellent correction of axial CA/ bokeh fringing. Great adapter, fits old FD lenses to Sony A7 cameras very well. Make sure to get a hood, it doesn’t need to be the expensive original one. . One of which is the honorably mentioned 35-105/3.5. Hi version) but sold it some time ago. I think that’s a very reasonable focus throw. These cookies do not store any personal information. I would like to avoid that problem on my Sony. When it comes to landscape photography, the 2/100mm and the 1.2/85 perform better. I have a glass-less adapter that lets me use Canon FD lenses on a Canon EOS and with that adapter (again without glass) it makes the lens function as a macro lens. The review describes the build quality and handling and shows how the lens performs in terms of sharpness, bokeh, distortion, flare, and CA. Canon Glass on the Sony a7 III: Another Reason to Switch Systems. Prior to the launch of micro four thirds, these have been really cheap, but still today they are bargains, considering the performance of these vintage lenses. For 300mm, the nFD 300/5.6 IF looks like a good budget-freindly choice: There are other vintage 28mm lenses that are much better (Pentax K f3.5 and Zeiss Distagon).Canon FD 35mm f2.8This is a very sharp lens, but I find the barrel distortion horrible at this focal length and don’t use mine for that reason.Canon FD 50mm f1.4 and f1.8The 50mm f1.4 is a fantastic lens – extremely sharp and mine lives on my Sony A7. Commlite for Canon EF/EF-S Lens to Sony E-Mount Cameras High-Speed Electronic AF Lens Adapter for Sony A7 A9 A7II A7RII A7RIII A6000 A6300 A6500 (V22 Version) 3.7 out of 5 stars 55. Question? The center sharpness peaks at f/2.8, the midfield shows good sharpness but the corners are softer. Vielleicht möchtest du dir die Bilder angucken. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. The one adapter that actually focuses to infinity was also the cheapest, so my advice is to buy a few different cheap adapters on Ebay. Either way, I’ve never had an issue with glare/flaring etc. Obviously some lenses are worse than others, but if you shoot RAW, then most of the time the auto-correct in Lightroom or whatever program you use will take care of this for you anyway. Low barrel distortion, strong vignetting at f/1.4 and average flare resistance. Great work. Hey, great to read an article about me beloved FD lenses. Low barrel distortion and bad flare resistance. That’s because 95% of the information we come across is unreliable: Everyone has different standards, Person A might rate the very same lens as a great performer while person B thinks it’s total junk. Hey there! Status: Borrowed from a friend for two weeks, ran one extensive comparison with it. In my experience fitting the adapter can sometimes be a bit tricky but I have never fastened or unfastened a screw because of that. With the release of the Sony A7 Mark II (reviewed here), using adapted lenses becomes even more exciting, as these old lenses suddenly become image stabilized lenses. I would be curious what you think of the nFD 1.2/50 (non-L). 00. Any disadvantages? I understand this is a common problem with vintage lenses in general, but as much as I’d like to buy a bunch of lenses to test and keep the best ones.. that’s a lot of money Both are related only to a small degree. Do you recommend this lens? It only reaches a 1:2 magnification and usually comes with a 25 mm spacer to reach 1:1. They run about $50 mint on eBay in the U.S., definitely an affordable lens. The only exception that I’ve noticed is with the FD-mount Tokina 17mm, which definitely needs a hood. When using the Tamron 90mm macro lens… But if you’re a Canon shooter, there’s more good news, and that’s that the A7 family has been able to be used with Canon glass via a Metabones adapter with some real success. At f/8 it is very sharp across the frame but the extreme corners are soft. Giovanni for providing images for the FD 4/17. Recommended. Obviously there is no autofocus – but for many users the focus-by-wire on Sony lenses is just annoying anyway. Sharpish for a 24mm, but needs to be stopped down to about f8. One alternative is the EF 4/70-200. It’s quite cheap, and in my comparisons with the MD 35-70mm f3.5 it was the sharper optic and the minimum focusing distance (in non-macro modes) was twice as close throughout the range. Aspherical” Version – optically, there is no difference except of an additional aperture blade for the Asperical version, which causes better bokeh stopped down and different sun stars. At f/5.6 there is quite a bit of astigmatism at the edges whereas the nFD 1.4/50 is free from it and therefore superior for landscape images. How much it affects your image depends a lot on your subject: It can be a problematic e.g. From my opinion it’s already sharp at 2.8 and has a nice bokeh. Thank you very much for your help in advance. While the 50mm FD lense is fine and the aperture changes are visible in the depth of field, my nFD 3.5/35-105 unfortunately does not seem to react to the aperture changes. I am a big FDn series fan as I found them as most reliable with a great build. Thanks for the great article and extensive testing. Da besteht zur L-Version doch ein sehr deutlicher Abstand. My Canon FD system with the A7 II – 24mm f/2.8, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, 70-210mm f/4, 50-300mm f/4.5L The most common misconception is that ‘X’ lens is sharp for subjects close to the lens, but soft at infinity. Comment document.getElementById("comment").setAttribute( "id", "a3bf052b79c97b720fed5009f423bbaa" );document.getElementById("j5eeec0a22").setAttribute( "id", "comment" ); Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. At f/2.0, the center is very sharp, the midfield and the edges reach good sharpness. Good price/performance ratio. You’re description of the 135mm is dead on. The f2 might be a lure to get one but the lens is not so magnificent as you would think when you see the 200$ price tag on Ebay and rarely found. The only issue is a medium amount of CA. Since you already have a set of L lenses, it gives you a cheap immediate access to using a Sony. I have been reading for days. So we are mostly interested in full resolution images taken with a fullframe camera including information on the aperture used. Sharp, light, affordable: There is a lot to like about this lens, CA is the only shortcoming I see. Leave a message below. I purchased the Novoflex Canon FD > Sony E through your link to mount my old lenses to my new Sony A7ii. The Canon FD 2.8/24 is a small lens and is very well balanced on my Sony Alpha 7. Most of the 1.2 lenses are soft and has a lot of CA in corners even closed down. Key benefit of the Canon L lenses is that they can be significantly cheaper than the Sony lenses, and at least equal in IQ (example : some consider the Canon 16-35 to be superior to the Sony 16-35). Status: Never owned ourselves, some reliable information available. There is some axial Ca, the only real weakness of this lens. The only issue is a medium amount of CA. It’s an excellent landscape lens stopped down to f/8, too. So glad that the resource you put together here exists, its everything I want to know and none of what I dont. 1060g | $350 | full review | aperture series | sample images, The summaries for these lenses are in production. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. If you only shoot landscapes at f8 or f11 on a tripod, then there are several Canon FD prime lenses out there that can give you significant image quality improvements over the kit lens at a very low cost. I like the Rokkor when it is cloudy and at night at some distances, the canon is different and also nice one, and sharper with better control over CA on wider apertures. http://vintage-lenses.blogspot.de/2016/02/best-canon-fd-lenses-to-consider.html. From f/5.6 it is spectacular with excellent sharpness, very low CA and little vignetting. I can tell you that softer corners at wider apertures are to be expected from any of the lenses you mention. HOME PHOTO > > REVIEWS > > > > > > > ABOUT 2015 Canon nFD 24 f2.8- The closer you get, the better . Bokeh is quite pleasant without obvious onion rings. 35/2.8 TS Weight and size is a little above average for a 50mm lens but not by much. If you shoot video, then you can get nice shallow depth-of-field on a budget, and you probably use manual focus anyway. I liked the 4/80-200 L a lot because of it’s great CA correction but my copy wasn’t centered well so I found the corners a bit lacking and this seems to be a common theme with 80-200 lenses. nFD 2.8/100 – Small, affordable and quite a good performer by all reports, nFD 1.8/200 L – super rare and expensive but it is by some margin the best lens in the system, nFD 4.5/500 L (can have bearing issues) – Excellent performance. i have quite a few FD lenses for my AVi i would like to use them on something digital would you recommend anything .under 500$ would be great..thanks bill . In the end I sold it because I had little use for a TS, not because I didn’t like the performance. Do yourself a very big favour and buy a FD 100 f2. This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Thanks! There is a great deal of misinformation circulating on the web regarding adapting vintage lenses to modern mirrorless cameras. For sure it has advantages over the 28mm f2.8 version. Have you successfully used other FD lenses? In truth I don’t like either of these, and prefer the Pentax-m 135mm f3.5 which is much sharper and has much better contrast. nFD 3.5/35-105 – not small but very good performance. If you want to date your Canon Lens, the following link has a table to help translate Canon’s date code from the back of the lens: Canon Lens Date codes. Trotti has spent her entire 10-year photography career shooting with Canon, but recently got the Sony A7R III and wanted to integrate that camera into her workflow with the Canon glass she already owns. The f1.8 version is okay and extremely cheap, but the f1.4 version is much better. Great research! Sony A7 Fd Lens. Excellent close-up-performance and good minimum focusing distance. I have two of these – just in case something happens to one of them! Status: Reviewed by Phillip who still uses it occasionally. 99 It is a good lens but the only significant difference to the f/2.8 version is that it is a stop faster and it isn’t very good at f/2 so the much cheaper 2.8/24 is the smarter buy if you ask me. + Bokina FD Mount Small but pretty heavy, much glass in a small case. If you have full resolution images from them we are very interested :). More likely you will find that those far away objects are still very slightly out-of-focus. The center is excellent there and doesn’t improve any further. Actively looking for more. If I get one for cheap i will give it a try. While there are a number of Contax G to Sony E adapters on the market, currently the only choice for AF is the Techart Contax G to Sony E Fullframe AF Adapter III ( $300 at Amazon | eBay ). It features floating elements which – compared to other normal lenses – improves performance at shorter distances quite a lot. This guide was written to give you a good idea what to expect from Canon’s older FD lenses, many of which still perform very well on modern digital cameras. Hi Phillip, ich teste gerade das nFD 300 F4 an meine Sony A7S II. Bokeh is very good. Excellent performance in the center from f/3.5, corners are good enough. bill cole says: Mar 23, 2019 at 12:11 am. To say anything meaningful about copy to copy variation I would have had to vigorously test tens of copies of each lens which I obviously didn’t do. Canon FD Lenses Since the advance of mirrorless cameras and especially since the launch of Sony's A7 line of full frame mirrorless cameras, Canon's good old FD lenses are getting more interesting. Shooting wide open at close distances is a joy with a bubble bokeh (if a rainy day and shiny drops make such effect) which is not often in Canon lenses. Will you guys still be reviewing this lens? Thanks for making your articles and photos available! full resolution collection | comparison with Minolta 1.2/58 |sebboh’s images | comparison with other normal lenses at f/8 | flickr pool. Philip If you are switching from Canon and not ready to make the switch completely, you may be wondering how well do Canon lenses perform on Sony bodies with adapters. Neewer® Lens Mount Adapter for Canon FD, FL Lens to Sony Alpha NEX E-Mount Camera, Fits Sony NEX-3 NEX-3C NEX-3N NEX-5 NEX-5C NEX-5N NEX-5R NEX-5T … I have a question, should I increase the sharpness or other settings in my a7 to get the most out of my fd 50 1.8? Hi Philip, Disagree with me? Very sharp across the frame from f/4 with moderate vignetting wide open. The 20-35mm is sharpest at 20mm and competitive in that regard with the 20mm f/2.8, but the mustache distortion make its almost impossible to use on anything with straight lines–the EF 17-40mm’s lens profile is the built in LR profile that works the best, but it isn’t perfect. The Sony 28-70 Kit Lens has very poor sides and corners and many vintage primes will easily outperform this lens in terms of pure image quality. Just shoot me a mail at reeve.phillip@gmail.com. At f/1.4 it is sharper than most other 50mm lenses but even in the center contrast is a bit muted, the resolution is fine though and the corers are lousy. I’ve had two and paid $500 for one of them and $550 for the other. I’d be happy to take some photos for you! excellent site and a wonderfully helpful resource; thank you. You may also prefer the precision of real manual focus over the focus by wire of some of the native Sony offerings. 305g | $160 | full review | aperture series | sample images. Bottom, Sony A7. The corners are very good at f/4 and peak at f/5.6. 200/4 Macro It isn’t a very good lens at the long end and ergonomics are difficult. when photographing metallic objects or unproblematic e.g. The whole film was shot using only natural light. 445g | ~300€ | aperture series | sample images | user review (German) | user review. Hi Great price/performance ratio. wishing you a successful and happy new year. This one is cited all the time – in truth, I’ve never really noticed it. This is harder to correct if you are shooting video, and there may well be some CA correction going on in-camera if you use a native lens (even in RAW files). (I understand if you are not). All Canon mount lenses, no matter if vintage LTM, FL, FD, modern EF o third party EF. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. Status: Used a lot by Phillip then sold to fund the FE 4/16-35. Status: Never used ourselves, some reliable information available. This problem is almost always caused by the adapter being slightly too thick, thus preventing the lens from focusing to infinity.How common is this problem?I have 5 Canon FD to Sony E-Mount adapters and only one of them focuses to infinity on all of my FD lenses!