Old lenses, do they fit on digital body ?

neuron · December 9, 2008

Hi,

I can get "Canon FD 50/1,4 S.S.C." lens nearly for nothing. Is there any chance it will work on Canon D40 ? I don't mind manual aperture and focus, it would be just lens to have fun with in darker corners. So the question is rather if the bajonet has the same size and if the camera wont refuse to shoot at all.

Thank you

--
neuron

Scott_Quier · December 9, 2008

neuron wrote:

Hi,

I can get "Canon FD 50/1,4 S.S.C." lens nearly for nothing. Is there any chance it will work on Canon D40 ? I don't mind manual aperture and focus, it would be just lens to have fun with in darker corners. So the question is rather if the bajonet has the same size and if the camera wont refuse to shoot at all.

Thank you

--
neuron

The FD mount lenses were manual focus (only) and are completely different from the current incarnation of a Canon mount (the EOS or EF mount). You can get an FD lens to physically mount on an EOS camera (the Canon Rebel series, the 20D/30D/40D/50D, and 1 series cameras are all EOS cameras) with an appropriate adapter. If you have an adapter with appropriate circuits installed, you can still use the AF functions of your camera - to tell you when you have a good focus.

The adapters come in two classes (at least); one with one or more glass elements and those without. The ones without the glass element will not allow the lens to properly focus at infinity. The ones with the glass element will, but the quality of that glass varies and, in all cases, will degrade the potential image.

On the other hand, that lens (if it's the one I remember) is a sweet lens. With a reverse-mount ring, you could mount it backwards on another lens and have yourself a super-sweet macro set up.

ziggy53 · December 9, 2008

Scott pretty well summed it up. I have one of the optical FD/EOS adapters, without focus confirmation, and it is not good quality (or perhaps it is designed for lenger focal length lenses which I don't have). I keep it just as a curiosity.

IMO you are much better off using older Pentax screwmount lenses with a simple mechanical adapter with a focus confirmation chip. I have 2 of those adapters and I like that method quite a bit. You will still have to manually focus and the aperture is set after you focus. If you need or want automation you are not going to like the process.

Bob Atkins has a great write up about old manual focus lenses on the EOS camera bodies:

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/eosfaq/manual_focus_EOS.html

Jane B. · December 9, 2008

ziggy53 wrote:

(snip)
IMO you are much better off using older Pentax screwmount lenses with a simple mechanical adapter with a focus confirmation chip. I have 2 of those adapters and I like that method quite a bit. You will still have to manually focus and the aperture is set after you focus. If you need or want automation you are not going to like the process.
(snip)

Ziggy
I have used older M42 lenses (not Pentax brand) adapted to EOS ever since I got a EOS 620 film camera in the 1980's and found them fun and a way to have more lens choice as I started to change to Canon from a camera that took that other mount,

I have continued to enjoy this on a D60. Particularly a 200mm Vivitar which I even picked up an inexpensive 2X converter for that seems to work well.

The thing is that being that old my M42 to EOS adapter is, of course, the kind without the confirmation chip. Since you have ones with the confirmation chip, would you mind posting which brands you have had good luck with working well? If not, would you be will to look at my profile and email? I think this would be a great help in speeding up the focusing as speed of doing so has always been my problem with manual focus (in fact the reason I got my first auto-focus Canon film camera).
Thanks
Jane

ziggy53 · December 9, 2008

Jane B. wrote:

... would you mind posting which brands you have had good luck with working well? If not, would you be will to look at my profile and email? I think this would be a great help in speeding up the focusing as speed of doing so has always been my problem with manual focus (in fact the reason I got my first auto-focus Canon film camera).
Thanks
Jane

Jane,

I adapted my first adapter by super-gluing a chip onto a mechanical adapter (post #12):

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=35188

The second adapter had the chip already applied but it also has a "flange" which is supposed to depress the aperture pin on the "A" series auto-aperture lenses. The flange does not work well with all lenses, so I wind up using the first adapter more often.

The second adapter, with the focus confirmation chip already applied, is very similar to this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/M42-CanonEOS-adapter-with-electronic-focus-confirmation_W0QQitemZ260314835180QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLens_Accessories?_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116

The primary advantage to the second adapter is the addition of a pin which allows it to work with the 1D/1Ds series camera bodies. The additional pin is required on those bodies in order to sense that a lens has been attached.

Neither adapter works perfectly and I often have to "wiggle-twist" the lens in order to make contact with the chip to allow AF confirmation.

Jane B. · December 9, 2008

ziggy53 wrote:

Jane,

I adapted my first adapter by super-gluing a chip onto a mechanical adapter (post #12):

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=35188

The second adapter had the chip already applied but it also has a "flange" which is supposed to depress the aperture pin on the "A" series auto-aperture lenses. The flange does not work well with all lenses, so I wind up using the first adapter more often.

The second adapter, with the focus confirmation chip already applied, is very similar to this:

http://cgi.ebay.com/M42-CanonEOS-adapter-with-electronic-focus-confirmation_W0QQitemZ260314835180QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLens_Accessories?_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116

The primary advantage to the second adapter is the addition of a pin which allows it to work with the 1D/1Ds series camera bodies. The additional pin is required on those bodies in order to sense that a lens has been attached.

Neither adapter works perfectly and I often have to "wiggle-twist" the lens in order to make contact with the chip to allow AF confirmation.

Is it trully "in focus" when it says it is? My interest comes , as I said above, from being slow at manual focus not from having trouble with it not being in focus when I think it is. So, moving subjects is what led to my purchase of my first auto focus camera way back when.
Jane

ziggy53 · December 9, 2008

Jane B. wrote:

Is it trully "in focus" when it says it is? My interest comes , as I said above, from being slow at manual focus not from having trouble with it not being in focus when I think it is. So, moving subjects is what led to my purchase of my first auto focus camera way back when.
Jane

Moving subjects are still very much the domain of cameras with advanced AF sensors and fast AF processors and fast lenses with the best AF motor technology. You would probably be unhappy with the performance of "any" manual focus lens, or manual focus mode, during a photo session with an active subject.

I did try the AF confirmation chip with a 500mm lens shooting a jet ski:

http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=329591&postcount=21

neuron · December 13, 2008

Hi all,

I'm sorry for the late response.

Scott, you opened my eyes, now I know what to look for. I would not mind if I loose the ability to focus to infinity. However the reverse mount to get "macro capabilities" is insane. I found some more literature to study, and a shop where they can build brass or copper mounts. Once I'll have nothing to do, I'm going to try macro photography

Ziggy, that's perfect link you gave us. I'll go spy around my fathers camera box, since he has nice little set of lenses at home.

After talking to my local photo guru, he gave me another idea. He told me to buy non-digital camera, where the objective was designed to work.

Have a nice day guys !

Thank you

--
neuron

Old lenses, do they fit on digital body ?

Comments