OLD Canon Fd 200mm f/4 2.5m focusing distance - do you have it? How do you like it?

[Andrey]

This one is not SC and not SSC, the earlier version of them all.

I got one for 40 bucks and I'm curious to see if anybody else has one.

How do you like it? Any images?

 

[Bobby Ironsights]

I have one.
Thank you, I didn't know what the minimum focussing distance was.

I don't have any images particularly worth uploading, but that's certainly not because of the lens. It's quite light, and as good or better image quality than my modern canon 80-200 mm zoom. (not that I've shot any test charts with it).

It's really nice and solid, and has a good feel. Great focussing ring. I bought it to use outdoors, and that's why I don't have many pics with it. Indoors, 200 mm is a bit much, I use 35mm for intimacy, and the FL 135mm f2.5 for portraits, (also cheap, I TOTALLY recommend it)

I'm not sure though, what you could be concerned about. It's a CANON, it's a PRIME lens and if even when you stop down to F8, totally doable shutterspeed outdoors with ISO100 or ISO 50 film.

You'll get sharp as hell pictures with that combo, unless you are going for the cliche shot of a hummingbird head on, from a moving vehicle.

You might need ISO 400 for that one.

 

[Andrey]

I have one.
Thank you, I didn't know what the minimum focussing distance was.

I don't have any images particularly worth uploading, but that's certainly not because of the lens. It's quite light, and as good or better image quality than my modern canon 80-200 mm zoom. (not that I've shot any test charts with it).

It's really nice and solid, and has a good feel. Great focussing ring. I bought it to use outdoors, and that's why I don't have many pics with it. Indoors, 200 mm is a bit much, I use 35mm for intimacy, and the FL 135mm f2.5 for portraits, (also cheap, I TOTALLY recommend it)

I've got a 135 f/2.5 recently as well. I have yet to run any film through it.

I'm not sure though, what you could be concerned about. It's a CANON, it's a PRIME lens and if even when you stop down to F8, totally doable shutterspeed outdoors with ISO100 or ISO 50 film.

I've had quite a bit of canon primes which were dogs and they were made in the last 15 years. So when picking up something canon from the 70s, single coated and cheap even back then... I have a couple of areas to be concerned about.

You'll get sharp as hell pictures with that combo, unless you are going for the cliche shot of a hummingbird head on, from a moving vehicle.

You might need ISO 400 for that one.

Hehe

That's cool.

 

[Bobby Ironsights]

I don't know what to say about "dog" Canon primes. I own more vivitar primes for Canon than Canon brand primes, but haven't had a problem with one so far. Almost all are FD or FL.

Perhaps it's just that I have reasonable and modest expectations from 35 mm, and when going for image quality I use 6x6 or 4x5. Maybe it's because I've never been exposed to "L" glass.

 

[benjiboy]

This one is not SC and not SSC, the earlier version of them all.

I got one for 40 bucks and I'm curious to see if anybody else has one.

How do you like it? Any images?

I think what you have perhaps isn't a FD lens but the earlier FL lens whose closest focusing distance is 2.5 metres and has 5 elements in four groups, none of the FD 200mm lenses were f4.5 some of them were f4, I have one of the later versions of the FD 200mm f4 for about twenty years, I'm very happy with the performance. I hope you enjoy using it Audrey as much as I have mine.

 

[Andrey]

I think what you have perhaps isn't a FD lens but the earlier FL lens whose closest focusing distance is 2.5 metres and has 5 elements in four groups, none of the FD 200mm lenses were f4.5 some of them were f4, I have one of the later versions of the FD 200mm f4 for about twenty years, I'm very happy with the performance. I hope you enjoy using it Audrey as much as I have mine.

It's an F/4 lens, not the f/4.5

I think you misread, the minimum focusing distance is 2.5 meters, which makes you step away sometimes.

 

[benjiboy]

Oops

It's an F/4 lens, not the f/4.5

I think you misread, the minimum focusing distance is 2.5 meters, which makes you step away sometimes.

Sorry Audrey, your right I have misread it.

 

[dynachrome]

Canon made three different 200/4 FD breech lock lenses. The first was a chrome front model which I have only seen pictures of. The second had a black front, was marked FD and focused to 2.5 meters. The third had a black front, was marked FD SSC and also focused to 2.5 meters. I have the second and third ones. They are both good but the SSC model has much better coating. Where close focusing is concerned, these lenses don't have it. The later 200/4 New FD has internal focusing and will get you closer. My closest focusing 200 is the Vivitar 200/3 Series 1. It goes to 4 feet. I have one in Konica AR mount and one in M42mount. I have used the M42 lens on an F-1 with the proper adapter. In lower light I will use my 200/2.8 New FD (1st version) but I do not consider it any sharper than the 200/4 FD SSC.

 

[benjiboy]

Do you know Dynachrome, I feel realy stupid I've had my 200 new typeFD about 20 years, and never noticed until looking at it just now that it has IF, and doesn't alter dimensionally when focused . "I will use my 200/2.8 New FD (1st version) but I do not consider it any sharper than the 200/4 FD SSC."
In my experience the slower versions of the majority of lenses aperture for aperture perform better than the faster , because of the problems of stretching the design to make it faster, although I know there are exeptions I find this to be true in general.