Should you ditch your FDs? - Canon FL 135mm f3.5 vintage lens review and test
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ส.ค. 2024
- Testing an alternative to the more popular Canon FD lenses: the FL series
Get your adapter: amzn.to/49rQuwy (affiliate link)
► You can support the channel directly via Paypal:
paypal.me/marcoaries
or by becoming a member:
/ @marcoaries
● Instagram: / marco.aries
►All the gear I use: amzn.to/3lDWjnx
(These are Amazon affiliate links from which I do earn a small commission with no added cost to you)
I knew this Canon as one of the best vintage 135mm/3.5 lens among its equals in the same price range but I never tried it. Now, I can see it performes better than other 135/3.5 vintage lens I own.
It does perform better than I expected!
This is my first vintage 135mm. And I really like this lens. Although I have seen negative reviews, I think that less successful examples exist. It's not perfect, it lacks a little contrast. This lens is a variation of the CZJ Sonnar. Canon wanted their own Sonnar, and they needed a cheaper alternative to the FL 135mm 2.5. But Canon didn't make a direct copy, they redesigned the back element.
As for other FL lenses, they deserve attention. The 135mm 2.5 is a great telephoto lens, but it weighs quite a bit. 50mm 1.4 there are two versions. The first without specifying the version and the second - "II". The second version seems better to me. But the first version, as they would say now, has an "artistic character".
Well, there is some sample variation and personal taste plays a significant role, so maybe that's the case with those negative reviews...
I will try more FLs if I get the chance, they're somewhat intriguing.
I love this lens.
LOL - I need a good 135, and have been thinking about it. After seeing this video, I popped onto e-bay. I wasn't planning on buying one - I was going to wait for your comparison with the FD, but, I couldn't pass it up - $24 and free shipping (from fairly close to me, too). From what you show, whether or not it's the best choice, it's definitely going to be good enough. It was the lack of flare and good sharpness wide open - that's precisely what I need. Thank you - again (this isn't the first time you've triggered me to get something).
I mean, it's the beauty of vintage lenses: buy for cheap, try and if you don't like it sell it again 😉
You can ditch FDeez
I had a FL 50 1.4 for a while. Bought it from a flea market in Seoul with heavy scratching on the front element. I used it adapted on m43; contrast and sharpness weren't going to be great at 1.4 but were even worse due to the scratches, so it became a sort of soft-focus soft-background portrait lens. I never got much out of it stopped down as the purple-green fringing was still pretty bad at 2.8 and an FD 50 1.8 was cheaper, lighter, and easier to handle.
The FD 50 1.8 is indeed a very reliable lens!
As much as I hate the breach lock, older FL and FD lenses can be fun to use, especially the faster ones. TY for the vid!
The FD mount is already annoying, the FL breech lock is even worse! 😂
The older ones tend to flare more and lose contrast towards the sun. But they certainly look ok otherwise. I would be interested in shots towards the sun.
I was surprise by how well it does at controlling flares and ghosting, I haven't found myself shading it or warring about loos of contrast.
Nice video and review. I already sold off most of my Canon FD lenses and the ones I have left, I just leave on Facebook for top dollar. I prefer my Konica and Nikkors more.
Understandable, FDs lack in character, especially compared to Konicas
@@MarcoAries I think I have about 7 or 8 FD lenses left. Favorites being my 50mm Chrome noses (I have the 1.8, 1.4 and 1.2) and the nFD 100-300mmf5.6L which is amazingly good.
I've heard only good things about the 100-300 L
You will have to pry my 55 mm f 1.2 FD out of my cold dead hands before I give it up😊
How is it wide open?