Canon FD Lens Recomendations, please!

Discussion in '35mm Cameras and Accessories' started by gnashings, Apr 29, 2005.

  1. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Hi All,

    I need a wide angle lens, and I decided that going for my Lubitel every time I want a wide shot is unrealistic, so I need an FD mount (early or late, I don't care ring or button) wide angle lens.

    There are quite a few, so I was wondering if some of the guys who shoot or have shot Canon and had first hand experience with some of these lenses may be so kind as to chime in and help me narrow down a choice.

    I am looking in the 24 - 35mm range, most likely a 28mm. From what I hear it (28mm) is the widest I can go before really strong "anomalies" start to manifest themselelves (dist. etc.)

    I am on a budget, so unless someone wants to give one to me, I am afraid any of the "L" lenses are out of the question :wink:

    Thanks for your help,

    Peter.
     
  2. colrehogan

    colrehogan Member

    Messages:
    2,016
    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, M
    Shooter:
    Large Format Pan
    I have a 24 mm (ring) lens and I like it. I used it on my A-1 and it worked fine.
     
  3. David A. Goldfarb

    David A. Goldfarb Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    18,004
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2002
    Location:
    Honolulu, Ha
    Shooter:
    Large Format
    The 28/2.0 is nice if you can afford it (around $150), and the 28/2.8 is really cheap and more than adequate.

    The 35/2.0 is a really outstanding lens. I have the latest version. There is an early chrome nose version with a concave front element that is considered very desirable for B&W shooting (sometimes the radioactive front element can be discolored from age, so it's not usually recommended for color), but collectors have jacked up the price.
     
  4. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Yes, I bid on a 28 f2... it went out of my range rather quickly. So, the average 28 f2.8 is a good lense? They seem cheap and plentiful - will I be seeing a lot of deformity near the edges? Maybe a 35mm would be better there? But I would like to go as wide as I can before distortion becomes an issue...
     
  5. Nikki

    Nikki Member

    Messages:
    60
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    North Las Ve
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Ya know peter, I still have a 28 f/2.8 lens...if you want it. :smile:

    Nikki
     
  6. waynecrider

    waynecrider Member

    Messages:
    2,297
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2003
    Location:
    Floriduh
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I love my 28mm F2.8, new FD. To me it's just perfect and a great picture taker. A 24mm is nice is you really need the wide view, but the 28 is a nice compromise between the 24 and 35mm.
     
  7. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You had a wide angle in that bunch of stuff?! I must have had a massive brain fart when reading the list (not uncommon....) Care to remind me of the particulars? Either here or PM or email - would be great! I think that lens might be the one that fits the budget. Sure, an f2 would be nice, but so would a 85 mm f1.2 "L" portrait lens. And of course that Porsche I always wanted... :smile:

    Thanks Nikki!
     
  8. Nikki

    Nikki Member

    Messages:
    60
    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Location:
    North Las Ve
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Peter check your pm box. :smile:

    nikki
     
  9. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks Nikki!
     
  10. benjiboy

    benjiboy Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,695
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    U.K.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    W/A Lenses For Canon F.D Cameras

    :smile:
     
  11. benjiboy

    benjiboy Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,695
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    U.K.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    W/A Lenses For Canon F.D Cameras

    Hi. Peter,
    I use both the 35mm fa2.8 and the 28mm f2.8 in my Canon system, I think that which wide angle lens you buy should depend on the one that would be of most use for the kind of shots you take the most of and, what your main photographic interests are, if you have the standard 50mm lens for most people a 28mm lense is the one most people would choose if they were limited to one
     
  12. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks Bentley, you confirmed what I was suspecting - I have a decent 50 mm (1.8 SC), and it is by far my favorite lens. (and I have a 80-200mm "L" lens that I almost literally stole froma pawn shop). I love the standard lens, it teaches a beginner like me so much, I find, by making me work for my shots. On the other hand, I think given that I will only have one, the 28mm gives me a little more of a "spread". I think I might have got one for a really good deal :wink: too. (Thanks Nikki!)
     
  13. Adrian Twiss

    Adrian Twiss Member

    Messages:
    623
    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2004
    Location:
    Wigan (oop N
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I use a Tamron Adaptall 28mm f2.5. This is one of the early BBAR lenses. It is a very sharp lens and (to my eyes) distortion free (which is more than can be said for my later model 24mm Sigma which exhibits discernable barrel distortion).
     
  14. Sponsored Ad
  15. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I was wondering how the off-brands compare with Canon lenses - I wonder how much of the "its got to be Canon" thinking stems from... well, a certain amount of snobbism. Then again, I am sure that generally its a safe bet and the name carries a certain amount of security for a buyer (other than most modern kit-lenses...)
     
  16. Whiteymorange

    Whiteymorange Member

    Messages:
    2,384
    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Location:
    Boston area
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    17 Tamron

    I've got a 17mm Tamron that I use with various old Canons (ftb, AE1, etc) It has got to be one of the sharpest lenses I use. The distortion is minimal at anything over a few feet and the flexibility of shooting with it makes it a wonderful street lens. You can shoot from the hip and get amazing images. i also have the 35mm 2.0. Great, but not any sharper than the Tamron. Of course the Tamron cost twice as much as any of the camera bodies, but, hey... you have to have priorities. Glass comes first.
     
  17. Mark Layne

    Mark Layne Member

    Messages:
    919
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2003
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    Bear in mind that Canon apparently did not make all of their lenses, they farmed out many of the lesser aperture ones.
    You can usually tell them apart as the Canon made ones have smooth black metal while the outsourced ones have a sort of sandblasted look to them.
    Mark
     
  18. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Very interesting! I know that in todays economics its impossible to find a major brand that does not "outsource" some things to trusted (hopefully) suppliers. I am beginning to think that a 28mm f2.8 would be a great balance. And I am sure the short focal would offset for the maximmum apperture by allowing me to shoot at slower shutters. And then, one day, when I am rich and famous :smile: I can buy all the fancy glass I want!:smile:
     
  19. benjiboy

    benjiboy Subscriber

    Messages:
    8,695
    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Location:
    U.K.
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If you can get hold of the Canon F.D. 28mm f2.8, which I have seen the latest version of very recently in mint condition for about £40 second hand in a few local retailers, you won't be disappointed, it's fast enough for just about any kind of general photography, is sharp and contrasty, gives an even light distribution over the frame,and if you stick to Canon marque lenses they are all designed to have the same colour balance. Don't worry that it's not f2 or even faster, lenses in general in my experience of moderate appature are simpler to devise( i.e they aren't f1.8designs that have been "stretched " to make them FA1.4) , it's easier to control abberations in a lens of more modest speed.
     
  20. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Well, I think my search continues - and the Canon 28mm f2.8 is what I will be hunting again. I think it will be a good compromise for me: fairly wide, fairly distortion free, and reasonably fast. Now I just have to snipe one that is going at a great price...
     
  21. MP_Wayne

    MP_Wayne Member

    Messages:
    314
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2003
    Location:
    Calgary, Alb
    Shooter:
    4x5 Format
    Although I shoot LF too, I have a pretty extensive collection of FD glass. If you can swing it, try getting both:
    [1] Canon FD 20mm f2.8 and
    [2] Canon FD 28mm f2.8

    Yes, you will get distortion with the 20mm, but for landscape and massively sharp Depth of Field in 35mm, the 20mm is a tremendously fun lens - sort of like LF wide angle feel in 35mm format. 20mm come up on eBay with reasonably regular frequency - a bit more pricey than the 28mm, but a whole lot of fun. The 28mm is a consumer lens so, with patience, you should be able to get a cheap snipe eventually.

    Finally, if you are looking for something fun on which to spend your income tax refund, have a look at the Canon FD 15mm F2.8 too. It is a full 180 degree fisheye across the diagonal on a full rectangular - just keep your tripod legs (or your own feet) out of the edge of the image. Another fun lens!
     
  22. gnashings

    gnashings Inactive

    Messages:
    1,376
    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Location:
    Oshawa, Onta
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    Thanks for the input - I will no doubt, someday, have all these lenses - but for now, budget is a BIG constraint. As such, I think the 28 f2.8 will do nicely for me as a good compromise - for starters :smile:

    When you say "consumer" - how bad is it? I've read decent reviews of it, then again, sme people are easier to please than others:smile:
     
  23. Cooki

    Cooki Member

    Messages:
    58
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2006
    Location:
    Winnipeg Can
    Shooter:
    Sub 35mm
    I have the FD 28/2.8, it is quite nice. I just picked up the Sigma 16mm 2.8 fish, and am having a great time remembering just how silly I can get. :rolleyes:
     
  24. naturephoto1

    naturephoto1 Subscriber

    Messages:
    1,819
    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2006
    Location:
    Breinigsvill
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    If you can find one, you may want to find the old Canon 35mm f3.5 Breech Lock lens. I had one of these when I used the Canon F1n, Canon F1 New, Canon EF over 20 years ago before switching to my Leica R series cameras. This particular lens, though quite slow was known for having exceptional performance. That was why I purchased it and it produced outstanding performance of color, sharpness, and contrast on my transparency film.

    Rich
     
  25. JBrunner

    JBrunner Moderator Staff Member Moderator

    Messages:
    7,077
    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Location:
    Basin and Range Province
    Shooter:
    8x10 Format
    Before it was stolen I had a 28 2.8 FD. I was shocked at just how darn good it was, because it was so cheap.
     
  26. rosey

    rosey Member

    Messages:
    120
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    Location:
    Toledo, Ohio
    Shooter:
    35mm
    This statement is very true. The 28mm 2.8 FD lens is the equal of any of my comparable Nikon, Pentax and Minolta glass.
    You can find excellent examples of the Canon 28mm 2.8 on the Bay for $50 to $65 from reputable sellers. That's where I got mine.
    That said, you can sometimes find a great deal on the 24mm 2.8 FD. I'm talking less that $80. I have one and am amazed at the clarity, contrast and lack of distortion.
    Ken