Lenses for the Canon T90

[CImages]

Hi,
I have just bought a Canon T90 and I was wondering which lenses work well with it. The body came with the with the Canon 50mm f/1.8, Canon 28 f/2.8 and Vivitar 28-200, I obviously need FD lenses which I never used before but they get great reviews if you can find them, which I cant! I like the look of the Canon 100mm f/4, any opinions on that lens or any other lens that I will need, I am doing a photography course in September so I will be playing around with black and white. Thanks in advance,
Craig.

www.craigpayne.webeden.co.uk

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

FD lenses are plentiful on eBay and at keh.com, and there is a very active discussion list for Canon FD equipment on Yahoo!Groups. I'm sure they can't be too hard to find in the UK.

 

[John Koehrer]

CImages
the 100/4 is a macro & will cost a bit more than the 100/2.8(5). As David said KEH & Ebay are the best sources.

 

[pauldc]

Hi Craig, I have a T90 and it is an incredible camera - the spot metering with highlight and shadow control is especially powerful when doing black and white.

The one thing to watch with it is that it has no exposure lock when in centre weighted metering mode. This threw me for a while as I like to take a reading from the ground and re-compose. As a result I was getting under-exposure as I was assuming that if I kept the shutter half depressed the exposure locked. It does this in partial and spot modes but not in centre weighted.

In my experience pretty much all the FD lenses are good. The macro 100mm f4 is very very good and incredibly sharp (too sharp for portraits as it shows every pore!)

My other favourite lenses are the 28mm 2.8 and the 135mm 2.8.

Also great fun is to get an FD/M42 converter monut (very cheap on auction sites) and use the vast range of cheap M42 lenses out there that are very cheap.

A good tip is to fire the shutter of the T90 every day to prevent a lock-up of the shutter magnets - it is expensive to repair if it gets locked. Another tip is to keep the batteries fresh in the camera as when they run out it drains the internal battery that is used for keeping the ISO memory and frame number etc

In the last year I made a transition from canon eos system to the older FD system with prime lenses and have not regretted it one minute. I love the build quality and solidity of the FD lenses and find them great pieces of glass.

Hope you have fun with it

 

[gnashings]

Hi Craig,

Like has been said - FD lenses are plentiful on eBay, KEH, and other vendors. The other upside to them is that they are usually a bargain due to the fact that Canon changed mounts when they went autofocus - so their FD lenses do NOT fit their newer film gear, and more importantly, the spend like crazy digital crowd.
You have a good start there - I have shot the 50mm 1.8, and it really is not a bad lens at all. If you want to upgrade, the 1.4 version is still a relative bargain (easily had for under $50), and a truely stellar performer. The 28mm you have is a great lens too, you would have to spend a great deal of money to improve on it. I don't know much about your zoom, but it is a very useful range of focal lengths - you will have to see how you like the quality. I am sure it won't be bad at all, just perhaps not up the standards of a good prime.
What I think you should do next is identify what it is you want to take pictures of that you can't with the lenses you have. Then you will be able to find the right lens. Right now its hard to give advice, as the FD line up ranges from decent, through (mostly) very, very good, all the way to true outstanding in a few cases. Its hard to go really wrong with it, so I think identifying needs is the first step. Then you can have a better idea of what to look for. Keep in mind that there are some really, really good FD mount lenses from Vivitar and Kiron among others - so there are options to Canon stuff if you want them. But given the prices of genuine Canon gear, it will be a case of wanting a particular lens (like one of the Vivitar 90mm macros for example, which are a legend), rather than having to settle for it.
See - there you go, ask a simple question and I will write you an essay
Hope you get some use out of it - best of luck, and be sure to let me know how you like the T90 - maybe I'll have to get one too!

Peter.

 

[meltronic]

Hi Craig. Canon lenses are very good, and I think you have everything you need already. Personally, I very rarely use any lens other than my standard 50mm on my SLR system. I took a course years ago, and never needed a telephoto, but a wide-angle, like your 28mm can come in very handy. If you need a cheap Canon telephoto, I'd recommend the 135mm f3.5, but I think the best shots are made from close range. I read somewhere that 90 percent of photo contest winners are done with a standard lens. Matt

 

[gnashings]

Hi Craig. Canon lenses are very good, and I think you have everything you need already. Personally, I very rarely use any lens other than my standard 50mm on my SLR system. I took a course years ago, and never needed a telephoto, but a wide-angle, like your 28mm can come in very handy. If you need a cheap Canon telephoto, I'd recommend the 135mm f3.5, but I think the best shots are made from close range. I read somewhere that 90 percent of photo contest winners are done with a standard lens. Matt

You know, I just realized that Craig is going to embark on a learning journey into photography - not just branch out into an FD system (I had a brain cramp I think...). Given that, I would have to echo what you said: slap the 50 on the camera, get some fresh batteries, pack everything else away (for now) and shoot, shoot, shoot and then shoot some more. That 50mm f1.8 is not stellar, but it really is not bad at all, especially stopped down a bit. I have shot hundreds of shots with mine, and yeah, I liked my 1.4 better, but not to the point where I can say I was not satisfied with the 1.8. Plus, its a great learning, all around carrying lens - you can buy them for the price of shipping - actually, I have seen body caps go for more than some 50mm 1.8 FD lenses. Its a great user, and after all this time, and all the lenses, guess what's on the front of my camera 90% of the time? You got it - a 50mm lens. Actually, since my 1.4 was stolen, its an old, breech lock 1.8 SC. I can send you some shots taken with that lens if you want to see some results - let me know.

Peter.

 

[CImages]

Hi,
Thanks for the advise, I have had one colour film developed and the pictures were really crisp and bright. I am hoping it was down to the camera and not the sunshine or different processing company! It is a very good camera, I took most of my pictures with the 50mm as I was taking pictures of my neighbours dog, I found the 28-200 was not so crisp when I looked through the viewfinder and the way the lens works is different to what I am used to (the zoom and focus are in the same piece). I am really looking forward to the course, the film camera is alot more rewarding and satisfying than my Canon 10D. Thanks again,
Craig.

 

[CImages]

Hi,
I have read some reviews and I am still looking at the 100mm f/4.0 but I think the 85mm lens would be better. I take a lot of portrait pictures and people seem to find it better than the 100mm for that purpose. What do you think, there is a 85mm 'L' lens on ebay at the moment which is quite cheap, because it needs repairing! Thanks,
Craig. www.craigpayne.webeden.co.uk

 

[cdholden]

Welcome to FD

Craig,
Compared to some, I'm relatively new to the FD line. I've been shooting with it for a few years now. Over that time, I've experimented with just about everything except the 14mm, 200mm macro and 600mm. As Gnashings said, what do you want to do that you can't do with your current kit? I shoot mostly landscape or wildlife. I love my 24/2, though the 24/2.8 is much cheaper, easier to find, and is also a great performer. I often carry the 20/2.8 on outings as well, but it takes some skill to use the distortion in such a way that it isn't a nuisance. I like birdwatching. I'm not the rabid type that is armed with an Audabon book and 20 other AARP members pointing and yelling. I just like colorful birds. I have a 300/2.8 Fluorite model (from the pre-L lens days) and 1.4x teleconverter. I can walk around with this and get some decent shots of birds that would otherwise be unable to get due to them being frightened away. The 1.4x has a lot less quality loss than the 2x, IMO.
35mm tilt/shift? Get a view camera, unless you're hindered by space requirements. Low end monorail view cameras offer larger negatives and more movements for about the same cost, if not less.
Some rave about the 85mm (both 1.8 and 1.2) for portraits, but you'll rarely find people in any of my photos.
As much as I liked the 100mm macro, I'd rather be shooting wildlife. When I had this lens, I wasn't into squinting into my eyepiece while crawling around on the ground, or trying to hold something to either reflect light, or shield wind. I tend to be distracted easily, so it was hard for me to stay in one spot. I've since found large format and ogling the ground glass is ok if I can stand up doing it.
I'm a big fan of the 135/2.5. It's a sleeper. I find that not many folks use this focal length. I got mine for $60 in mint condition and have got my money's worth several times over. This and the 24/2 are probably my most used lenses.
The 400/4.5 is nice, but I've never owned one. The one I borrowed was the newer FD model. Get a nFD instead of SSC if possible. The newer FD model has a different light baffle in the back, allowing use of the 1.4x TC. I've heard the SSC has a light baffle that prohibits the use of the 1.4x, but the 2x will work fine since it doesn't have the protruding lens element.
The 500L lens is great. Heavy, so make sure to use a tripod.
600? Never used it.
The 800/5.6L is an amzing lens for birdwatching, but you'll find out real quick that a 10 pound lens requires a tripod, and a healthy one at that. My little Bogen 3021 wasn't enough so I stepped it up to a 3046. The tripod isn't light, nor is the lens. Add in a camera bag, some food and water. You'll soon find yourself working from the car instead of hiking out into the wilderness.
Search "CanonFD" in Yahoo Groups. There's a lot of info in the archives. Look before asking questions. Since the FD line is no longer being developed, your question has probably already been answered.
*whew* Maybe my comment seems like a pro-FD rant and should be redirected to the soapbox.
Welcome to the wonderful world of FD!
-Chris

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

If you can afford the 85/1.2L that's a really fantastic lens. Really, anything from 85 through 135 can make a nice portrait lens. The Tamron SP 90/2.5 or 2.8 is a fine lens for portraits and macro. The 80-200/4L is a great portrait lens as well, if you don't need a super-fast lens.

I have the 400/4.5 SSC that Chris mentions. What he says about the rear baffle is true, but it's not hard to modify it, if you end up needing to do so for use with the 1.4x extender or the rare FD-EOS converter, both of which have protruding elements.

I have the 600/4.5, and I think it's pretty underrated, because it's not an "L" lens, so it's usually a good bargain. The design is the same as the 800/5.6L minus the LD glass, but arguably, an 800 of the same design as the 600 probably needs better glass to make up for the fact that it's a longer lens.

If you navigate to my website and go to the bird gallery, all the bird photos were made with FD lenses, mostly the 400/4.5 SSC and 600/4.5, and a few with others like the 300/4 L or 200/2.8 IF and various extenders (2x-A, 2x-B, and 1.4x-A), the only exception being the first shot in the gallery, which was a landscape shot on 4x5".