Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2016 · Lenses have come a long way!

  
 
Sir_Loin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Lenses have come a long way!


So, I decided to dig out my old FD lenses to try on my M3 and the first results were startling! Just a quick test with the FD 24mm f/2.8, apparently a decent, but not outstanding lens at the time gave dire results! The lens just isn't sharp even stopped down to f/5.6! Very disappointing. It's early days as I have others to try and I bought myself a couple of Russian lenses to have a play with (I haven't received those yet). Maybe my technique needs looking at? Maybe, but I'm not optimistic that's the reason as after 35 years doing photography as a hobby I haven't suddenly become useless! . Is that particular lens a poor copy and now we have the ability to scrutinise results at the pixel level it's now shown up? Interesting.

Todays lenses are the pinnacle of optical technology and we've never had it so good. Just look how Canons cheapest lens performs, the 50mm f/1.8 STM! The same old optical formula, but with a few tweaks it's an astonishing lens for less than £100!

Edited on Dec 24, 2016 at 10:15 AM · View previous versions



Dec 24, 2016 at 10:09 AM
jcolwell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Lenses have come a long way!


Yes, you have to pick and choose carefully, when you're looking for older Alternative lenses to put on modern DSLR. On the positive side, there are still many of them out there, worthy of today's high resolution cameras, and beyond.


Dec 24, 2016 at 10:12 AM
Dudewithoutape
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Lenses have come a long way!


While Canon's stm line definitely show improvements and are excellent overall, the 24 is no slouch.

Are you sure you're stopping down? A lot of new users to the fd adapters aren't using them correctly. The fd line it's tricky due to the pin and having to rotate the collar. Try stopping down to 16 and looking through the front of the lens. Another possibility is stuck aperture blades.

Then there is precise focus. How are you focusing it? Are you using focus magnification?

Also, you mention fd, I only have experience with the fdn, but it's perfectly fine for my uses as a wide angle. Finally, maybe you just have a dud. The Canon fd line is a favorite of many mirrorless adaptees.



Dec 24, 2016 at 10:26 AM
Sir_Loin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Lenses have come a long way!


It is an 24mm f/2.8 FDn and I was stopping down correctly (making sure the rotating collar was engaging the lever) and I visually checked the aperture was closing down. I was using both focus peaking and magnified view at infinity, couldn't really go wrong you would have thought? The results were very disappointing. A dud? It's distinct possibility which has only shown itself under 100% magnification.

Very valid points so thanks for replying.



Dec 24, 2016 at 12:28 PM
Zenon Char
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Lenses have come a long way!


Digital forced the companies to improve lens IQ standards.


Dec 24, 2016 at 12:32 PM
danski0224
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Lenses have come a long way!


Sir_Loin wrote:
So, I decided to dig out my old FD lenses to try on my M3 and the first results were startling! Just a quick test with the FD 24mm f/2.8, apparently a decent, but not outstanding lens at the time gave dire results! The lens just isn't sharp even stopped down to f/5.6! Very disappointing. It's early days as I have others to try and I bought myself a couple of Russian lenses to have a play with (I haven't received those yet). Maybe my technique needs looking at? Maybe, but I'm not optimistic that's the reason as after 35
...Show more

Why not try printing the image at a normal size that you would have used with film, and then take a look at it?

Was the M3 on a tripod and focused with live view? Shutter triggered with a cable release or timer? Minimum of 1.5x the focal length for the shutter speed (preferably a minimum shutter speed of 2x focal length)?

Being able to view an image at 100% plus never existed for anyone using 35mm film except those that had their own darkroom equipment. Even a 4.2mp Canon 1D exceeds what I was able to do with 35mm film and print size, but I never owned a darkroom setup. I remember when 4x6 prints were an enlargement option over the 3x5, and the couple of 8x10 enlargements I ordered turned out poorly while a 13x19 print of an uncropped 4.2mp 1D file is fantastic.

Film lacks the interpolation of the Bayer sensor array. Film transitions are smooth and not made-up, especially on high contrast edges.

A Foveon sensor is probably the closest digital approximation of film today.




Dec 24, 2016 at 01:46 PM
notherenow
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Lenses have come a long way!


Depends, could be lots of things.

The lens could have had a hard life and/or may not have been the best copy to begin with but I would guess it may well be the adapter isn't the best.

I have a few FD adapters for a few different systems and most seem to not quite get to infinity.

Was the subject you tried close or distant? I love my 24 FD but it is the 1.4 L (some people think the slower FD 24s are better optically). If I try and shoot something at infinity with it (doesn't matter if it is FF on my A7s Sony or M4/3) I am often disappointed but for anything other than that, I like it more often than not.

Maybe try a few other cheap old lenses and see how you go.




Dec 24, 2016 at 02:42 PM
Sir_Loin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Lenses have come a long way!


It could well be the adapter, it was only cheap so I got what I paid for I feel. Any recommendations for a good FD to EOS-M and EOS adapter? It was focused at around infinity so that maybe what the issue is. I will have a day testing and experimenting with a few manual lenses after Christmas and see if I can nail down the issue.

Thank you for all the responses so far.



Dec 24, 2016 at 02:50 PM
danski0224
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Lenses have come a long way!


The only "good" FD to EF adapter is OEM Canon, and it is uber rare and uber expensive.

If the 3rd party adapter has a glass element, quality will likely suffer. If it doesn't have a glass element, infinity focus is lost.

Ed Mika made (makes?) many mount conversion kits for FD to EF that (mostly) retain infinity focus. These kits replace the FD mount, usually in a non-destructive and reversible way. However, switching back and forth isn't practical. He had a store on that big auction site. I haven't looked for a while as the economics of buying and converting FD glass didn't work out for me.

Given the rise in cost of FD lenses, I wonder what the attraction is in buying them to convert if you do not already have some of them. Nikon AI-S lenses are readily available, there are a few really good ones, even by current standards, and work just fine on a Canon camera with an inexpensive adapter

Probably a good idea to thoroughly check reviews of EF-M to FD adapters. There is likely to be a wide range of quality and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that two or three manufacturers are rebranding all of what is available.

I would look into Ed Mika kits, if available anymore, for your lenses and then you can use the EF-M to EF adapter from Canon.



Dec 24, 2016 at 03:21 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Lenses have come a long way!


WA wasn't Canon's strong suit in the days of yore, either. This was the fact that embarked me on my first journey to find non-Canon WA / UWA glass ... the segue to "alternative" glass.

To Jim's point, some excellent classic glass abounds ... and some dogs of yore as well.

That said, the point that today's glass seems to have outpaced much of the yesteryear counterparts is valid. I mean, take a look at glass such as the Sigma 150-600/6.3 C. 600mm and respectable IQ to the masses ... today's Sigma isn't the same as yesteryear's Sigma. Definitely an era of raising the bar in many regards.

+1 @ adapter quality matters more for WA end of things, and the FD-EF adapters using an extra optical element don't do you any favors there either.



Dec 24, 2016 at 05:04 PM
notherenow
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Lenses have come a long way!


Regards adapters,

I am not an M user (but an interested bystander, maybe for later).

I am not sure I would kludge a FD to EF adapter in a EF to M adapter.

Are there any FD-M adapters yet?

The issue with most of my FD adapters isn't optical as there is no glass. It is just they are very cheap and manufacturing tolerance maybe a fraction off.

They are very close to getting infinity and will seem ok a lot of the time but just that it is a lot better (for me) when the subject is closer.
Things that are still at longest focus throw can still be fine but it is when I have focus at the furthest horizon more than anything that it is more noticeable.

The lens may well have been designed that way though as most of the focus throw is taken with close focus distances with the last before the infinity marker being just 10 feet/3 metres so 95% of the focusing is for that 10 feet distance or less. That would mean even the smallest error in manufacture could make a difference.

I do realise that applies to just about all lenses but for some reason it just seems more noticeable (or to matter more anyway) to me with the old FD 24 1.4 L.



Dec 24, 2016 at 05:23 PM
Dudewithoutape
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Lenses have come a long way!


Most adapters aren't calibrated correctly. You cannot just turn to infinity and expect it to be correct. You should focus through the entire range to see if you have proper infinity. Usually, it's a smidge back from infinity as adapters are very conservative.


Dec 26, 2016 at 02:55 AM
artificialyello
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Lenses have come a long way!


I use the FD 50/1.8 (non n) with a FD to EF-M adapter on the original EOS M. It came to me with a used F-1 and the results are exelenty matching the 22/2.0. ヅ


Dec 26, 2016 at 03:27 AM
David Baldwin
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Lenses have come a long way!


Sir Loin,

You are totally right in pointing out how good modern lenses are. I have the Canon 50mm f1.8 STM, and its brilliant.

Incidentally, I regard my Sigma 18-35 f1.8 zoom with awe quite frankly. Its so incredibly sharp at the widest apertures, very well built, and affordable. Its performance and price make me cringe when I remember how much I was paying for frankly lower IQ f2 and f1.4 wide lenses back in the 1990s! Things have definitely moved on a great deal, and nowadays even crop sensors are producing results far far better than 35mm film.

We are incredibly lucky.



Dec 26, 2016 at 04:11 AM
artificialyello
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Lenses have come a long way!


I saved the old Photodo site to disk before it was taken down and these graphs should be attributed to it:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/s/uygfgzq3jjx8q5u/old.photodo.com.png

Edit: Perhaps it should be mentioned that the corner on a crop sensor should be about the 15mm mark on the scales above.



Dec 26, 2016 at 05:00 AM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.