FD vs EF for low-light manual focus

DavidP #28649 · Jul 20, 2002

I hope nobody minds the cross-post of this from the Canon SLR forum, but given the nature of the question, I think that some pros (even those who don't shoot Canon) can give me some valuable insights here.

As you may or may not know, I've been having problems with front-focusing in ultra-low light situations (probably with my EOS-3 and D30 and 1D). Unfortunately, even in manual mode, I can't really tell that something's out-of-focus (ever so slightly) when looking through the viewfinder.

One thing that came to mind is this. Maybe part of the problem is the small amount of "throw" needed on today's AF lenses (the Canon EF mount) compared to the throw needed on yesterday's MF lenses (the Canon FD mount). I've never used an FD mount lens. But, I've used an old Minolta SRT-101 with a 50/1.2 lens, and I seem to recall it having to be turned more to change focus than my current EF lenses.

Basically, I'm wondering if part of the problem in trying to use MF on these EF lenses is that just a very small nudge changes focusing distances too much. These lenses were designed for the USM motors to turn them, not for human hands. I think there's just not enough precision available for a human hand to achieve "perfect focus" on these lenses.

So, I'm wondering if I were to replace/supplement my fast primes with FD versions if I'd have better luck in these low-light situations.

Right now I have the 50/1.4, 85/1.2, and 135/2. I don't know what's available in the FD line (where can I find out?) out there in the used market. What I'd probably want is a 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, and 135mm. All at least f/2, preferably closer to f/1.4

Also, I know there's an FD to EF adapter, but where can one find these?

Another thing, will these FD lenses work with my auto-exposure? Or will I have to go completely manual on that, too? Am I correct in assuming that these lenses will have aperture rings on them? Or do they have electronically controlled apertures?

One last thing, for those who've used the FD and EF lenses before. Am I crazy, or do you think I might have better luck achieving critical manual focus with the old FD lenses? And what about the quality of these pre-83 lenses? I'm assuming they're pretty good.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise

Jose Luis Gonzalez · Jul 21, 2002

DavidP said:
I hope nobody minds the cross-post of this from the Canon SLR
forum, but given the nature of the question, I think that some pros
(even those who don't shoot Canon) can give me some valuable
insights here.

As you may or may not know, I've been having problems with
front-focusing in ultra-low light situations (probably with my
EOS-3 and D30 and 1D). Unfortunately, even in manual mode, I can't
really tell that something's out-of-focus (ever so slightly) when
looking through the viewfinder.

One thing that came to mind is this. Maybe part of the problem is
the small amount of "throw" needed on today's AF lenses (the Canon
EF mount) compared to the throw needed on yesterday's MF lenses
(the Canon FD mount). I've never used an FD mount lens. But, I've
used an old Minolta SRT-101 with a 50/1.2 lens, and I seem to
recall it having to be turned more to change focus than my current
EF lenses.

Basically, I'm wondering if part of the problem in trying to use MF
on these EF lenses is that just a very small nudge changes focusing
distances too much. These lenses were designed for the USM motors
to turn them, not for human hands. I think there's just not
enough precision available for a human hand to achieve "perfect
focus" on these lenses.

So, I'm wondering if I were to replace/supplement my fast primes
with FD versions if I'd have better luck in these low-light
situations.

Right now I have the 50/1.4, 85/1.2, and 135/2. I don't know
what's available in the FD line (where can I find out?) out there
in the used market. What I'd probably want is a 35mm, 50mm, 85mm,
and 135mm. All at least f/2, preferably closer to f/1.4

Also, I know there's an FD to EF adapter, but where can one find
these?

Another thing, will these FD lenses work with my auto-exposure? Or
will I have to go completely manual on that, too? Am I correct in
assuming that these lenses will have aperture rings on them? Or do
they have electronically controlled apertures?

One last thing, for those who've used the FD and EF lenses before.
Am I crazy, or do you think I might have better luck achieving
critical manual focus with the old FD lenses? And what about the
quality of these pre-83 lenses? I'm assuming they're pretty good.

--

David forget that FD idea, the needed adapter has a glass element in it that introduces flare and soften considerably the resolution. the only way is to go M 42 thread and Olympus OM lenses, with them you can use manual and Av exposure modes. I tried the FD adapter because I have the full line of FD optics ( it has been my main 35 system since the 70´s ) but no good results can be obtained.

The manual focus is OK if you have a sharp eysigth and the lenses are f2 or faster, as you know the Canon DSLR ( d30 and D 60 at least ) focusing screens are so so to use manual focus.

I´m getting great results with OM and M42 lenses, for the type of photography I do I dont need AF, so they fit the bill perfectly

Regards
Jose

Jay Metz · Jul 21, 2002

I don't consider the old lenses as good as the new. I would take my new lenses any day. I no longer have my FD lenses, I sold them when I commited myself to eos but I did achieve a dramatic improvement in the number of sharp focused photos I get now as opposed to before. It's not just the autofocus system, the lenses seem better too. I mostly shoot moving subjects (sports) and was very good at follow focusing but the autofocus system is better than I was. One thing I do notice when I try to manually focus my eos lenses is that the focusing screen is not nearly as good as my old cameras had and that may be part of the problem. When I manually focus I kind of rely on the infocus indicator to verify sharp focus since there is no split image or microprism.

I would not even consider using an adaptor.

DavidP said:
I hope nobody minds the cross-post of this from the Canon SLR
forum, but given the nature of the question, I think that some pros
(even those who don't shoot Canon) can give me some valuable
insights here.

As you may or may not know, I've been having problems with
front-focusing in ultra-low light situations (probably with my
EOS-3 and D30 and 1D). Unfortunately, even in manual mode, I can't
really tell that something's out-of-focus (ever so slightly) when
looking through the viewfinder.

One thing that came to mind is this. Maybe part of the problem is
the small amount of "throw" needed on today's AF lenses (the Canon
EF mount) compared to the throw needed on yesterday's MF lenses
(the Canon FD mount). I've never used an FD mount lens. But, I've
used an old Minolta SRT-101 with a 50/1.2 lens, and I seem to
recall it having to be turned more to change focus than my current
EF lenses.

Basically, I'm wondering if part of the problem in trying to use MF
on these EF lenses is that just a very small nudge changes focusing
distances too much. These lenses were designed for the USM motors
to turn them, not for human hands. I think there's just not
enough precision available for a human hand to achieve "perfect
focus" on these lenses.

So, I'm wondering if I were to replace/supplement my fast primes
with FD versions if I'd have better luck in these low-light
situations.

Right now I have the 50/1.4, 85/1.2, and 135/2. I don't know
what's available in the FD line (where can I find out?) out there
in the used market. What I'd probably want is a 35mm, 50mm, 85mm,
and 135mm. All at least f/2, preferably closer to f/1.4

Also, I know there's an FD to EF adapter, but where can one find
these?

Another thing, will these FD lenses work with my auto-exposure? Or
will I have to go completely manual on that, too? Am I correct in
assuming that these lenses will have aperture rings on them? Or do
they have electronically controlled apertures?

One last thing, for those who've used the FD and EF lenses before.
Am I crazy, or do you think I might have better luck achieving
critical manual focus with the old FD lenses? And what about the
quality of these pre-83 lenses? I'm assuming they're pretty good.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise

JohnLund · Jul 23, 2002

David,

I agree with the previous poster. Forget about trying to convert FD lenses to your purposes. The glass designs of the new EF lenses are better. The only thing better about the old MF system is the split image focussing screens of the F1 cameras for instance. They are the only thing that saves me from old eyes in dark situations....that and fast glass. In the FD lenses, the range you mention is almost identical except at 50mm there is also a f1.2 and even a f1.0, I believe.

Good luck,
JL

DavidP said:
I hope nobody minds the cross-post of this from the Canon SLR
forum, but given the nature of the question, I think that some pros
(even those who don't shoot Canon) can give me some valuable
insights here.

As you may or may not know, I've been having problems with
front-focusing in ultra-low light situations (probably with my
EOS-3 and D30 and 1D). Unfortunately, even in manual mode, I can't
really tell that something's out-of-focus (ever so slightly) when
looking through the viewfinder.

One thing that came to mind is this. Maybe part of the problem is
the small amount of "throw" needed on today's AF lenses (the Canon
EF mount) compared to the throw needed on yesterday's MF lenses
(the Canon FD mount). I've never used an FD mount lens. But, I've
used an old Minolta SRT-101 with a 50/1.2 lens, and I seem to
recall it having to be turned more to change focus than my current
EF lenses.

Basically, I'm wondering if part of the problem in trying to use MF
on these EF lenses is that just a very small nudge changes focusing
distances too much. These lenses were designed for the USM motors
to turn them, not for human hands. I think there's just not
enough precision available for a human hand to achieve "perfect
focus" on these lenses.

So, I'm wondering if I were to replace/supplement my fast primes
with FD versions if I'd have better luck in these low-light
situations.

Right now I have the 50/1.4, 85/1.2, and 135/2. I don't know
what's available in the FD line (where can I find out?) out there
in the used market. What I'd probably want is a 35mm, 50mm, 85mm,
and 135mm. All at least f/2, preferably closer to f/1.4

Also, I know there's an FD to EF adapter, but where can one find
these?

Another thing, will these FD lenses work with my auto-exposure? Or
will I have to go completely manual on that, too? Am I correct in
assuming that these lenses will have aperture rings on them? Or do
they have electronically controlled apertures?

One last thing, for those who've used the FD and EF lenses before.
Am I crazy, or do you think I might have better luck achieving
critical manual focus with the old FD lenses? And what about the
quality of these pre-83 lenses? I'm assuming they're pretty good.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise

--
...f8 and be there!

DavidP #28649 · Jul 23, 2002

Thanks to all for the info.

BTW, I just sent off all my lenses and the 1D (per Canon's request) to factory service in Irvine. Apparently they will adjust the focus of the lenses to the 1D body. I had previously only sent in the 1D body for front-focusing adjustment. This made it better, but not perfect.

It's kinda lonely with the only Canon camera products in the house being my lens hoods, remote timer/release, focusing screens, and lens bags.

John Lund said:
I agree with the previous poster. Forget about trying to convert FD
lenses to your purposes. The glass designs of the new EF lenses are
better. The only thing better about the old MF system is the split
image focussing screens of the F1 cameras for instance. They are
the only thing that saves me from old eyes in dark
situations....that and fast glass. In the FD lenses, the range you
mention is almost identical except at 50mm there is also a f1.2 and
even a f1.0, I believe.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise

Search

FD vs EF for low-light manual focus

DavidP #28649

Forum Pro

Jose Luis Gonzalez

Member

Jay Metz

Well-known member

JohnLund

Well-known member

DavidP #28649

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts