The FD 135/2 is an interesting proposition since they can be bought for next to nothing. Conversion is easy (not rear element to play with), no mirror issue whatsoever on EOS. Only trick is to link the aperture mechanism, just like any other FD. Integrated hood is handy, and IQ is OK as far I can tell. I miss the EF 135/2 for a genuine comparison. This copy was made in 1989 BTW.
Thanks for posting, Alex, I have been wondering about this lens for some time. Good to know it is "easy" to convert - also seems like it is worth the effort. Nice job
MajinHurricane wrote:
your an orthodox christian living in japan?
Not really, French-born catholic. This was a gift for my son's first communion.
Curious to know though... how much money are you essentially saving by going the MF route when you can buy the 135L?
2nd hand 135L runs for $700. Got the FD for $150. Work took around 4h, so you do the maths to see if it's worth it. I had good fun doing it. Bottom line: I will likely sell the FD and buy a 135L because what I shoot requires AF (young kids)
AlexTokyo wrote:
Sorry no write-up to share (yet). FD conversion's trick (for simple lenses) relates to linking the aperture mechanism. Here is how I do it, with small aluminum plate & 1 screw:
Pic was taken when training on a basic 35-70 for the 85L, which is a different ball game with its rear element.
Yes, that and the non-standard screws that hold the body to the mount frame. You can't find flathead thread forming screws, not to mention longer ones.
Just for fun, I tried to compare FD 135/2 and EF 135L/2. These pics are directly out of the camera, 21MP res. (no USM, no NR, just bicubic re-size for the non-crops).
To make a long story short, FD Bokeh is really nice (not sure you can tell from these), and obviously the 135L has been corrected for CA, which is the reason the FD was not L I guess.
Dim.ka_ wrote:
Here is mine short comparison between them and C/Y zeiss sonnar MMJ 135 f2.8
Focusing point is a bit different in some shots, but i just want to find out how is the defocus rendered - so ef a bit more creamy.
Very interesting Dim.ka. Thx for posting.
I found the EF to have a bit more contrast, which might explain the not so FD creamy (to my eyes) effect at times, like in your red flowers set.
Wayne thanks for your tip, if i have an oportunity to try 135 f1.8 i will do - i remember there was a chance to buy minolta 135 stf lens last summer with not working diapraghm blades (only wideopen) - only for 480 EUR so it was a real chance to convert it to eos.
In your test shots the EF 135L looks like it has less CA, slightly sharper and better bokeh than the FD version. I like the Zeiss 135 2.8 for sharpness and color but the bokeh is no where close to as good as the other two, IMHO.
I'm not surprised with the quality of FD lenses - especially the better one's like the 135 F2.
The Old fashioned "Leaded Glass" (Today the Green Party and Planet Earth Mothers would have a fit) process enabled Very high quality glass to be made albeit a bit heavy and of course not "environmentally friendly" manufacturing processes.
To achieve the same high quality glass using non toxic materials has been a significant (and on going) process .
Thanks for a great tip.
For longer Tele's I've been using the old Official FD==>EOS adapter but these only work with the longer 'L' FD teles -- due to the long "snout" in the converter
but I'm really interested in trying the 135 conversion -- you can pick these lenses up for a song.
Do you have infinity focus with the 135mm Alex? Direct mount following removal of the old mount and intermediate ring usually results in focusing way beyond infinity on nFD lenses unless a custom spacer is used under the EOS mount.
pengland wrote:
Do you have infinity focus with the 135mm Alex? Direct mount following removal of the old mount and intermediate ring usually results in focusing way beyond infinity on nFD lenses unless a custom spacer is used under the EOS mount.
Yes, I do have infinity focus. There is no need to use a spacer. I just thinned the EOS mount (M42->EOS) down to 1mm, and kept the original nFD base mount (deepest ring, where the 4 flat screws are). Removing the 2 groves of that base mount allows to use the 4 original flat screws. To reach proper EOS register distance, I just screwed the thinned EOS mount on top of it. If I find my measurement drawing I will post it later.
Now working on converting a 500/8 nFD to EOS. Even easier (no aperture)
