According provided by lens CANON LENS FD 135mm 1: 3.5 huge thanks to Alexander Dundanov.
Canon Lens FD 135mm 1: 3.5
CANON LENS FD 135mm 1: 3.5 is a classic budget 135-piece of the old days. In the line of Canon nFD lenses there are two more 'older' models with F / 2.8 and F / 2.0. Most likely, CANON LENS FD 135mm 1: 3.5 (nFD) from this review is a further development of the CANON LENS FD 135mm 1: 3.5 SC lens (version II, with original FD mount, 1976).
Please note that Canon FD, nFD (NEW FD) lenses cannot simply be mounted on modern Canon EOS SLR cameras without additional modifications. But they are easy to use on mirrorless cameras, such as Canon EOS M.
Basic information about the lens:
| Review Instance Name | CANON LENS FD 135mm 1: 3.5 CANON LENS MADE IN JAPAN 183374 |
| Designed by | For film cameras with Canon nFD mount (NEW FD) |
| Front Filter Diameter | 52 mm |
| Focal length | 135 mm |
| Zoom ratio | 1 x |
| Number of aperture blades | 6 pieces, matte, form a regular hexagon when closed |
| Tags | focusing distance in meters and feet, bayonet mount mark, aperture value, depth of field scale for f / 8, 16, 32, red dot for infrared, 'A' button for auto iris, bayonet mount lock button (for Canon lenses FD, nFD, the bayonet button is on the lens itself) |
| Diaphragm | from F / 3.5 to F / 32. On the aperture ring there are marks for F / 3.5, 5.6, 8, 11, 22, 32, you can also set one intermediate value between each pair of numbers. The diaphragm control ring is plastic. On cameras with Canon nFD mount, automatic iris control is available |
| MDF | 1,3 m, maximum magnification ratio 1: 7.7 |
| The weight | 325 g |
| Optical design | 4 elements in 4 groups |
| Lens hood | telescopic, built-in, metal. The hood is firmly fixed when unfolded. |
| Manufacturer country | CANON LENS MADE IN JAPAN |
| Period | Since June 1979, production shutdown time unknown |
The lens is perfectly assembled. The focus ring is rubberized and rotates 220 degrees. During focusing, the frame rim lengthens, but the front lens does not rotate. Focusing occurs by moving the entire lens block relative to the frame of the housing.
From the small aperture of F / 3.5, I expected a sharper image from this lens. Nevertheless, I have no serious complaints about the Canon Lens FD 135mm 1: 3.5 - it is moderately contrasting, sharp, with not particularly memorable bokeh. In side light, it can catch a blue flare (example), which disappears if you expand the built-in hood. There is not much glare in the backlight. It does not suffer from distortion, has slight vignetting and chromatic aberration.
I used a lens on the camera Sony a7 using the adapter Canon FD - Sony E. Source files can be downloaded at this link (37 photos in the '.ARW' format, 900 Mb).
Canon Lens FD 135mm 1: 3.5 on camera Sony a7
How to use FL/FD/FDn mount lenses
To use a Canon FL, Canon FD, or Canon FDn mount lens on modern mirrorless cameras, you should use the appropriate adapter:
- Canon RF/RF-S: adapter FD/FDn/FL -> RF/EOS R
- Canon EF-M: adapter FD/FDn/FL -> EF-M/EOS M
- Sony NEX/ILCE/IMCE/FE/E: adapter FD/FDn/FL -> NEX/ILCE/FE/E
- Nikon Z: adapter FD/FDn/FL -> Z
- Panasonic L / Sigma L / Leica L/T/TL: adapter FD/FDn/FL -> L
- fujifilm x: adapter FD/FDn/FL -> X/FX
- Samsung NX: adapter FD/FDn/FL -> NX
- Micro 4/3 (Panasonic/Olympus): adapter FD/FDn/FL -> M4/3
- Nikon 1 : adapter FD/FDn/FL -> N1
The adapters are suitable for FL, FD and FDn mount lenses, these mounts are backwards compatible. But using lenses with a Canon FL / Canon FD / Canon FDn mount on SLR cameras is difficult due to the long working distance. In such cases, a corrective lens adapter must be used, which will degrade the image quality.
Results
Canon Lens FD 135mm 1: 3.5 - an old and unpretentious 135-lens with a small aperture and good build. It’s nice to work with the lens, and the pictures have the expected image quality.
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
This is amazing…
Better Yu37A MS?
no
I don’t understand, is Sony so colorful or is it the merit of the lens, everything is so saturated
Rather, in the settings, contrast and saturation are lifted.
Are you kidding me? :) If it is “colorful”, then black and white photography will not be “colorful”. alpha 7 gives stable alumina from any lens.
show your photos from your colorful camera, but for the time being it seems that you yourself don’t know and don’t have anything
By my own feeling, I will say that all Canon FD lenses give such a picture, I have several of them - 24, 50, 135, 100-300. So compared to other manuals, Canon wins in contrast. And the Sony A7II has excellent color reproduction. Especially the S version, but too bold (
There is a soul in this alpha ..
Begins ...
I forgot to ask you ...
That’s all right. I’m not offended :) But you don’t politely behave :)
Haha :)
Liked it!
I look Arkady pinned to shoot in framing 16: 9 HD.
I myself like this cropping format, but I also use 1: 1 and drag from 2.39: 1 Scope because it makes ordinary mega photos cool like frames from a movie. And what kind of portraits can be done in 2.39: 1 Scope format with Hollywood bokeh is just a fairy tale.
Sonya made mulatto children out of white children. Too colorful is not natural.
The mulattos here are nothing, it's half of the droid binoculars from "Star Wars"
oh, he commented in the wrong direction :( mop! :)
That's for sure. Something is wrong with the flowers.
The lens deserves attention, for me the main question that the author can answer is, in terms of price / quality, Jupiter / OH?
I am not an author but I will answer.
Better than the Yu37a there is no 135mm with an aperture of 3.5, perhaps only the original itself - CZ. 135 3.5 nikkor is also very good and even better in the back.
But class 2.8 or 2.5 is another matter.
Is the Japanese optical glass worse than in the USSR?
Glass may not be worse, I did not measure the number of lines per millimeter. But the fact that 6 petals is already bad.
Canon also has good lenses with focal 135; - the quality is the highest, but the price…. Everyone must determine the ratio for himself. Is it worth it.
It's really interesting how it feels when compared to the old Nikkors
Why say that Sonya has a bad color ?! I do not understand this. This camera has very nice colors and God would give it to all the cameras.
It was not enough for you to begin to praise the color of your d3 * 00 and D5 * 00, or similar kenons. Have a conscience, if you did not hold the camera in your hands, but just saw a couple of pictures, this is not a reason
God forbid. I have one, and for comparison, two dimes (classic and mark II) are available ... Sonya is incomparable in black and white, otherwise at 4. While the boot in color is extremely good, the truth in the juiciness of black and white is a little behind her aunt. Everything for your tasks.)
FD glasses have interesting colors, and here is the full frame of the Sony a7. With a matrix similar to Nikonovskaya d600. Great combination in one word.
Good afternoon.
I am very interested in using FD mount lenses on Canon DSLRs. If an article appears describing how to connect to EOS, it would be great.
Thank you.
Try it: http://evtifeev.com/19889-obektivyi-canon-fd-adapteryi-katalog-i-proch.html
Hello!
I’m holding this lens in my hands now, I’m thinking which tail to transplant? Either Nikon or M42, I suppose. Naturally with infinity and native aperture control. I transplanted a lot of similar ones, but I didn’t hold this particular in my hands yet. And there I compare with the PR37 (stolen Zeiss) PR. Infa will be on my site.
I've already seen this article from Dmitry. It's still not clear where the problem comes from - the FD has a flange of 42 mm, and the EOS has 44 mm. It would seem - to make a spacer of 2 mm and calmly use the lens from ff on the crop. Or is everything somehow much more fun there?
Most likely, focus on infinity will be lost, like Nikon with Soviet optics and the probability of hitting the mirror
Aleksey- at FD, if you completely remove the tail and drill M42 eos, then there is infinity, but the diaphragm switch (it is on the tail) will not work. You need to make the diaphragm switching mechanism yourself. the older model FD SSC- will not have infinity when changing tails, you need to cut-grind the mounting pad of the lens (and also make the aperture switching mechanism, the chance to ditch the lens is great even for an experienced specialist). I mastered the PS system, almost all the fd-shki are (stand on the eos) - the image is excellent
Taki should be vice versa, cut 2 mm.
"You need to do it the other way around, cut 2 mm." -you obviously don’t understand Russian, or you’re stupid. I also have it written that you need to grind-cut. Why do I post the same thing again, also claiming that I wrote incorrectly and you need to do the opposite
Alexander
Please do not write anything else.
You already wrote enough nonsense.
It's a pity no one gives Arkady 135 2.0l - it would be interesting to compare whether the new 135 is so much cooler, how much more expensive it is :) I haven't tried the subject, but 135 2.0l was quite pleased with the picture even on the crop, not to mention ff. True, the focus is not super convenient, but in general, for the sake of such a picture, you can run around. For myself, for now, I decided that 135 is being successfully replaced by a telephoto, I don't really need 2.0, especially since it often has HA at 2.0.
This particular 135 f3.5 is not very appropriate to compare with the EOS 135 f2. Canon has another manual glass with an FD mount - 135 f2.5. These are completely different lenses, both in quality and cost. Now it can be compared with the new L.
Five years later :)
By the nature of the image - sharpness-blurring - this glass is very similar to 135 / 2.8SF. Not a bad compact 135, quite fast, not brilliant in terms of sharpness, but a good moderate portrait telephoto for the money. It will be necessary to pick up the pictures and write down the review.
135 / 2L gives a completely different blur pattern. This is the characteristic, oily, greasy, with an even stronger separation from the background.
I know why you don't like SONY ... Because it is dear and unattainable for you, for the same reason you kiss the tank glass of Jupiter-37, which costs three rubles ... Ha, Ha, ha ...
Yeahhhh sure!)))
Is it worth changing the U37A to the "older brother" Canon 135 / 2.8 FD?
But what about the difference in working lengths? FD can only be placed on the BZK
It seems to me that thanks to Arkady Shapoval, there is not a small demand for old manual lenses. It is necessary to push through the law so that from each sale of manual optics of the 50s - 90s the Radozhiv website receives deductions)))