March 06, 2015, 11:51:59 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - ontarian

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11
Software & Accessories / Re: EdMika new kit launch - FDn 85mm 1.2L
« on: October 29, 2012, 11:44:12 AM »
Interesting thing, the 85mm 1.2L EOS conversion was by at least a factor of 2 the one I got the most requests for developing.  At just over a week out, I have sold a grand total of 1 kit (to an apparent fan of my work who's on their 6th adapter - thanks for that Dana!).  It just goes to show that sales and interest do not go hand in hand.

I theorize that this has a lot to do with the fact that this is a conversion that either requires the extremely difficult task of full lens disassembly in order to do the conversion reversibly or to simply break a lever off making it a (semi) permanent conversion (this can be undone with some good soldering but it obviously wouldn't be mint anymore).  These are not fun choices to have with an 800 dollar lens.

Thankfully the 50L (actually ready to ship, I just have to make the video and listing) and the 85 1.2 Aspherical (still in final stages of development) do not require such extreme measures to convert so I predict they will be more popular.

I also appreciate the moderators of this site, good job folks! :)

Software & Accessories / Re: EdMika new kit launch - FDn 85mm 1.2L
« on: October 24, 2012, 11:25:02 PM »
Nice collection of Old and New 85/1.2s (except you're missing the Zeiss Contax 50 year anniversary edition, and the m42 Helios/Cyclop)...

Any thoughts on the IQ difference between the nFD and EF L and EF L II? (as far as I've seen on reviews, the EF L II does better centres but softer borders than the L I, which is more consistent across the frame. That's the price for better bokeh i suppose).

Based on my unscientific (our lens testing lab is in the works though) pixel peeping the FDn 85mm 1.2L is as sharp and contrasty as my EF 1.2L II version with beautiful creamy bokeh.  I thought the FD version had a lot more vignetting than the EF until I remembered to turn peripheral illumination correction off and then bingo, virtually no difference between the two lenses.  I love how compact the manual lenses are compared to the big plastic modern beasts, its all business with a grenade like ball of glass wrapped in a thin metal shell.

Software & Accessories / EdMika new kit launch - FDn 85mm 1.2L
« on: October 24, 2012, 11:09:44 PM »

Its finally here, the single most requested conversion kit, the FD 85mm 1.2L is shipping out now.  The FD 50mm 1.2 L is expected to launch in a couple of days as well.

5X 85mm 1.2 lenses by Ontarian, on Flickr

The 85mm 1.2 Aspherical kit is coming along well also.

Also, here is a little video showing how we machine the EdTraveller if anyone is interested, we don't injection mould it, we machine it from a big cylinder of Delrin. Video from My Phone

I saw very similar looking effects when I tried some of my old FD lenses with an adapter.
It was far worse at wide apertures, improved as stopped down.
I think it's basically the poor quality of lens coatings of the old FDs and the adapter lens which cause internal reflections to disperse light and kill contrast.  Effect varies with different lenses, focal lengths etc.

Toss 'em and get some new glass or get some old Nikkor lenses instead, they don't require a corrective lens adapter and they had slightly better coatings to start with so are more compatible with the somewhat reflective image sensors vs more matte and less reflective film they were originally designed for.

I respectfully disagree, the FD glass has IQ and coating performance that is no worse than similar vintage Nikkor glass.  The spider web being described is a common fungus pattern and is the likely culprit of the visible haze.  I have a very hairy 50-300 4.5L I got off eBay with a broken mount that I rebuilt with one of my kits recently and a couple of mint same lens copies and the IQ of the shots between the fungsy and clean ones is dramatically different.

Lenses / Re: Manual Focus Lenses: Smarter in F-Mount?
« on: September 29, 2012, 10:37:08 PM »


Canon's old lenses need adapters to work on anything new
Nikon's old lenses need adapters to work on new Canon or some other bodies.
Nikon's old lenses still work on new Nikon bodies without adapters (with some AF issues on low end bodies)
Therefore, Nikon lenses are more versatile, and there's a pile of old used ones to be found out there, more than Canon's.



Not all things are equal.

Some Nikon Lenses are better than similar Canon lenses of that time.

Other Canon Lenses are better than similar Nikon lenses of that time.

Also Nikon shooters like Nikon Lenses and Canon shooters like Canon Lenses.

So blanket statements are broad, comfortable and kind of cover all the bases but are just barely more right than wrong in any given specific case.

Lenses / Re: Manual Focus Lenses: Smarter in F-Mount?
« on: September 22, 2012, 05:12:52 PM »
Canon people like shooting Canon lenses.  This is true in my case and I'm sure its true for many, many others.  Unfortunately Canon orphaned their line of fantastic manual focus lenses when they went to the EOS mount in 1987 with a longer lens registration distance.  The only adapters that would make infinity focus had to be optically corrected which stole light and added distortion so a pro lens started acting optically worse than the cheepest entry level zooms.

This is why I make mount swap kits, not quite adapters but replacement mounts.  This brings those great lenses back to play in EOS for us Canon fanboys.

-Ed Mika

Lenses / Re: Manual Focus Lenses: Smarter in F-Mount?
« on: September 22, 2012, 05:09:20 PM »
I was wondering, since we all know Nikon lenses can be mounted on Canon bodies but not viceversa, is it not smarter to buy manual-focus-only lenses always in Nikon mount and buy an adapter?

That would minimize the inconveniences of side-grading, and would make expensive lenses such as Zeiss, Voigtländer and Schneider-Kreuznach a very safe investment.

Is there any disadvantage I'm neglecting? Any problem with aperture control?
As long as its a totally manual lens, you only have to deal with the somewhat klutzy adapters.  If I were buying a new lens and it was available in Canon mount, thats the way to go.
However, in terms of being able to resell a manual lens, having one that could be adapted fit Most DSLR bodies might have the most value.
Not only can a Nikon F lens be adapted to Canon, but also to Sony/Minolta, and a few others.  That increases the possible number of users who might want to buy it.  Just watch out, many of those old Nikon lenses have odd protrusions or other gotchas.
Of course, buying vintage medium Format lenses with their very long flange distance would allow them to be adapted to almost any DSLR.  The old Zeiss Hasselblad Distagon T* lenses are fairly good and low priced for a Zeiss lens. I've adapted one, and I love the smooooth manual focus.

Not all adapters are Klutzy (good term!), just most.  Of course I'm biased, I make adapters (that are 5X more expensive than the norm).

Any chance of the FD 20mm f2.8 fitting an EOS mount?

Because the iron ring on the 20 2.8 is missing screws and holes it would be extremely difficult.  I'm working with Jim Buchanan (world famous lens conversion services specialist) on some stuff and perhaps he could overcome this issue with a soldered on solution.  People would have to send their lenses in to him for the adaptation though.

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: EdMika Launches the FDn to EOS Adaptor
« on: September 21, 2012, 04:10:58 PM »
Thanks for the great exposure Craig, its much appreciated.

I'm Ed Mika and I developed these adapters (and continue to do so).  My conversion kits are not like the traditional adapters that just screw on apart from my original low profile FD-EOS adapter.  That adapter is the thinnest on the market and with my lens focus calibration instructions makes all the white super telephoto FD mount lenses focus to infinity and most importantly without corrective light robbing and distortion adding glass elements.

All of these other adapters are mount swaps that take the old FL FD and FDn mounts off and put EF/EOS mounts on.  We machine them out of solid chunks of brass on a pair of computer controlled mills in our garage in Ontario Canada.  It takes over an hour of machining and assembly work on each adapter before it is ready to be shipped out.

I can honestly say that these are the best EOS adapters on the market in terms of performance and craftsmanship.  Feel free to look through my eBay feedback profile to see this fact reinforced over and over by my clearly happy customers.

I'm working on the EdTraveller for the 85 1.2 L and 50 1.2 L and 85 1.2 Aspherical lenses this weekend actually.  They may launch sooner than later.

Woo, personalised suggestions, now that's customer service :)

135/2.0 is probably my most-wanted lens (in 35mm format, at least). There's one left on fleabay, $150 and rising.
Then 24/2.0 would be a very nice addition, it's probably the only 'hole' in my lineup

For reference, I've got primes at:
17/3.5 Tokina, 20/2.5 Mir, 28/2.8 (2 in OM mount), 35/1.4 Samyang, 50/1.8 II, 50/1.4 Takumar, 85/1.8, 100/2.0, then 120/2.8 in P6 mount (but it's not too big or heavy).

I'm not sure what else would fit in here. A 15mm Fisheye makes 'most' sense from a focal-length view (more than a 17mm or 18mm fisheye, those Takumars go for $300). But then that's only useful on my eos 3 because I don't have FF Digital. But then if i'm shooting film, I may as well put the Zodiak 30mm on 6x6 and get square fishies (i reckon they look better that way), at higher scanned-resolution. For digital fisheye, it's the Samyang 8mm (or, more likely, nothing) for me for a few years.

How does the 50/1.4 compare to the FL 55/1.2? (on one of your other adapters).
Both the FL 55/1.2 and Takumar 50/1.4 are not so much 'soft', but 'low contrast' fully wide-open, same as the Samyang 35mm. Stop any of those three down to f/1.6-2.0, and they're sharp as anything (whereas the EF 50/1.8 II doesn't get there until f/2.8 or even 4.0). If the 50/1.4 is actually useable wide-open, it might be tempting to get my 7th lens in the 50-55mm length...

I'd buy this $275 FDn 135/2 bargain grade lens copy from I've had good experiences with bargain grade from them.

I'd take the FD 55mm 1.2 SSC over the FDn 50 1.4 because it doesn't hit my 5D3 mirror at infinity (may be important to you if you upgrade to ff) and lets face it 1.2 is 1.2.  The FDn 50mm 1.4 however is great because its so tiny and easy to pocket when juggling a few lenses on a day trip.  The 50mm 1.4 is cleaner/sharper/more contrasty at the pixel level than any of the 1.2's apart from the much more expensive FDn 50mm 1.2L and FD 55mm 1.2 Aspherical (and FDn 85mm 1.2L).

Also to consider, even though I don't have the production EdLink developed yet (just a hand ground prototype one) the lens that has spent the most time on my 5D3 for over a month now is the FDn 50-300 4.5L.  Soooo sharp wide open, amazing colours, contrast and the really wide range is handier than expected.


Ed,  how does the FDn 50mm 1.2 compare to the FDn 50mm 1.4 in sharpness and contrast?

I haven't done a whole lot of shooting with either yet but a quick and dirty back and fourth comparison on a bright scene with high contrast edges really impressed me on the 1.4's CA performance and contrast.  The non L FDn 50mm 1.2 wide open was expectedly sharp for a prime lens but it had the most purple fringing I've seen out of any f/1.2 lens (more than the FD and FL 55mm 1.2's I developed earlier kits for too).  The prototype still in development FDn 50 1.2L on the other hand has the CA issue tamed very well though. 

Its not to say the FD 50mm 1.2 non L is a dog or anything, in low light it does a fine job getting the shot but in bright light you are going to want to step it down a bit to keep the fringing in check.

We intend to develop a hopefully decent optical test lab in my father-in-law's basement in the next year so we can get real performance numbers beyond these qualitative feelings.

Well, i'm definitely more excited about a guy in canada carving hunks of brass in his back shed than I am about a multinational corporation releasing something years in the making (that will still sell in the millions and make more money than Ed could dream of).
More credit to Ed, I've got a few camera accessory ideas that I could sell, it's definitely inspiring me to take them more serisouly (even if in my case, it'd take China a few weeks to copy them before all the fun's over).

I'm almost tempted to buy one even though i don't have any FD lenses to convert (yet). But seeing as i'm definitely staying out of (digital) FF until 5D4 or 6D2, i've got more cash to blow on lenses...

With that in mind my personal recommendation where value meets amazing imaging is

135mm f/2 - about $350, amazingly sharp, great bokeh even though it has a bit more CA than modern L version.
50mm 1.4 - about $100 bucks, great CA control (less at 1.4 than 1.2 non L set at 1.4) tiny, worthy of "reference lens" title.
24mm f/2 - about $300, also very sharp, shockingly compact and widest distortion free you can get
15mm fisheye - about $500 build quality that even exceeds the TS 35mm 2.8 + 4 very cool internal built in filters

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 11