Canon FD telephoto lenses

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by curveshooter, Jul 2, 2013.

  1. curveshooter

    curveshooter Mu-43 Regular

    57
    Nov 29, 2012
    North Carolina
    Update:

    I bought the following:

    Canon A-1, s/n 891973
    Canon FD 50mm 1.4
    Canon FD 24mm 2.8
    Canon FD 200mm 2.8
    Canon FD 35-105mm 3.5
    Canon Extender FD 2X-B
    Vivitar MC Tele Converter, 2X-4, FL-FD
    Canon Speedlite 199A

    Lens caps, filters, Canon leather cases for all 4 lenses.

    $210 for all. How'd I do?

    --------------------------------------------------------------
    Original post:

    How much are these lenses worth (ballpark range) in very good condition?

    - Canon FD 50mm f/1.4
    - Canon FD 200mm f/2.8
    - Canon FD 35-105mm f/3.5

    I don't really need them, but I might be able to get them cheaply from a motivated seller. And who doesn't want good lenses for cheap? :biggrin:

    I have an FD-to-m43 adapter for my Panny G3, which I think will let me use any of these lenses, without any electronic pass-through of course.

    I suppose the Canon 50mm f/1.4 might be a small upgrade from my Nikon 50mm f/1.8. I have no telephoto lenses and I'm wondering whether 200mm would be too long on m43 to be useful (400mm equivalent, if I'm understanding correctly), so the 35-105 zoom might be more useful, and I think these old FD lenses can be zoomed manually.

    Thoughts?
     
  2. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    941
    Oct 20, 2011
    - 50 for 50, probably a little more. imo, the chrome lock would be worth an extra 10.

    -200 $150ish. maybe 200 if in VG condition, but man that's going to be heavy
     
  3. uci2ci

    uci2ci Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 22, 2012
    Los Angeles, CA
    Sam
    Id be more interested in the 200mm more than anything else. AFAIK, its a good lens. 200mm focal length will let get some wildlife shots. You can also a 2x TC to it, giving you a 400mm 5.6...not bad!. I would stay away from the canon fd zooms, unless its the L variety
     
  4. curveshooter

    curveshooter Mu-43 Regular

    57
    Nov 29, 2012
    North Carolina
    Here's a pic of it. Can you determine if it has the chrome lock (I have no idea what that is, LOL)?

    canon50.

    Too heavy to use with a regular tripod attached only to the m43 camera?
     
  5. curveshooter

    curveshooter Mu-43 Regular

    57
    Nov 29, 2012
    North Carolina
    Would I be able to use a 2x teleconverter with FD-m43 adapter?

    Here's a pic of the 35-105 f/3.5 lens. Can you determine if it's the L variety?

    What are the drawbacks of the non-L FD zooms?
    canon35-105.
     
  6. denis_sf

    denis_sf Mu-43 Regular

    98
    Jun 4, 2013
    Oakland, CA
    Denis
    That's an nFD (new FD) 50mm 1.4.

    Not too heavy at all. Great glass, I own both the nFD and the FD 50/1.4 SSC and both are very nice.

    EDIT: Oops you were asking about the 200. I haven't owned anything longer than the 35-105.

    The 35-105 comes in two variations, by the way. There's a constant 3.5 and a 3.5-5.6 or something that you do not want. That lens is big (think 72mm filters) and heavy. It's also a two-touch zoom, meaning that there are separate rings for focus and zoom.

    EDIT: looks like that's the right one of the two variants. It is a decent lens but as you can see it's big and bulky. Not an L version (is there an FD 35-105?).
     
  7. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    Yes. The TC fits between your adapter and lens.
     
  8. curveshooter

    curveshooter Mu-43 Regular

    57
    Nov 29, 2012
    North Carolina
    Better than the Nikon 50mm 1.8 (that's my current 50mm lens)?

    I was referring to the weight of the FD 200mm lens, not the 50mm. Would it be too heavy for a tripod attached to just the camera?

    OK, so it sounds like the pictured 35-105 is a constant 3.5 aperture?

    Is two-touch zoom a bad thing? I'd have assumed that all zoom lenses have separate zoom and focus rings. For my uses (lol, I'd have to find uses), I don't think speed of focusing will be a priority, and anyway, it will all be manual since I'm using a 'dumb' adapter, so separate zoom and focus rings don't bother me.

    I take it the 'L' version is smaller/lighter?
     
  9. uci2ci

    uci2ci Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 22, 2012
    Los Angeles, CA
    Sam
    The 200mm is 800g...not too heavy for a fast tele. And no, it wont break the mount with its weight.

    L versions are usually heavier actually...more glass, wider aperture
     
  10. denis_sf

    denis_sf Mu-43 Regular

    98
    Jun 4, 2013
    Oakland, CA
    Denis
    Haven't used that lens, but faster is usually better and the FD 50s are great glass, especially if you're getting them inexpensively. I love both of mine.

    Gotcha. I figured it out after re-reading. No, should be fine.

    Yes.

    Nah, not a bad thing. Just a heads-up.

    As uci2ci says.
     
  11. curveshooter

    curveshooter Mu-43 Regular

    57
    Nov 29, 2012
    North Carolina
    What's the difference between an extender and a tele converter? The guy is also selling these, and I'm guessing I can get them for next to nothing if I buy a few of his lenses.
     
  12. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    Extender is just what canon calls their TC's.

    Sent from my Samsung Note II via mu-43 app.
     
  13. sinclair

    sinclair Mu-43 Veteran

    If I came across these lenses, I'd buy them up in a heart beat. But then I prefer Canon nFD glass.
     
  14. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    I just picked up two high end, fast, bargain teles in Canon FD mount - they are due to be delivered later this week:

    A Vivitar Series 1 200mm f3.0 and a Vivitar Series 1 135mm f2.3

    Because of various incompetence in the ebay sellers' listings, I was able to pick up the 200mm for $47 and the 135mm for $35 including shipping costs, which is well under half what these lenses typically sell for. Hopefully, the sellers' incompetence does not extend to how these lenses are packed and shipped. These lenses are, by reputation, at least as good as the better Camera Manufacturer's fast 135 and 200mm offerings, so we'll see when they arrive.
     
  15. nuclearboy

    nuclearboy Mu-43 Top Veteran

    851
    Jan 28, 2011
    USA
    I have the canon nFD 200/2.8 and a nice canon 2x extender. I have used both on the E-PM2 mounted to a tripod. It is heavy but it works.

    The 200 is a nice lens. It has some chromatic aberrations in certain instances but in general I like the lens.

    I will probably be selling it at some point, however, because I seem to never use it.
     
  16. jomerads

    jomerads Mu-43 Veteran

    223
    Mar 27, 2013
    Moorestown, New Jersey
    John S.
    I got my fd 35-105 from KEH.com for $59 bargain price with caps. (Do not be fooled by bargain lenses at KEH.com, they are very usable.) I agree with the weight so I use it with a monopod. I use it for video with my EM5 for stage performances of my kids; with very decent results stopped down a bit at 4-4.5.

    It also does not extend out when zooming. It might suffer from lens creep because it is a zoom and it is old. You can use a lens band for this.

    John S.
     
  17. curveshooter

    curveshooter Mu-43 Regular

    57
    Nov 29, 2012
    North Carolina
    Exactly why I'm only interested at a bargain price. I probably won't have much use for it, but at a low enough price, it'll be nice to have around.
     
  18. Just Jim

    Just Jim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    941
    Oct 20, 2011
    Not the chrome lock, but your 2xb has the chrome lock. I like them because they work with the FD adapters better, that's all.

    The 200 would be fine with a tripod, I just sometimes wonder about the build quality of some of the adapters. and that the weight may introduce a bit of light leak with the weight pulling down on the adapter. You'll want a tripod anyway working with a lens at that magnification, even more so with the 200 and the 2xb, If I was you and you if do buy the 200 I'd hunt down the 1.4xb (avoid the 2xa and 1.4xa). I also wouldn't worry about the zoom that much you'll just have to learn the sweet spots that were of the zooms of those days. Usually wide open is not so good, stop down at least a couple stops and most of them are fine. It's just that you may have to stop down more than you are used to compared a modern zoom. the 80-200 f4 is a fantastic non L zoom for instance, and can be had for around $100 in VG shape, where the L version maybe $400 and there is very little different in the make up of the lens itself other than the focus, and zoom ring operation being different. The difference in FD L zooms then is not nearly as drastic as it is now with EF.
     
  19. Anthon

    Anthon Mu-43 Regular

    182
    Dec 8, 2012
    Spain
    I was in the same situation as OP and I finally bought a Canon FD 135mm f2.8 in mint condition at a bargain price.
     
  20. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green

    Both of these lenses arrived this afternoon - and my experience demonstrates the range of outcomes when dealing with clueless ebay sellers.

    The 135mm arrived with an obviously hacked aperture mechanism - it works, but the aperture ring is oriented incorrectly, so the lens does not display whatever aperture setting it has been set to, and there are no aperture click-stops, it just moves smoothly through the entire range - all the way till the empty space where the ball bearing SHOULD have been that clicks into the detents to provide aperture click stops. Also, this lens was shipped to me without any lens caps, and really crappily packed in a rolled up paper bag inside a small box barely big enough to hold the lens. The front element was completely scuffed and marred when I got it. Fortunately, after cleaning, it only has one insignificant scratch on the front glass that wouldn't damage the images in any way. I'm going to try to get a partial refund from the seller for the less than fully functional condition of the aperture mechanism - but when push comes to shove, the lens does work, even without visible aperture settings and click stops, and at the price I paid, ($35 including shipping) it's still an OK deal.

    Meanwhile the 200mm f3.0 was decently packed and is, for all intents and purposes, in absolute mint condition. Easily worth 3-4X the $47 I paid including shipping.