Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Available Light: Canon FD 35mm f 2.0 test
  • TraumManufakturTraumManufaktur
    For my first post, a quick little test catching the magic hour

    Lumix GH2 Available Light test Canon FD 35 mm f2.0 @ f2, f 2,8

    unhacked, 720p "Cinema" -2, -2, 0, -1, not graded except title shot, medium ISOs



    Cheers
  • 11 Replies sorted by
  • itimjimitimjim
    Is the 35/2 you are using the old FD (chrome nose), or the new FD?
  • TraumManufakturTraumManufaktur
    It's a FD 35m/2.0 straight, no S.C.C. or Chrome nose. Picked up from ebay yesterday, based on recommendation from Andrew Reid and from http://www.fdreview.com/lens-review.php?itemid=16 They're all supposed to be "awesome", and a bit underrated for video.

    The 35mm on Gh2 is a light tele, so it'll need a monopod or glide for documentary work. I like the framing and the color rendition so far, will have to use it in real shoots.
  • brudneybrudney
    yeah, I love this lens. probably the most used FD by me.
  • ShaveblogShaveblog
    @TraumManufaktur

    Does your FD 35mm f2 have a concave or convex front lens element, and does its aperture range end at f16 or f22? The magic FD 35mm f2 has the concave front element and f2-f16 range - this is the version Andrew and others have praised, and they're right on, it's an amazing lens, easily my favorite legacy glass. I love this lens so much I have two of them in case something ever happens to one of them.

    The later FDn 35mm f2 has the more common convex front element and f2-f22 range. It's a good lens but is not in the same league optically, unfortunately. That's why so many eBay sellers trying to move the later version turn the lens so the f22 doesn't show in the listing photo.
  • TraumManufakturTraumManufaktur
    @Shaveblog Ah, yeah it's the one with f22. I did not know that there was a vast difference. Is it called S.S.C or Chrome Nose then? How do you compare the IQ of the two models? Any links with video that feature the concave model? I've noticed prices going up on FD's, what does the special one go for? Something to hunt once I get a chance. A few things to get before that becomes a priority perhaps.
  • LPowellLPowell
    The concave Canon FD 35mm f2 has a unique drawback: its lens coatings contain radioactive Thorium. While it's not likely a health hazard, the lens elements tend to turn yellow over time, particularly if the lens is covered and stored for long periods. This makes them excellent choices for black & white photography and problematic for video.

    Internet legend has it that lengthy exposure to direct sunlight or a UV light can reverse the yellowing effect:

    http://camerapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Radioactive_lenses
  • itimjimitimjim
    @TraumManufaktur both the old chrome nose with the thorium coating and the new FD are very capable lenses. The old one is a bit sharper though, famously so.

    For me, its drawbacks outweigh that extra little bit of sharpness though. The yellowing over time, great for B&W as @Lpowell stated, but not so good for video....or at least more of a faff with custom WB for a lens change. Also, the thread diameter is 55m, and all of my other Canon FDn are 52mm, which keeps things consistent for me.

    Everyone's mileage will vary. The chrome noses are going for around £200+ (good condition), and the FDn around £150+.
  • TraumManufakturTraumManufaktur
    Thanks for the responses, very helpful. Been mainly working as an editor and I must say it's liberating and exciting to get images myself. Hooked on legacy glass so far, I have the 50mm 1.4 S.C.C in the mail and perhaps I'll switch my 28mm 2.8 for a 24mm S.C.C. The kit zoom 14-140 I have is way too video-looking for my taste. Very capable lens still, but a little "off". To digest the different lenses and make them my own will take some -fun- time.

    I'll post some more video as I get it. Perhaps this thread can be moved to "lenses" Did not realize there was a category specially for that. :slap:

    Edit: sp
  • ShaveblogShaveblog
    @TraumManufaktur

    You've still got an excellent lens, it's just not the same design Andrew and others refer to as the "magic" Canon FD 35mm f2. I've shot with both versions and it's well worth hunting down the earlier concave version.

    @LPowell

    The concave FD 35mm's radioactive rear element isn't a drawback, it's a feature! As long as you don't sleep with the lens under your pillow every night there's nothing to worry about. As for the yellowing, both my 35s had it and I cleared them up with a $9 Ikea LED lamp that throws off so much UVB light it clears up these radioactive lenses in 1-2 days instead of months for sunlight and weeks for backlight fluorescent bulbs:
    http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/20169658/
  • balazerbalazer
    @LPowell, it's the lens element's glass that contains thorium, not the coating. Glass made with thorium has a higher index of refraction.
  • Mark_the_HarpMark_the_Harp
    Just out of interest, wouldn't radioactivity mess with the electronics in the sensor / processors?

    EDIT: Here's a CMOS sensor under Alpha radiation, which is what Thorium emits:
Add a Comment