EOS camera to FD lens converter

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Canon FD : One Thread

I have noticed that bhphoto sells converters for EOS cameras to use the FD converter. They are made by companies I have not heard of. At least one has a picture that shows a lens in the center of the adapter.

Now the question: Does anyone know if these adapters work well?

-- Howard Z (greenspun@howardz.com), March 13, 2001

Answers

ooops.

I have noticed that bhphoto sells converts for EOS cameras to use the FD lenses. They are made by companies I have not heard of. At least one appears to have a lens in the center of the adapter.

Does anyone know if these adapters work well?

-- Howard Z (greenspun@howardz.com), March 13, 2001.


Well, if you add optics, you have the problems of image degradation associated with teleconverters, and if you don't, then you can't focus at infinity, and these things aren't cheap in general, so you're probably better off using an FD-compatible body with your FD lenses, which is probably more useful anyway.

-- David Goldfarb (dgoldfarb@barnard.edu), March 14, 2001.

And the FD-compatible body may be less expensive than the EOS-FD converter. And also, in case of a full FD system, you'll have the automatism between body and lens.

I had the same problem, an EOS body, and I wanted to buy some good lenses (and not so expensive as the EOS lenses). I now use a full FD system...

Think that with the converter without lens, you won't be able to focus at infinity. That's really bad for the large and extra-large angle lenses.

NicolasLL

-- NicolasLL (Nicolas.Leste@obspm.fr), March 15, 2001.


I have a full FD system. But, sometimes I think about buying an EOS camera. Being able to use some of the FD lenses will delay the cash outlay for buying EOS lenses. Like maybe I'd buy an Elan 7e and one EOS zoom, like the 28-70, and then use my old FD lenses for telephoto needs (135, 200, and 300).

I was wondering if there is any quality difference between the various brands of converters, and if anyone has used one of these converters and can comment on how much sharpness is lost.

-- Howard Z (greenspun@howardz.com), March 15, 2001.


I belive there are two different converters, one without lens for macro work, and one with lens for normal operation, with extender function build in.

-- Řyvind Dahle (odahle@start.no), March 15, 2001.


I have used a similar beast but for the minolta AF/MF lines. That one contains a small optic that acts as a 1.2X teleconverter (needed for the extra mounting distance I think). As with many teleconverters, you get some degradation from the edges inward. This means wide open you will have softer (maybe much softer) images but as you close your aperture down you should approach the sharpness of the original lens. The loss in light is nominally half a stop so this should not be a big deal. You also get a 1.2x (or whatever the specific value is for the canon one) increase in focal length, which is great for a telephoto but not so useful with a wide angle. (P.S. All the above has been verified with measurements...) Hope that helps.

-- Demetri (dprountzos@hotmail.com), July 31, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ