Personal View site logo
Lenses for Canon FD mount
  • 185 Replies sorted by
  • I just won Vivitar 55mm 2.8 Macro made by Komine at $44.65. Original front and rear caps and a original case.

    It's Konica AR mount. FD mount version was priced ridiculously high. I really like AR adapter. It's pretty solid and there's no play. Here comes macro!!!
  • You'd need 2.8 or faster for indoor.
  • I got you all beat. Behold the magnificence! Brand New Rokinon 70-180mm F 4.5 Canon FD Lens
    Bought it "Brand New" off ebay for around $30 shipped. OK seriously, I have zero camera experience and I was literally buying random cheap lenses, just to have them and try them out. It was new and there's a reason it's never been sold. Ultimately it useless indoors on the GH1 becaue of FPN. This produced the worst FPN indoors I've yet seen. Out doors it's decent, but I haven't used it much.

    840 x 630 - 287K
  • >Vivitar Series 1 105mm Macro

    Just never bid on this lenses again.
    Especially after NEX release such auctions frequently end up in strange prices :-)
  • got outbid on the Vivitar Series 1 105mm Macro - damn!
    next would be the 90mm ...
  • If anyone want to have really good FD lens, here is another candidate:


    Price is not bad, especially if you live in Europe.

    If you like prime lenses and don't have 135mm and 200mm Series 1, something is not right :-)
  • some "lens test footage". No piano score though ...

    GH2 and Canon Macro Lens FD 50mm f3.5

    (the test was, how much shake does the lens take before it disintegrates. Next time I'm going to build a wind breaking tend around my friends the plant louses)
  • >Considering current price hike on old F2.8 zooms, selling it and buying Canon L zoom is good idea.
    From similar F2.8 zooms it is best to go for new Tamron. It is much much sharper.

    You're right. It weighs a ton and it's not terribly sharp. Thanks for the suggestions.
  • >About Vivitar 55/2.8 made by Komine, does the mount type matter on optical performance? e.g. FD, AR, F.

    I think not. Just choose reputable seller and lens in good shape.
  • About Vivitar 55/2.8 made by Komine, does the mount type matter on optical performance? e.g. FD, AR, F.
  • I've got an FD 55mm F/1.2 and an FD 24mm F/2.8

    The 55mm is a wonderful lens (WAY HEAVY THOUGH!) and still looks pretty good wide open in low light, and has amazing depth of field and bokeh. The 24mm F/2.8 is sharp, but the image looks kinda "boring" to me. I'm glad I have it though, as the 55 is a very long lens on the GH2 and not great in many situations where a wide angle would be better.

    Now if they made a 20mm f/1.2 I'd be one happy camper indeed. ;-)
  • >I bought the Tokina 80-200 f2.8 because it's faster. But the quality is not as good as the Canon i suppose, although reasonable.

    I tried this Tokina some time ago on Pentax (and still have her cousin 100-300mm F4).
    It is not very good lens. You really need to stop it down. And weight...
    Considering current price hike on old F2.8 zooms, selling it and buying Canon L zoom is good idea.
    From similar F2.8 zooms it is best to go for new Tamron. It is much much sharper.
  • I bought the Tokina 80-200 f2.8 because it's faster. But the quality is not as good as the Canon i suppose, although reasonable.
  • "- Dear, where we are supposed to sleep?
    - Just place this to big white lenses to the side and throw pair or Mark bodies in window, dear, they are two years old anyway."
  • thanks for the tip, Vitaliy! Sure enough my family will embrace another lens or two at home :-) "look, dad has a new nose!" "no, its just another lens" ... well, so be it.
  • @Alex

    You definitely need to try Vivitar 55mm F2.8 macro in this case.
  • Everyone is in need for speed thus f1.2 and f1.4 lenses are never cheap. Sometimes crazy over priced. The Canon FD macro 50 mm f3.5 is slow for a 50. Its a special purpose lens (macro). I got it very cheap and I always was putting the FD 50mm f1.2 or the Olympus 58mm f1.2 in my bag unless I took some time to play with the f3.5 macro. This lens produces so clean and sharp images that I now never use a f1.2 unless I really need the speed. However I can't tell if the macro beats a stopped down f1.2 lens.
    Anyway I don't care about sharpness that much. The correction of chromatic abbreviation, coma and astigmatism is for me the key to good image quality and that seems to be where those high end lenses shine (not most of the expensive Canon L glass though!). The Canon FD 50mm f3.5 seams to be well corrected. As well as the Olympus OM 28mm f3.5. Also one of my favorites.

    Another thing why the Canon macro excites me is macro film making. I'm new to this genre. The GH2 is so good for this task. Macro lens, GH2 in 720 60p plus 1:1 crop mode and you are in another world with very small gear! I will upload some footage I shot soon ...
  • Thanks a lot Vitaliy. It is possible that I will take it for tests and I will show you the comparison between my lumix 14-140 and this "tank toy " :-).
  • >AT-X TOKINA 24-40/2.8 FD mount

    I only read many threads about it, so info not from me directly, but as I understand this lens is not remarkable.
    Build quality is good, as always in AT-X range, but sharpness is below average.
    Better look at modern lenses like Tamron 17-50mm or Tamron 28-75mm (for Nikon or Pentax).
    To compete with modern bad or average zooms you normally need best old zooms.
    For primes it is not so clear.
  • Hi,
    Anybody knows about AT-X TOKINA 24-40/2.8 FD mount ? Perhaps I will buy this for around 120 $.
    AT-X TOKINA 01.jpg
    640 x 480 - 88K
    AT-X TOKINA 02.jpg
    640 x 480 - 83K
    AT-X TOKINA 03.jpg
    640 x 480 - 74K
    AT-X TOKINA 04.jpg
    640 x 480 - 82K
    AT-X TOKINA 05.jpg
    640 x 480 - 79K
  • Want to add other useful info.

    If you want tele zoom with very good image quality and extremely well build, look at Canon FD 80-200mm L F4 .
    It is push-pull zoom, I think that it is on of the best, if not the best of them.
    Not cheap (from manual F4 zooms only Contax Zeiss T* 80-200mm goes for similar prices).
    But if you are ok with F4, you are covered.

    My limited expirience with this lens proves that it is all true that you'll read in small user reviews.

    700 x 465 - 32K
  • @Tesselator

    I am very interestined in examples and your opinion about each lens.
    How about one separate reply per one lens?

    I want to ask you also to upload all images of lenses and examples via attachments (as they can be gone from your own or auction sites with time).
  • @stonebat
    I don't understand the all or none comment. I mix Nikkor, OM, MD, FL, FD, nFD, CZ, Yashica, M42, and etc. with no trouble. Is there something useful about matching up?

    The nFD 50/1.4 isn't great wide open but stop it down even 1/2 a stop and all the ghostly halos go away. Even at that the nFD version shown above, is better than the FD version with the S.S.C. printed on the ID ring which halos even worse WO - but again is cured in one full stop click (as opposed to 1/2 in the case of the nFD). :)

    The nFD 24/2.0 actually has better IQ than the 24/1.4L so if you don't need the extra stop that'll save you some money.

    Also the FL 58/1.2 is a good substitute for the 50/1.2L if you don't mind the extra 8mm of angle. :)

    @anyone... :)
    I have a buttload of FL/FD/nFD lenses and I like most of them. I don't think I would try to make some kind of matching set out of them for video and/or stills tho. Most are not exceptional IQ. Even the famous 85/1.2L for example is pretty terrible wide open. Way too much CA and almost all bright nFD lenses under 200mm (including L versions) halo and ghost in bright contrast. Like the Sun on shiny leaves or highlights on a pond surface. Stopped down they're better but most lenses are - better when stopped down I mean. I guess we could call it a soft-focus special effect or something. :D

    Canon makes supremely awesome long lenses but I don't have enough love for the majority of the under 200mm group to become exclusively FD. Some newer EOS mount lenses are improved - especially the L versions but without special and very expensive adapters we can't control the aperture on EF (EOS) lenses. There are a few nice exceptional FL/FD/nFD lenses to be had for sure but finding out which ones to get or leaning how to avoid the trouble spots of each, can be kinda time consuming. I'm not saying to not buy/use them or anything. They're fun lenses and I think a great for experience and learning - if you're into alt glass don't skip the old Canons!

    Here's the latest 9 Canons I sold or still for sale:

    image image image

    Canon_FDn_24mm_F2.0 -
    Canon_FDn_24mm_F2.8 -
    Canon_FDn_28mm_F2.8 -

    image image image

    Canon_FD_50mm_F1.4 -
    Canon_FD_135mm_F2.5 -
    Canon_FDn_135mm_F2.8 -

    image image image

    Canon_FL_200mm_F3.5 -
    Canon_FDn_200mm_F4.0 -
    Canon_FL_200mm_F4.5 -

    I'm selling them over at here:


    Although usually I do the e-bay thing. :)

    If anyone want to see some example photos taken with these just ask.

  • Always remember to add Vivitar 55mm F2.8 macro. It is very good, but doe to fact that it is not so widely advertised in web, it is also much cheaper.
  • Canon 50mm f1.4, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, Kiron 28mm f2.0, Vivitar Series 1 90mm f2.5, Vivitar 100mm f2.8 (1:1 macro) are the ones i know and which i selected based on a lot of good comments. They are all very cheap (apart from the 85mm perhaps)