Canon FD 85-300 f4.5 Zoom questiongreenspun.com : LUSENET : Canon FD : One Thread
I'm interested in a longer zoom lens and have been looking at the 85-300 f4.5 zoom. My question (duh) is whether this lens has separate focus and zoom rings. I saw one in a local used camera shop a couple of years ago, but thought it was an f5.6 lens, but I can find no record of a 85-300 f5.6 - only the f4.5 so I guess I didn't look that closely at it.
Any comments on the f4.5? Sharpness good? Anyone know the filter size (I guess that it's pretty big)? Any views on the lens would be appreciated. Thanks.
-- Bruce Pollock (email@example.com), June 16, 2001
I do not have first-hand experience with the 85-300/4.5. However, one of the following sites might have specs/reviews on it:
Gary Reese's Site: http://members.aol.com/canonfdlenstests/default.htm
http://www.photozone.de/ -- interface not so intuitive first time around, but there's FD info there
-- Joshua Martin (firstname.lastname@example.org), June 16, 2001.
I have this very lens in the breechlock SSC version. It does have 2 rings for focussing. It is a solid and sharp lens especially between 100 and 200 mm. I shot a dragonfly handheld wide open at 300mm and you can see the hairs on it's legs. I also did my standard lens test of imaging a newspaper page at various focal lengths and settings and it did very well. The only problem with this lens is that it's contrast is only about average. Considering it's from the mid 70's it does very, very well.
It uses series IX filters which are about 80 mm in diameter. I machined up an adapter ring to use Cokin P type filters which also holds 77 mm filters in place. I also modified the back of the lens to accept a 1.4xA TC. I believe the new FD version has the circular cutout.
A good lens for $500-550 in reasonable shape.
-- Duane K (email@example.com), June 16, 2001.
I used this lens for filming for a couple of days. It doesnŽt convince optically (too soft) and is very heavy - a tripod is essential. Absolutely no reason to buy it. The 50-300L is excellent and one of my favourite lenses, but much rarer on the market (though you will get one with a bit of patience) and more expensive. IŽd definitely go for the 80-200/4L.
-- Tobias Mennle (firstname.lastname@example.org), November 12, 2001.