• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Looking for a Canon FD Wide or Super Wide Angle Lens

Plato's Philosophy.

A
Plato's Philosophy.

  • 2
  • 1
  • 61
Feet of clay

D
Feet of clay

  • 2
  • 6
  • 69

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
201,866
Messages
2,831,420
Members
100,992
Latest member
bob531
Recent bookmarks
0

darinwc

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
3,164
Location
Sacramento,
Format
Multi Format
It the 15mm f2.8 a full frame fisheye?

I have a 16mm Zykkor that I really like (the perspective) but it is on a M42->FD adapter and I dont think the registration is quite right. (very poor results)
 

Jeff Kubach

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond VA.
Format
Multi Format
Like hpulley said the FD 15/2.8 is a full frame fisheye. I usually have good results with it.

Jeff
 

dynachrome

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
1,844
Format
35mm
Canon Wide or Super Wide

The 28/2.8 Canon FD SC is an excellent lens. The 28/2.8 New FD whoch replaced it does not seem as good. The 28/2 FD SSC is an excellent lens. I have never compared it to the 28/2 New FD. My only Canon 24 is a chrome front FD SSC. Once its rear element separation was repaired it worked very well. Most people who have used the 24/2 and 24/1.4 lenses seem to think the f/2 model is better. The 35/2 FD SSC (1st version) and 35/2 New FD are both excellent. The SSC lens may need the UV treatment to clear the color. It is also beter made. There was a 35/2 FD SSC with a convex front element (2nd version) which has no color problem but which does not have the reputation of the earlier FD SSC. I saw one of these last Sunday. To go wider than 24 with Canon mount I have the 19/3.8 Vivitar, 20/3.8 Vivitar (M42 with an adapter) and 21/3.8 Vivitar T4. The 19 needs to be closed down a little. The 20 and 21 are both good performers. I have a 17/3.5 Vivitar for Konica and a 17/3.5 Tokina RMC for Minolta. Both are good.
 

benjiboy

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
12,007
Location
U.K.
Format
35mm
The 28/2.8 Canon FD SC is an excellent lens. The 28/2.8 New FD whoch replaced it does not seem as good. The 28/2 FD SSC is an excellent lens. I have never compared it to the 28/2 New FD. My only Canon 24 is a chrome front FD SSC. Once its rear element separation was repaired it worked very well. Most people who have used the 24/2 and 24/1.4 lenses seem to think the f/2 model is better. The 35/2 FD SSC (1st version) and 35/2 New FD are both excellent. The SSC lens may need the UV treatment to clear the color. It is also beter made. There was a 35/2 FD SSC with a convex front element (2nd version) which has no color problem but which does not have the reputation of the earlier FD SSC. I saw one of these last Sunday. To go wider than 24 with Canon mount I have the 19/3.8 Vivitar, 20/3.8 Vivitar (M42 with an adapter) and 21/3.8 Vivitar T4. The 19 needs to be closed down a little. The 20 and 21 are both good performers. I have a 17/3.5 Vivitar for Konica and a 17/3.5 Tokina RMC for Minolta. Both are good.

I bought a Vivitar 19mm f3.5 FD fitting lens new as a stop gap until I could find a Canon 20mm f2.8 in good condition, and although the Vivitar isn't terrible the Canon one is much better.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom