Canon built lenses for FD mount

[redbandit]

have a Ftb-n model camera, am wanting to get a quality canon lens for it but am seeing some oddities in determining the later so called "new" lenses with the flourite crystal lenses compared to the previous versions

I am looking for longer focal lengths. The reason is for bird photos. And the newer newest most advanced lenses from CANON factory to get the best quality possible.

I have seen MANY knock offs of the "new" and "pro" lenses from 3rd levelcompanies advertised as teh genuine deal.

 

[koraks]

Take your pick: https://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/index.htm

 

[gone]

FD lenses are top quality, there is little to no advantage going to third party lenses. There aren't many that fit a FD mount camera anyway. But if you're determined to go this path, I believe you can go to a FD to Nikon F adapter for the camera, buy an adapter/lens mount for a Leica R lens, and put one of those on there. Would make more sense to just buy a Leica R camera for a Leica R lens. Or go w/ the Nikon F to Leica R adapter/lens mount and use a Nikon camera w/ an R lens. Anything w/ an adapter will force you to use stop down metering though.

 

[redbandit]

New FD 100 - 300mm f/5.6L is the general idea, but the ones with the lower lens speeds, 2.8 and 4 are the more idealized ones.

Its hard to tell for me, from ebay photos what lenses are what. There are alot of knockoffs and some "genuine advertised lenses" dont share what i think are critical parts of the official lenses.

ie, the offical cannon factory lens f/2.8 l with flourite and UD lenses in it, has a lens mount of X color, many "genuine lenses" on ebay have completely different color mounts..

on some of the lenses they have a filter drawer on the factory lens, many "genuine" lenses on ebay dont. And its hard to identify some of them as i have found some of the knock offs labelled as t mount adapter lenses with minolta labelling

 

[mtnbkr]

Can you show some examples of what you think are fake lenses? It's kind of odd that someone is taking the time to make fake Canon FD lenses considering the low cost of even some of the more desirable ones (compared to Leica, etc).

Chris

 

[xkaes]

Are you "blowing off" Sigma and other lens makers? My APO 500mm f7.2 is stellar.

 

[redbandit]

Are you "blowing off" Sigma and other lens makers? My APO 500mm f7.2 is stellar.

my fastest lens is a vivitar 70-210 mm 1:3.8 macro zoom.

Its NICE i admit, but ive really been wondering if the cannon "constant" f/4 lenses or even the fancy f/2.4 lenses would give me better image quality in low light.

i like sigma lenses in general, however im focusing on:

proper function with the cameras TTL system
image quality
light gathering in general
low light performance
magnification for bird work

 

[xkaes]

Sigma made great LONG APO lenses, like 500mm f4.5 and 800mm 5.6 for birding. Lots of reviews on line. Too expensive for me -- I have the Sigma 500mm f7.2 APO and Tokina 850mm f8.5 CAT.

 

[redbandit]

Is there a way to get new filters for the drawer? I know i have seen those type sold before but not sure on the exact SHAPE

 

[eli griggs]

Canon made many lenses in the FD mount and those cameras, like your FTb ql can also use Canon FL series glass, and the F1 series cameras are all the camera you'll likely ever want.

If no, there's the A series and the T90.

Then the third party stuff expands the FD Universe even more.

If Canon picks up making film cameras again, I hope they will be FD mount, so the buyers can take advantage of what all is out there.

Cheers and Godspeed, to everyone, as we pass into the new year.

 

[Paul Howell]

Although not as fast a new Canon 70 to 200 2.8L, early Vivitar Series 1 70 to 200 were as good or better than Canon, Nikon, or Minolta of the day. But in general I would avoid most 70s vintage zooms. Canon L primes in FD mount are on the expensive side, of course the longer the lens the more expensive they become. Tonkia, Sigma, Tamron made some pretty good lens, at about half the price of Canon glass. Personally for birding I would get a Canon AF EOS 1N, battery grip and a modern long zoom.

 

[eli griggs]

Although not as fast a new Canon 70 to 200 2.8L, early Vivitar Series 1 70 to 200 were as good or better than Canon, Nikon, or Minolta of the day. But in general I would avoid most 70s vintage zooms. Canon L primes in FD mount are on the expensive side, of course the longer the lens the more expensive they become. Tonkia, Sigma, Tamron made some pretty good lens, at about half the price of Canon glass. Personally for birding I would get a Canon AF EOS 1N, battery grip and a modern long zoom.

I liked the 300 f4 L lens for shooting seabirds, etc on the fly.

I also used it to photograph herds of Whitetail Deer in a Duke Power coal plant's surrounding landscape and Ducks and Geese.

It was a great way to spend a frozen winter day!

This is the black 300 L series lens, no to be confused with the white version.

 

[Craig]

If Canon picks up making film cameras again, I hope they will be FD mount, so the buyers can take advantage of what all is out there.

They made lots of film cameras in EOS mount, I can't see them ever going back to FD again. If they wanted a film camera, they could do an EOS body and market it with their current lenses, FD would be starting from scratch with another lens lineup. That doesn't really make commercial sense for Canon.

 

[eli griggs]

Yes, starting a new lineup would be expensive, but by allowing buyers to use existing FD lenses, with a new universal mount and kit lens, the high cost of new lenses is something that could be delayed, allowing new film users to focus on buying the new camera and use it straight off, and discover the joy of film, without the absurdly high cost of new "modern lenses" and Canon earns the loyalty of the new generation of analog shooters whom eventually enjoy older FD and new Canon lenses.

IMO

 

[Paul Howell]

New users are going to want Auto Focus, that is not to say that Cosina could not make a bear bone FD mount body, maybe if Pentax's plans work out establishing that is a market for film cameras.

 

[redbandit]

New users are going to want Auto Focus, that is not to say that Cosina could not make a bear bone FD mount body, maybe if Pentax's plans work out establishing that is a market for film cameras.

Hate auto focus.

That EOS 1N is a nice camera BUT i cannot do another camera with winder motors, unnedded weight and to much to go wrong. Trust me, one time having an advance motor short on is ENOUGH

 

[Craig]

Yes, starting a new lineup would be expensive, but by allowing buyers to use existing FD lenses, with a new universal mount and kit lens, the high cost of new lenses is something that could be delayed, allowing new film users to focus on buying the new camera and use it straight off, and discover the joy of film, without the absurdly high cost of new "modern lenses" and Canon earns the loyalty of the new generation of analog shooters whom eventually enjoy older FD and new Canon lenses.

You can't mix EOS and FD lenses, as one is entirely mechanical and one is entirely electronic. There is no "universal mount" that will work. There was a 1.26 teleconverter made in the early 90's as a bodge to allow pros to use their FD telephoto lenses on EOS bodies, but it was stopped down metering and manual aperture control. It was really intended for the sports photographers to use their 300 and 400 F2.8's wide open, as the teleconverter only worked with the fast telephoto lenses.

As it turned out scrapping FD was the right move, as it allowed Canon to dominate the sports and journalism markets in the late 90's and 2000's in the way Nikon did previously in the 80's and into the 90's.

The FD ship sailed a long time ago, if there wasn't a market back when lots of pros used FD lenses, there isn't a market now. EOS lenses have been made for nearly 35 years, there is plenty in the used market. I would think that autofocus is also a significant feature for any new body, that battle was won by the early 90's. FD can't accommodate AF so it's really a dead end. Why would Canon of today care about people "loyal" to a system that was obsolete in the last century? What business case is there for Canon?

If Canon does introduce a film body, it only makes sense to make it EOS mount, as there is an ecosystem of lenses and accessories already produced that they can sell (and service). If that body is a sales failure, it's a much more modest investment than developing a new line of lenses as well. After all, Canon's goal is to sell more cameras and lenses and make a profit.

 

[redbandit]

tH

You can't mix EOS and FD lenses, as one is entirely mechanical and one is entirely electronic. There is no "universal mount" that will work. There was a 1.26 teleconverter made in the early 90's as a bodge to allow pros to use their FD telephoto lenses on EOS bodies, but it was stopped down metering and manual aperture control. It was really intended for the sports photographers to use their 300 and 400 F2.8's wide open, as the teleconverter only worked with the fast telephoto lenses.

As it turned out scrapping FD was the right move, as it allowed Canon to dominate the sports and journalism markets in the late 90's and 2000's in the way Nikon did previously in the 80's and into the 90's.

The FD ship sailed a long time ago, if there wasn't a market back when lots of pros used FD lenses, there isn't a market now. EOS lenses have been made for nearly 35 years, there is plenty in the used market. I would think that autofocus is also a significant feature for any new body, that battle was won by the early 90's. FD can't accommodate AF so it's really a dead end. Why would Canon of today care about people "loyal" to a system that was obsolete in the last century? What business case is there for Canon?

If Canon does introduce a film body, it only makes sense to make it EOS mount, as there is an ecosystem of lenses and accessories already produced that they can sell (and service). If that body is a sales failure, it's a much more modest investment than developing a new line of lenses as well. After all, Canon's goal is to sell more cameras and lenses and make a profit.

The FD system was only replaced due to a larger difficulty in putting AF into it, and patents for the mount itself were expiring. Just like the patens for the EOS/EF and Nikon F mounts expiring helped spring the new mirrorless mounts based on oder medium format mounts.


Thing is, the FD mount is still good. It merely requires a person to have mental power to turn a dial to focus. Its NOT that hard.

 

[Paul Howell]

Hate auto focus.

That EOS 1N is a nice camera BUT i cannot do another camera with winder motors, unnedded weight and to much to go wrong. Trust me, one time having an advance motor short on is ENOUGH

Of all the cameras I own or have owned, the most reliable are the pro level AF bodies. Nikon F4, Minolta 9Xi, 800si, 9, 7, and Pentax SF1 and PZ are well built, much more reliable than my now 40 year old all mechanical bodies. Even my Spotmatic's meter is getting dodgy. The price of a EOS1N or 1V and one or two long modern zooms, like a 150 to 500 is still much less than a FTb and 3 or 4, FT L glass primes, to get motor drive speed you need a F1 or F1New with motor drive which adds weight. An EOS 1N or V can be lightened by not adding the battery grip. I shoot wildlife, some birds and I don't think I could without a motor drive.

 

[redbandit]

Of all the cameras I own or have owned, the most reliable are the pro level AF bodies. Nikon F4, Minolta 9Xi, 800si, 9, 7, and Pentax SF1 and PZ are well built, much more reliable than my now 40 year old all mechanical bodies. Even my Spotmatic's meter is getting dodgy. The price of a EOS1N or 1V and one or two long modern zooms, like a 150 to 500 is still much less than a FTb and 3 or 4, FT L glass primes, to get motor drive speed you need a F1 or F1New with motor drive which adds weight. An EOS 1N or V can be lightened by not adding the battery grip. I shoot wildlife, some birds and I don't think I could without a motor drive.

YOu seriously need a motor drive to shoot birds? Thats embarressing, I have knocked out a roll of film with my lil Ftb N QL in 2 or 3 minutes. on the birdies. MORE then fast enough, and in some cases i have to slow DOWN to do the job properly.

 

[Craig]

The FD system was only replaced due to a larger difficulty in putting AF into it, and patents for the mount itself were expiring. Just like the patens for the EOS/EF and Nikon F mounts expiring helped spring the new mirrorless mounts based on oder medium format mounts.

If there were any patents of the mount ( I have not done a search to see if there ever were), they would have expired long before the EOS mount came along. A major stumbling block in addition to AF was the relatively narrow throat size. Canon wanted to develop faster lenses, like the 50 F1.0 and that couldn't be done with the FD mount.

 

[grat]

Thing is, the FD mount is still good. It merely requires a person to have mental power to turn a dial to focus. Its NOT that hard.

But it makes absolutely zero economical sense.

 

[Paul Howell]

YOu seriously need a motor drive to shoot birds? Thats embarressing, I have knocked out a roll of film with my lil Ftb N QL in 2 or 3 minutes. on the birdies. MORE then fast enough, and in some cases i have to slow DOWN to do the job properly.

In most case no, single shot mode is fine, there are times when a bird is in flight like hummingbird that a motor drive is helpful, well more than helpful.

 

[Lew_B]

I’m still using my FD lenses occasionally via a cheap FD to Fuji-X converter (XE2). Sure, you’ve got to focus mechanically, but you turn on focus “peaking” on the Fuji which really helps. And, I shoot aperture priority anyhow, so I just use the lens just like I used to on my F1 and Ftb’s! The results are great, and certainly a lot cheaper than buying new Fuji X equivalents. The glass is still very good!

I haven’t bothered trying to use them on my 5d iv, because the converters require some glass to use, and they’re generally awful (unless you spend a lot of money). The Fuji adaptor is just air, no glass, just distance correction for focal plane.

And I still have all my FD gear, which will come back out when I retire (hopefully) and get back into film again….I was a very late convert to digital…..the final nail was when I started having to mail out E6 to a different state to get it processed! That was only a few years ago! Enjoy!