Hi I was wondering what the verdict was on using old Canon FD lenses on the FS100? The lenses are really cheap in comparison and you can easily accumulate a set of primes for a very low price. Can you achieve really good quality sharp footage using them? Are there any really amazing Canon lenses to look out for? Is there a quality loss due to using an adapter withe these lenses? Also I have heard that you can get strange colour problems when using these lenses as the camera doesn't know how to handle the information? Any advice would be great. Thanks Robert
Great option for those on a budget. I've used the 50mm f1.8. Got a nice image out of it. As the FD mount is a bit fiddly I'd get an adaptor for each lens. Would make life a lot easier.
For indie film making, music videos, the more wistful end of documentaries and perhaps the more artful end of corporate/event work, FDs are great. However, I've stopped using them on Corporates. I have a couple of keepers, but whilst well built and optically clean, they have lower contrast than modern glass and suffer a lot from flare, which brings down apparent sharpness. Also, their design seems to favour being used a stop or three down from wide open - which is bang on for a full frame stills camera. If you're hunting wide-open lenses, FDs do look decidedly soft until you hit two stops in. The 50mm f1.2 is unusable wide open, only marginally better at 1.4, and only really comes on-song at 2 to 2.8. On the other hand, my Sigma 50mm is very usable at 1.4 and tack sharp at 2. One could say that 'glass is the new film stock' - in that your choice of glass will give your film a certain look, and over 30 years or so we've associated certain aberrations (lens flares, soft focus, low contrast, shallow DoF) with moods or storytelling aids, rather than seeing them as 'mistakes'. So, a overly warm coloured and flare-heavy lens with a little chromatic aberration may be just the thing to evoke a 1970s feel, which will do its magic far more subtly than a mere plug-in filter. But the problem is that when you change lenses - 10, 20 or 30 year old lenses - the look will also change. You can work with it, but in the corporate world, you'll be fighting it more often than not. But don't let all that put you off. I'm extremely grateful to my FD 35-105 3.5, and I even had my Tokina 80-200 2.8 converted to EF to use it on non-Emount cameras. Not so sure about the 50mm 1.2, but there you go.
Oh yes, Canon FD lenses. My lens collection consists of the kit lens, a 17-50 and 50-150 F2.8 Canon EF mount zooms, a Sigma 10-20 zoom for modern lenses, and a 50 F1.4, a 35 F2, a 28 F2.5 and a 28-90 F2.8-3.5 in Canon FD mount. Honestly, I think the FD mount stuff is great. Can't beat the price, and I think it looks pretty decent. I know I have a boring test video around somewhere that was shot with the FD zoom.....ahh that's right, here it is:
Thanks Matt, a really helpful answer! One last question I have a Merlin steadicam which i have been experimenting with for the hand-held look. Can you recommend any FS100 prime lenses that would would well on the steadicam. The lenses need to be light and i am not a bit fan of really wide so 28 -50mm. The kit lens it too heavy as are most modern Canon lenses once you add on the adaptor, (the rig becomes top-heavy). I bought a 28mm FD lens and adapter yesterday and it works well but it would be nice to have a light high-quality lens that was good enough for commercial work, any suggestions. Thanks, Robert
The 'Plastic Fantastic' Canon 50mm 1.8 is surprisingly 'okay' and very light - insubstantial, even. Zooms are, mostly, variable primes and will always be heavy. By and large, because you're looking for the best 'hyperfocal' distance on Steadicam (so you don't have to focus), you'll be working at smaller apertures (f5.6 - f11) on the sub-35mm end of focal lengths. I'd be looking out for 24/28/35mm primes, not wickedly fast but competent, and stopping down. Older lenses are more compact though are often heavy. Remember, with steadicam, it's not just about balance, it's about where the weight is, with 'Dynamic' balance. And from what I remember with the Meriln and runnning around, it's also handy to have a fairly sleek shape as wind can blow your camera off course - so no big 1.4s with petal lens hoods!
