This is SO interesting! I have one of these and just tested it similarly. This is on a A6300 (APS-C) Bokeh is creamy and not busy in pretty much any apperture. It's sharp all over (APS-C) from F/1.8 to F/11, and from F/2.0 to F/11 it's as sharp as my Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8 (Sony).
Thanks. Glad you like it. I am actually on my way to the tenth’s episode of the 50 lens tests. :D With APS-C you cut out the filet parts of the lens. But also the higher resolution shows more weaknesses. The older lenses are really very good stopped down a little bit. The Zeiss 55 1.8 is also on my list and will come at some point in future. :D
@@manugeeei’ll definitely be using it without a finder and just with the regular finder it comes with until i can afford the waist finder attachment, it’s my first lens and camera ever so i’m excited to start learning on it.
Maybe a problem, that I have mostly not too many copies and cannot judge production variations and the performance over time. But in this case. I had a couple of the Canon nfd 50mm lenses but did not experience that much difference. Wide open okay, stopped down a little better. The bokeh is sometimes in midrange a little distracting, for my oppinion. But as you said. A really excellent lens, even today.
@@manugeee agreed. I had an s.s.c. version before this one. It was not as good wide open as my current one. I also have a 1 owner, perfect minolta md 50 1.4 it also is not near as sharp wide open. Ive had a few different brands but the canon is the best all around
Which viewpoint do you think it f1.4 open better, contrast, sharpness, Bokeh, distortion ? I have previous version FD 50mm f1.4 S.S.C., sure wide open image quality is low, but f2~2.8~4~, come little by little better.
I have good experiences with the K&F concept adapters. But check your infinity at first. Because I have one (the pro version) where infinity does not reach infinity. I dont know where you are from. So I think links to the german Amazon page would not be helpfull. ;-)
During the comparison with the other 50mm lenses, i think the canon is really a very descent lens. Don´t know the Planar 50mm 1.7, but im am in the last steps of finishing the 70s Planar AEJ 50mm 1.4 video and also had a little comparison the the CAnon inside and in therms of wide open performance the Canon is definitely stronger. :)
This is SO interesting! I have one of these and just tested it similarly. This is on a A6300 (APS-C) Bokeh is creamy and not busy in pretty much any apperture. It's sharp all over (APS-C) from F/1.8 to F/11, and from F/2.0 to F/11 it's as sharp as my Zeiss Sonnar 55mm 1.8 (Sony).
Thanks. Glad you like it. I am actually on my way to the tenth’s episode of the 50 lens tests. :D
With APS-C you cut out the filet parts of the lens. But also the higher resolution shows more weaknesses. The older lenses are really very good stopped down a little bit.
The Zeiss 55 1.8 is also on my list and will come at some point in future. :D
just bought this lens to pair with my old f-1, super excited.
It’s a great combo. The F1 ist really a high quality camera and can also be used with waist level viewfinder (or no viewfinder at all). 😃👍
@@manugeeei’ll definitely be using it without a finder and just with the regular finder it comes with until i can afford the waist finder attachment, it’s my first lens and camera ever so i’m excited to start learning on it.
Nice review, Manu! Thank you for this!
Thanks for the compliment, Hugo. :-)
I definitely need a Kentucky Fried Chicken lens adapter!
🤣😁👍
I noticed too late and liked it too much to correct (again) ;-)
Lately I got FD 50mm f1.4 S.S.C., also nice lens. I use it with Leica M240. Other, Summicron-R 50mm f2 v1, I like too.
that is pretty interesting combo with the SLR lens on a Rangefinder camera. What adapter do you use? Does it work with the Rangefinder?
I use Rayqual adaptor "FD-LM", it works with no problem, infinity is Okay.
And I prefer small digital camera full size format body.
@@kn_sqa2912use evf? Or simply just zone focusing?
@@ElmarJournal I use EVF in SLR lens, because like precise focusing.
I have a nice copy of this lens from the original owner. Mine is much better at f1.4 . These are excellent lenses
Maybe a problem, that I have mostly not too many copies and cannot judge production variations and the performance over time. But in this case. I had a couple of the Canon nfd 50mm lenses but did not experience that much difference. Wide open okay, stopped down a little better. The bokeh is sometimes in midrange a little distracting, for my oppinion. But as you said. A really excellent lens, even today.
@@manugeee agreed. I had an s.s.c. version before this one. It was not as good wide open as my current one. I also have a 1 owner, perfect minolta md 50 1.4 it also is not near as sharp wide open. Ive had a few different brands but the canon is the best all around
Which viewpoint do you think it f1.4 open better, contrast, sharpness, Bokeh, distortion ?
I have previous version FD 50mm f1.4 S.S.C., sure wide open image quality is low, but f2~2.8~4~, come little by little better.
Can you put links on the adapters please?
I have good experiences with the K&F concept adapters. But check your infinity at first. Because I have one (the pro version) where infinity does not reach infinity.
I dont know where you are from. So I think links to the german Amazon page would not be helpfull. ;-)
Of 1980´s analog 50mm Lenses, I think the Canon FDn 50mm 1.4 was runner up towards the Contax Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.7 T* which was the best.
During the comparison with the other 50mm lenses, i think the canon is really a very descent lens. Don´t know the Planar 50mm 1.7, but im am in the last steps of finishing the 70s Planar AEJ 50mm 1.4 video and also had a little comparison the the CAnon inside and in therms of wide open performance the Canon is definitely stronger. :)