The 35-105/3.5 constant-aperture lens is a real classic, and it's a good zoom range for event photography, where you're likely to be switching between single portraits and photographs of people in groups quickly and won't have time to change lenses, and if you're also using non-TTL auto flash, you'll get fairly consistent exposures. If you don't do that kind of photography, then sell it, and you can buy another nice FD lens. A lot of the top of the line FD lenses like the 50/1.2L or the 85/1.2L are real bargains, considering what they can do. I'm personally a fan of the 35/2.
David's absolutely right. Although I've never used the 35-105/3.5, I'd trust anyone who's had experience with it, or comparable lenses. Personally, I don't use a zoom -- just don't have the need, for my purposes. I've been using the following FD lenses (they're the only ones I own) with great satisfaction with my F-1N: 35/2, 50/1.2L, and 100/2. They accommodate just about every situation encountered.
I do have one EOS film body left at present, it's a 630 which works alright for my intent. I do all of my event and professional work digitally now (I know.. I know..) but I refuse to totally let go of film because it's my background!
I don't see myself shooting events or anything that would require a zoom, that's left to my digital gear. So I think I'll go ahead and sell the 35-105 as well. Does seem like a nice lens though.
I know the 28 f/2.8 isn't the most highly regarded lens, but is there another prime option that isn't that costly?
The 24/2.8 is in my opinion the best affordable all around FD wide angle, and they can be had pretty cheaply if you're patient.
Avoid the ones with the green circle instead of the green A at the auto position (the oldest breechlock ones) unless you can inspect it personally first, as I've seen a lot if those with element glue separation in the rear element.
Sounds like you have a good kit, especialy if you combine it with the 50mm 1.4. I have used both (and still have) the 28mm 2.8 and 28mm 2, can't really see much, if any difference in image quality between the two. The 2.8 may seem a bit poverty pack, but all the examples I have used produce really sharp images.
Sounds good to me! Doesn't have to be the best, but just good enough
I listed all the extra stuff on eBay today so I'm going to be on the hunt for a FDn 50mm f/1.4, Unless anyone has a spare?
Another VG lens is the FDn 35mm f2.8, everybody raves about the f2 ver which is supposed (I don't own one) to be superior and the f2.8 is ignored and can be bought quite cheap. The only FD Canons that don't impress me are the FDn 200mm f4, the FDn70-210 f4 and the cheapy FDn 35-70mm kit lens....maybe I have bad copies