Great video as per usual 🙏🏻 I think the 28mm looks much better, I have read before it can be really hard to get a clean image with an FD adapted and not fully modified, both have really great qualities, I personally have a Pentax 50mm 1.7 for my BM 6k Pro, works really well……thanks again Flo 👌🏽👏🏼
It would be a dream to shoot with the Zeiss set. Super clean look, I personally would use it for a corporate interview or something along that line, no doubt! I never use or ever seen Leica R in real life, but the Zeiss could potentially be a poor man Leica R if it is in the right hand. Last weekend, I got a chance to use a Nikkor Ai/Ai-S set and was blown away by the image that it produce on my pocket 4k. I can't even imagine if it was a Zeiss. And now I am very very fond to go on a journey to find a vintage set for my own! Thanks for the video, Flo!
@@kunsunrethy Thanks for watching!! Really glad you've enjoyed the video. A friend of mine shot a lot with the Nikkor on his bmpcc and his work is beautiful. I would still like to test the Leicas one day :).
I have a set of FD lenses for my a7siii. I enjoy the look but in the end they can be tough to use. It’s pretty hard to nail focus with them and they all have that glow/halation look. The glass on them is clean too so I just think it’s the character of the lenses.
I just got the 28 mm zeiss last month because of your videos. I am absolutely obsessed with it. The image is absolutely stunning. Thank you so much for the videos!
I built a set of Contax for video, but when I bought a Sony A7RIV I found that they blow away most high-buck digi-lenses for stills. I tried Sony G Master, Sigma and other blah, blah, blah fancy lenses and hated them. The Contax are sharp, resolve the sensor but don't have that flat, overly sharp, dead, clinical look.
I think vintage lenses starting to loose their superpower. The look is undoubtedly unique and very pleasing, to my eye at least. But the prices are so high now I feel it's just crazy going for a Contax, not to mention a Leica. Nowadays you can get a modern cinema lens for the same price or cheaper actually, already geared and consistent. Vintage lenses were great options while they were affordable, now the new cinema lenses (DZO, Meike, SLR, etc) are in the affordable category and vintage is some sort of a luxury. For a hobby it's great, I love the history behind them and the look. I have a set of Jenas, I would say the look is in between the Contax and Canon/Helios and decided not to go further in the vintage rabbit hole. :)
I don't think the Contax's are expensive, I did a ebay search last night and added to cart 5 lenses - 18/28/35/85/135 - and all in it was around $4,500 USD...I haven't seen any set of modern primes for under $10,000...the Rokinons are absolutely terrible but DZO, Meike, SLR are solid...but they're 10-15 k to save the hassle of declicking, gear rings etc...but with vintage you can buy a set slowly (probably $300-$1000 depedning on the lens and condition) over time and the look is just...well the look is why we're all so attracted to them in the first place. I wouldn't give up yet!
@@buknar456 Hey Matt, sorry I didn't mean to be moody haha! Completely agree on Rokinons, but I would look into the price of the other brands. I think for 5-7K - or even half if s35 coverage is working for you - you can get a set that's matching and ready to use straight out of the box. So I guess my point here is there are less practical reasons nowadays to get a vintage lens than a few years ago. But as a hobby, it is very exciting, oh and I love the look and feel of my Jenas. And maybe, just maybe the new cine lens brands can help normalise the price on those vintage ones. Who knows?
Well other than price, you have to consider the other benefit which is weight. My Meike FF Cine lens with the PL adapter is so heavy that I am sure I will not travel with it unless I go everywhere in a car and will be bringing a tripod.
They are still used in big movies, tough..like in Dune 2 for example. For my part, I already owned a couple of vintage lenses (because I always loved film photography). But it’s true that they are getting expensive (not every lenses but some of them are really expensive.)
Love both these lenses! One thing I'll say in regards to FD for anyone curious - your set is the NFD which are more plastic and cheaper. If you want more premium lenses, the SSC are better built, and many of them are better optically. They are also much more expensive, especially considering you have to professionally mod them from FD to EF in order to use them well on a camera like the 6K. Can't go wrong with the either!
You are correct, the SSC are better built for sure. Thanks for clarifying man. I think we can agree that FD, SSC and Contax Zeiss are amazing either way :) !!
I am using the newer Zeiss ZE lenses with my BMPCC 6K, since they do not cost too much second-hand - and usually they are in perfect condition. I assume that some photographers tend to dream about golden times when photographing with manual focus was easy and fun..and now when have to You rely on Your DSLR:s beeps and blinking lights You get with Your Zeiss blurry nose and sharp ear on that words most beautiful girl!
Great video! I think your adapter from FD to EF is decreasing the image quality of your Canon FD...on my full frame camera, they're almost as sharp as the contax zeiss.
@@jasonnowwhat5041 FD has a shorter flange distance than EF, so the adapter has to have a lens in it to compensate. Luca uses full frame Panasonic L mount cameras which don't need a lens to adapt FD lenses, whereas the BMPCC 6K is EF mount.
I've been shooting Canon since the 70's and prefer the earlier FD lenses with the breach mount...these lenses are more robust and have much better build quality compared the 'cheaper' bayonet style, 'plasticky' Canon lenses in this video. I also use Contax RTS with C/Y 28/2.8, 35/2.8 and the highly regarded 35-70 zoom. Unfortunately, once Canon came out with the EF lenses, the FD became unusable on Canon bodies. So when not shooting film, I use my FD lenses on a Sony A7R2 digital body with a simple adapter (and with Sony's in-body stabilization, every FD lens is now stabilized). This is where Canon goofed up in my opinion.
Canon's "goof" was a God-send for me. That meant I could get a fairly wide collection of FD lenses at pizza prices. The timing in my life has usually been disastrous. This time I lucked out. The "plasticy" FDn lenses have given me zero problems, although I'm not diving for cover in a warzone. Glad that you and many others still regard them as cheap. And, it seems the cinematography world has suddenly caught on to Canon FD lenses. Now my FDn collection includes: 15mm/2.8 (superb!), 17mm/4, 24mm/2.8 (maybe best vintage sharpness and IQ?), 28mm/2 (rivals the Distagon "Hollywood"?), 28mm/2.8, 35/2 (almost as good as the legendary Distagon 35mm/1.4, which is HEAVY and big), 35/2.8 (IQ!, light & cheap), 50mm/1.4 (best-performing pre-ASPH, pre-APO vintage 50ish?, sharper corners compared with the Planar), 50mm/1.8 (flares a lot, cheap & light performer, Canon's counterpoint to Nikon E series), 50mm/3.5 macro (is there a better macro?), 85mm/1.8 (sleeper! In top 3 for me, CA can be edited away), 85mm/1.2 L (need I say more?), 100mm/2.8 (at least as good as the legendary Nikkor 105mm/2.5, or Minolta 100mm/2.5?), 135mm/2.8 (compact, best-performing 135mm/2.8?), 200mm/2.8 SSC (FDn is not lighter, so I chose the sturdier SSC breech-mount due to the length and weight), and the 500mm/8 mirror-reflex telephoto.
You may be able to sharpen your image using the K&F adapter. Have you tried to rotate the glass? This is usually how I troubleshoot focus issues with my speedbooster (viltrox and metabones)
Nice video flo! Love the zeiss. You are right these lenses fall apart at 1.4, but very nice from about 2.8 down. Since putting them on an fx6 there is a LOT of vig and only goes away at 5.6 or 8
Thank you! As always your videos answer the exact questions I had 👍I noticed you have the MM version which have more controlled flare. I liked the look of the Zeiss over fd so I'll go for Zeiss.
Lots of variation in the fd 50 coatings. Nfd in my case has more pronounced coating than the older breach lock fd, but the 35 nfd has a similar coating. I think the nfd 50 has more power for light management, gives slightly warmer tones I think the strong violet back coating does alot to minimize the chromatic flaws in the fd breach lock. These 2 FDs have different mounting distances from flange to front with the fd breachlock type the front element is deeper set in. These are practical differences that may not comply with all camera flange distances equally because of the electro optical nature of light and the sensor..so even though it seems the 50 is a cut and dry case it's best to try these different copies and pairing with the right camera
Nice video, interesting comparison. I have quite a few FD lenses, and I really like them. The 35mm ssc f 2.0 is a gem. I like the few Zeiss lenses I have too, they are really something. A budget alternative can be Minolta Rokkor lenses.
I have the same two Canon FDs as you and cant justify spending 1k just to replace them with Zeiss, although i would love to own them. These are just for special occasions when the project needs this look and for most corporate videos or other payed stuff i need a sharp lens like Sigma Art. But maybe the Zeiss Milvus are something to look into. They can produce highend images since they reportedly share the same glass as Zeiss CP.2/CP.3 but with a filter you can mimic a vintage look
I think with lenses it always on the work you do and if you want to own / rent. These days I keep my FD more for stills and the Contax for video only :).
I own also this two canon fd 24 2.8 and 50 1.4 and really like em …. Using them on Panasonic s1 with cheap adapter… maybe you should try em on you eos R 😀
As far as I'm aware, the optics used in Contax Zeiss lenses were so advanced for their time that their are still used in the CP2s, CP3s and Zeiss 'Classics' with minor updates. The 21mm f/2.8 and 28mm f/2 are two of those lenses.
The only thing I don't like about Zeiss with Yashica (contax) mount is the long run they had over decades, which means different coating on lenses. You can see that on the coating color. Beside that they do haze, which I haven't seen on Zeiss with HFT coating. In my opinion the Zeiss HFT are better choice, of you can find them. The HFT do also have the unique triangle aperture on 35mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4, which you might have seen in many Hollywood movies
I've never heard of Helios lenses other than the 58mm. Did they produce other focal ranges? I would immediately buy a set of their lenses. There are also a bunch of cheap modern lenses like TT Artisan, 7artisans and Pergear that give a vintage look. They're much wilder than these, but still...
I'm building up my FD SSC set! 24mm f2.8, 55mm f1.2, and 85mm f1.8. Love the look and physical feel/focusing of the fully manual lenses. They definitely lose a lot of contrast in direct light, are people using matte boxes?
Nice, the SSCs are beautiful! I do use matte boxes with mine when possible. However the Contax Zeiss do a better job than my FDs re contrast so I don't feel the need to use a MB each time :).
Nice video. Looking at picking up the Zeiss as well as I have some modern Zeiss glass which I love. Just a note: a have a set of FD's that don't flare in this way. I suspect either your coatings are worn or perhaps it is your adapter causing it.
Canon FD 50mm f1.2 is nearly 2/3rd of a stop brighter than the f1.4 lens using the same aperture, might be something to do with the bigger front element and if you go down to f1.2 would make it a full stop different compared to f1.4
Your using a very cheap adapter on those fd’s. You lose a stop of light and they decrease the field of view/crop factor. Your also shooting through an extra piece of very cheap glass so your going to get ghosting /CA.
I have both a Canon FD SSC Aspherical 55mm f 1.1.2 and a Carl Zeiss Planar f 1.1.4 50mm lens. I have used both in SLR bodies with flm. They have super performance. Now I want to use them on my Sony Nex series mirrorless camera. I need to get the appropriate Adapter.
I have the color ultron 50mm 1.4 which is said to be made by zeiss and seems very close or the same as the zeiss planar. I think it's a wonderful piece of glass
Thanks for the overview, I found this video after falling down the rabbit hole at the contax guide over at redusers. Question on the lens handling, how/where do you typically grip the lens to mount/unmount? Ergonomically I am always a little sketch because my nikon gear has a defined grip area on the lens barrel that's stationary. With im trying to grip the little section between the focus and aperture rings. Thanks again, loved the video.
been wanting to collect this vintage lens lineups slowly because I reallt love the output from this lenses but it is really hard to find good condition ones 😐
Planning on adding a Canon FD set for my Fuji X. The price is only gonna go up with the popularity of vintage right now. Why would you not use the Canons for “serious work”?
He used an adapter that seriously degrades the image quality. If you leave out the adapter with the plastic glass element z the quality is much better. But you won't be able to focus to infinity. So no landscape photography. The solution here would be to buy a conversion kit that permanently changes the mount from FD to EF and corrects the slight mismatch in distance that causes this issue. This cost 150€ for machined aluminum or around 50€ 3d-printed.
Hey Flo! I was wondering if you've experienced any increased CA from your Zeiss kit on the BMPCC4k and 6k? I just purchased a Contax Zeiss 35mm f1.4 and am experiencing an abundance of CA. I'm not new to vintage glass, but this lens produces more than any of my other lenses (takumar 25 f2, helios 85mm f1.5, Nikon 50mm, etc.). However, when I threw the lens on my Canon 5D Mark iii all the CA seemed to have vanished. So I was wondering if there was something specific to the Black Magic sensors or if I got a poor performing lens.
Are you using an adaptor with glass because is a speed boost? or is because the focal distance? Because if this adapter is fixing the distance between the lens and the sensor you are loosing the real look on the FDs
I currently have the canon fds I love the soft image but using the fd to ef adapter holds the lens back with the infinity focus problem and the too soft look it gives when the lens is wide open
Keep in mind, that this gentelman uses an adapter that significantly messes up the image on FD glass... I dont think its fair to call it a comparison this way... Swapping mounts to EF would make the image look different!
The Contax Zeiss Distagon T* 25/2.8 is known to be one of the poorest performers in the line, with soft corners. The 28/2.8 is significantly better. The 28/2 has a rendering that is unsurpassed, but a price to match.
I have both Contax Ziess and Canon FD. HOWEVER, I think you have the NFD versions. Otherwise your build comparison would be different. Older FDs are all metal. I stay away from the NFD Canons and go for the ones built in the 70s. Anyway, great video. Thanks
I've been thinking on getting a prime lens that's a bit more serious. I am looking at the FD 1.2 or maybe the Samyang / Rokinon, then this video came up. The Zeiss is certainly a better image technically. So for that I think they do offer more flexibility for actual paid work. The FDs I worry it is actually probably harder to find such high quality versions due to them being so common, needle in the hay stack. I think Samyang may off the balance of vintage-ness while offering some more coma and other aberrations / defects. Then again I also feel I don't shoot enough to justify any of them 😅 Thanks for another lovely video Flo.
Thanks for watching man !! Haha there is no such thing as not shooting enough, I'd say go for one anyway :). A 24 or 28mm covers a lot of subjects. I am sure if you get one you will find more things to shoot. I got quite inspired when I first got my vintage lenses. Let me know if you do :)
So cool.. interested to try canon fd for the price.. does conon fd give 3D pop / dimension like leica r/ zeiss? & may I asked your setting for Rode NTG mic, the volume number & the audio gain % in the setting menu? For the best audio result, less noise/hiss.. many thanks.
Thanks !! The FD don't really have that Pop, it really is more a Contax Zeiss feature. Do you mean for the Voice over or on camera ? For voice over I plug it directly into my macbook 16 and have the dial on 4. On camera it really depends on the location.
@@OfTwoLands Thanks for the answer.. yes that 3d pop is really special character 😇. For the mic volume, it is for the rode ntg dial volume & camera % gain audio at the run n gun situation (not the voice over), more or less number.. like maybe 8 for ntg & 75% for camera gain? thanks...
I think I am almost done building my Contax Zeiss set.. 28mm f2.8, 35mm 2.8, two 50mm f1.4 (selling one if anyone is interested), and the 100mm f2. Any others I should look for? 🙏
@@frenchyoutube9871 I will sell it to you! It is a mint condition AEJ f1.4 model (ninja star bokeh) with a simmod EF mount, (tab shaved down for Metabones use). I'm asking 350 USD (450 CAD) +50 USD to ship anywhere in North America with tracking and insurance, let me know if you are interested :) only reason for sale is I got this one in a set and I already have the 1.4, it's one of my favourites for low light shooting
@@connorwagstaff2348 Ah, what a shame. I also use CZ in the original mount for shooting stills, so I don't think a simmodrd version would work for me. Thanks for the offer though!
Hello! I was seeing if you were able to provide some advice ! I use the BMPCC 6k and looking at getting the contax after your advice. What adaptor would I need for this and is the cheaper option ok to use ? Thank you !
The thing about the Zeiss Contax's is that calling them 'vintage' is potentially deceptive because the standard ones have a modern feel to them. They're like modern lenses with a tad bit of character.
@@connorwagstaff2348 I am just saying, words and associations can be quite strong with a lot of people. I don't actually like vintage lenses because I don't like the inherent softness and low resolving power and I would rather get my 'character' from using filters. However, the Zeiss Contax lenses are an exception because they good to great resolution yet enough of a 'look' to feel non clinical.
@@bluefilmsltd This video comparison is actually not accurate. The Canon FD lenses were adapted with an optical adapter which under certain conditions negatively impact image quality. It's quite obvious when wide open or backlit, the FD lens automatically perform worse.
At this point i imagine there may be 50 comments similar to this one but, you are using 2 of the more regular Canon fd to compare to contax t* and on top of that you're using an adaptor with a lens between your sensor and the lens...don't sound like an usefull comparison
4:59 This comparison is absolutely not fair for Canon FD lenses because you use a cheap optical FD-EOS adapter that severely compromises image quality. Everyone please be aware that this is not a true test of the Canon FD lenses!
@@OfTwoLands Of course this isn't about clinical pin sharp results, some like the look actually but I just wanted to point out about that half inch worth of questionable quality glass behind those FD lens. It's like stacking 3 or 4 UV filters on the front of the lens and forgetting that they're there.
The Canon FDn 50mm 1.4 are MUCH better than the FDn 50mm 1.8 ! When you compare, then compare similar Lenses (with similar aperture) do not compare a 24mm with a 28mm Lens !
@@gicechicken7062 The Canon's image quality is severely affected by the cheap FD-EOS optical adapter. They perform better on shorter focal flange distance mirrorless cameras.
The FDs look so bad. Its incredible!!! I mean, they get the image on the sensor. But that quality WTF! I would say that look is at best worth 50 euros. They dont deserve to be at that price point. Very bad quality. Almost unusable! Any canon modern cheap lens is HEADS better. Even the cheapest ones... Primes i mean. The Zeiss though!!! wow! Mca!! The best images i have seen ever, always come from Zeiss. And Leica, they dont realy put themselves out as being profesional gear. Its more of a prestige thing. We are expensive, is what they ride. Not necesarily the actual use of theyr equipment...
Here is my comparison between the vintage Contax Zeiss and the Canon FD lenses.
Which one would you get or which one do you already have ?
Cheers,
Flo
Great video as per usual 🙏🏻 I think the 28mm looks much better, I have read before it can be really hard to get a clean image with an FD adapted and not fully modified, both have really great qualities, I personally have a Pentax 50mm 1.7 for my BM 6k Pro, works really well……thanks again Flo 👌🏽👏🏼
It would be a dream to shoot with the Zeiss set. Super clean look, I personally would use it for a corporate interview or something along that line, no doubt! I never use or ever seen Leica R in real life, but the Zeiss could potentially be a poor man Leica R if it is in the right hand. Last weekend, I got a chance to use a Nikkor Ai/Ai-S set and was blown away by the image that it produce on my pocket 4k. I can't even imagine if it was a Zeiss. And now I am very very fond to go on a journey to find a vintage set for my own!
Thanks for the video, Flo!
@@BBDigitalArts Thank you !! Yes, the Contax 28mm is pretty amazing. I have things great stuff shot on the Pentax as well :)
@@kunsunrethy Thanks for watching!! Really glad you've enjoyed the video. A friend of mine shot a lot with the Nikkor on his bmpcc and his work is beautiful. I would still like to test the Leicas one day :).
I have a set of FD lenses for my a7siii. I enjoy the look but in the end they can be tough to use. It’s pretty hard to nail focus with them and they all have that glow/halation look. The glass on them is clean too so I just think it’s the character of the lenses.
I just got the 28 mm zeiss last month because of your videos. I am absolutely obsessed with it. The image is absolutely stunning. Thank you so much for the videos!
Really happy to hear, such a beautiful lens :) !!
Well understandable.
I built a set of Contax for video, but when I bought a Sony A7RIV I found that they blow away most high-buck digi-lenses for stills. I tried Sony G Master, Sigma and other blah, blah, blah fancy lenses and hated them. The Contax are sharp, resolve the sensor but don't have that flat, overly sharp, dead, clinical look.
Great video, Flo! For my it‘s the FDs 📸 I use the 28mm f2.8, the 50mm f1.8 and the 70-210mm f4 which is a great Macro-lens, too. Cheers!
Thanks man !! I love the FDs, such great value for vintage lenses. How’s the 70-210 ? I’ve never used vintage zooms.
Great video! Thanks for sharing your experience with them.
No worries, thank you for watching !!
Very explanatory video Flo! Thank you.
Thank you for watching :) !!
I think vintage lenses starting to loose their superpower. The look is undoubtedly unique and very pleasing, to my eye at least. But the prices are so high now I feel it's just crazy going for a Contax, not to mention a Leica. Nowadays you can get a modern cinema lens for the same price or cheaper actually, already geared and consistent. Vintage lenses were great options while they were affordable, now the new cinema lenses (DZO, Meike, SLR, etc) are in the affordable category and vintage is some sort of a luxury. For a hobby it's great, I love the history behind them and the look. I have a set of Jenas, I would say the look is in between the Contax and Canon/Helios and decided not to go further in the vintage rabbit hole. :)
I don't think the Contax's are expensive, I did a ebay search last night and added to cart 5 lenses - 18/28/35/85/135 - and all in it was around $4,500 USD...I haven't seen any set of modern primes for under $10,000...the Rokinons are absolutely terrible but DZO, Meike, SLR are solid...but they're 10-15 k to save the hassle of declicking, gear rings etc...but with vintage you can buy a set slowly (probably $300-$1000 depedning on the lens and condition) over time and the look is just...well the look is why we're all so attracted to them in the first place. I wouldn't give up yet!
@@buknar456 Hey Matt, sorry I didn't mean to be moody haha! Completely agree on Rokinons, but I would look into the price of the other brands. I think for 5-7K - or even half if s35 coverage is working for you - you can get a set that's matching and ready to use straight out of the box. So I guess my point here is there are less practical reasons nowadays to get a vintage lens than a few years ago. But as a hobby, it is very exciting, oh and I love the look and feel of my Jenas. And maybe, just maybe the new cine lens brands can help normalise the price on those vintage ones. Who knows?
@@buknar456 I totally agree. The cost of modern quality cine lenses is very high. It makes more sense to sorce Zeiss lenses locally.
Well other than price, you have to consider the other benefit which is weight. My Meike FF Cine lens with the PL adapter is so heavy that I am sure I will not travel with it unless I go everywhere in a car and will be bringing a tripod.
They are still used in big movies, tough..like in Dune 2 for example.
For my part, I already owned a couple of vintage lenses (because I always loved film photography).
But it’s true that they are getting expensive (not every lenses but some of them are really expensive.)
As I remember from the 1980´s, the Contax Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.7 was the best performing of all 50mm SLR Lenses.
You hooked me up on Zeiss lenses and now I cant mount anything else on my camera :) Thinking to add that 28mm to my set.
Haha the Contax Zeiss can do that to you, sorry !! The 28mm is my favourite by far :). Let me know if you do!
@@OfTwoLands its also the way you describe them, fits to the style of the lenses hehe :) keep up the good work.
@@OfTwoLands how do you feel between the 28 and 25? I got the 25 and had no idea there was a 28.
Love both these lenses! One thing I'll say in regards to FD for anyone curious - your set is the NFD which are more plastic and cheaper. If you want more premium lenses, the SSC are better built, and many of them are better optically. They are also much more expensive, especially considering you have to professionally mod them from FD to EF in order to use them well on a camera like the 6K. Can't go wrong with the either!
You are correct, the SSC are better built for sure. Thanks for clarifying man. I think we can agree that FD, SSC and Contax Zeiss are amazing either way :) !!
Optically they should be the same since the nfd came after the ssc with the same glass but cheaper built for entry level
What adapter needs to be used from FD to EF?
Thank you, great content !!
Thanks for watching!!
I am using the newer Zeiss ZE lenses with my BMPCC 6K, since they do not cost too much second-hand - and usually they are in perfect condition. I assume that some photographers tend to dream about golden times when photographing with manual focus was easy and fun..and now when have to You rely on Your DSLR:s beeps and blinking lights You get with Your Zeiss blurry nose and sharp ear on that words most beautiful girl!
Great video! I think your adapter from FD to EF is decreasing the image quality of your Canon FD...on my full frame camera, they're almost as sharp as the contax zeiss.
Why? Doesn’t the adapter contain no glass? My FD to e mount is just a piece of metal, no glass.
@@jasonnowwhat5041 FD has a shorter flange distance than EF, so the adapter has to have a lens in it to compensate. Luca uses full frame Panasonic L mount cameras which don't need a lens to adapt FD lenses, whereas the BMPCC 6K is EF mount.
Hard to pick one! The Zeiss look so cool though :) xx
They really do!! :) xx
I've been shooting Canon since the 70's and prefer the earlier FD lenses with the breach mount...these lenses are more robust and have much better build quality compared the 'cheaper' bayonet style, 'plasticky' Canon lenses in this video. I also use Contax RTS with C/Y 28/2.8, 35/2.8 and the highly regarded 35-70 zoom. Unfortunately, once Canon came out with the EF lenses, the FD became unusable on Canon bodies. So when not shooting film, I use my FD lenses on a Sony A7R2 digital body with a simple adapter (and with Sony's in-body stabilization, every FD lens is now stabilized). This is where Canon goofed up in my opinion.
Canon's "goof" was a God-send for me. That meant I could get a fairly wide collection of FD lenses at pizza prices. The timing in my life has usually been disastrous. This time I lucked out. The "plasticy" FDn lenses have given me zero problems, although I'm not diving for cover in a warzone. Glad that you and many others still regard them as cheap. And, it seems the cinematography world has suddenly caught on to Canon FD lenses. Now my FDn collection includes: 15mm/2.8 (superb!), 17mm/4, 24mm/2.8 (maybe best vintage sharpness and IQ?), 28mm/2 (rivals the Distagon "Hollywood"?), 28mm/2.8, 35/2 (almost as good as the legendary Distagon 35mm/1.4, which is HEAVY and big), 35/2.8 (IQ!, light & cheap), 50mm/1.4 (best-performing pre-ASPH, pre-APO vintage 50ish?, sharper corners compared with the Planar), 50mm/1.8 (flares a lot, cheap & light performer, Canon's counterpoint to Nikon E series), 50mm/3.5 macro (is there a better macro?), 85mm/1.8 (sleeper! In top 3 for me, CA can be edited away), 85mm/1.2 L (need I say more?), 100mm/2.8 (at least as good as the legendary Nikkor 105mm/2.5, or Minolta 100mm/2.5?), 135mm/2.8 (compact, best-performing 135mm/2.8?), 200mm/2.8 SSC (FDn is not lighter, so I chose the sturdier SSC breech-mount due to the length and weight), and the 500mm/8 mirror-reflex telephoto.
You may be able to sharpen your image using the K&F adapter. Have you tried to rotate the glass? This is usually how I troubleshoot focus issues with my speedbooster (viltrox and metabones)
So many options in lenses now and days. I'm thinking about a Contax set or trying out the Meike S35 lenses.
I have both and love them both !! The Meike are proper cinema lenses and really good value with a beautiful image.
Nice video flo! Love the zeiss. You are right these lenses fall apart at 1.4, but very nice from about 2.8 down. Since putting them on an fx6 there is a LOT of vig and only goes away at 5.6 or 8
Thanks mate !! How have you been ?
Are you talking about vig on the Zeiss as well ?
@@OfTwoLands the zeiss zf.2. yes things are heating up in sydney again which is great.
Thank you! As always your videos answer the exact questions I had 👍I noticed you have the MM version which have more controlled flare. I liked the look of the Zeiss over fd so I'll go for Zeiss.
No worries, thanks for watching :) !!
Lots of variation in the fd 50 coatings. Nfd in my case has more pronounced coating than the older breach lock fd, but the 35 nfd has a similar coating. I think the nfd 50 has more power for light management, gives slightly warmer tones I think the strong violet back coating does alot to minimize the chromatic flaws in the fd breach lock. These 2 FDs have different mounting distances from flange to front with the fd breachlock type the front element is deeper set in. These are practical differences that may not comply with all camera flange distances equally because of the electro optical nature of light and the sensor..so even though it seems the 50 is a cut and dry case it's best to try these different copies and pairing with the right camera
Nice video, interesting comparison. I have quite a few FD lenses, and I really like them. The 35mm ssc f 2.0 is a gem.
I like the few Zeiss lenses I have too, they are really something.
A budget alternative can be Minolta Rokkor lenses.
I have the same two Canon FDs as you and cant justify spending 1k just to replace them with Zeiss, although i would love to own them. These are just for special occasions when the project needs this look and for most corporate videos or other payed stuff i need a sharp lens like Sigma Art. But maybe the Zeiss Milvus are something to look into. They can produce highend images since they reportedly share the same glass as Zeiss CP.2/CP.3 but with a filter you can mimic a vintage look
I think with lenses it always on the work you do and if you want to own / rent. These days I keep my FD more for stills and the Contax for video only :).
I own also this two canon fd 24 2.8 and 50 1.4 and really like em …. Using them on Panasonic s1 with cheap adapter… maybe you should try em on you eos R 😀
I love them as well, I haven't used them on my R but always loved their image on my BMPCC4K. Such a good little combo :)
As far as I'm aware, the optics used in Contax Zeiss lenses were so advanced for their time that their are still used in the CP2s, CP3s and Zeiss 'Classics' with minor updates. The 21mm f/2.8 and 28mm f/2 are two of those lenses.
I have the 28mm f/2 ZF.2 version. In addition to its high micro-contrast, the optical character the lens has is very unique.
The only thing I don't like about Zeiss with Yashica (contax) mount is the long run they had over decades, which means different coating on lenses. You can see that on the coating color. Beside that they do haze, which I haven't seen on Zeiss with HFT coating.
In my opinion the Zeiss HFT are better choice, of you can find them.
The HFT do also have the unique triangle aperture on 35mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.4, which you might have seen in many Hollywood movies
Great Video Flo!
Did you go for de MM or AE version of de Contax Zeiss?
Thanks !! They are all MM since I didn't want the star shaped bokeh :).
I've never heard of Helios lenses other than the 58mm. Did they produce other focal ranges? I would immediately buy a set of their lenses.
There are also a bunch of cheap modern lenses like TT Artisan, 7artisans and Pergear that give a vintage look. They're much wilder than these, but still...
I'm building up my FD SSC set! 24mm f2.8, 55mm f1.2, and 85mm f1.8. Love the look and physical feel/focusing of the fully manual lenses. They definitely lose a lot of contrast in direct light, are people using matte boxes?
Nice, the SSCs are beautiful! I do use matte boxes with mine when possible. However the Contax Zeiss do a better job than my FDs re contrast so I don't feel the need to use a MB each time :).
Nice video. Looking at picking up the Zeiss as well as I have some modern Zeiss glass which I love. Just a note: a have a set of FD's that don't flare in this way. I suspect either your coatings are worn or perhaps it is your adapter causing it.
Canon FD 50mm f1.2 is nearly 2/3rd of a stop brighter than the f1.4 lens using the same aperture, might be something to do with the bigger front element and if you go down to f1.2 would make it a full stop different compared to f1.4
Honestly from what i see on youtube the Contax Zeiss looks better than any new lenss...
Right on
Thank you !!
Your using a very cheap adapter on those fd’s. You lose a stop of light and they decrease the field of view/crop factor. Your also shooting through an extra piece of very cheap glass so your going to get ghosting /CA.
I have both a Canon FD SSC Aspherical 55mm f 1.1.2 and a Carl Zeiss Planar f 1.1.4 50mm lens. I have used both in SLR bodies with flm. They have super performance.
Now I want to use them on my Sony Nex series mirrorless camera. I need to get the appropriate Adapter.
I have the color ultron 50mm 1.4 which is said to be made by zeiss and seems very close or the same as the zeiss planar. I think it's a wonderful piece of glass
Thanks for the overview, I found this video after falling down the rabbit hole at the contax guide over at redusers. Question on the lens handling, how/where do you typically grip the lens to mount/unmount? Ergonomically I am always a little sketch because my nikon gear has a defined grip area on the lens barrel that's stationary. With im trying to grip the little section between the focus and aperture rings. Thanks again, loved the video.
been wanting to collect this vintage lens lineups slowly because I reallt love the output from this lenses but it is really hard to find good condition ones 😐
Yes, it is, it took me months to get my kit!
Planning on adding a Canon FD set for my Fuji X. The price is only gonna go up with the popularity of vintage right now. Why would you not use the Canons for “serious work”?
He used an adapter that seriously degrades the image quality. If you leave out the adapter with the plastic glass element z the quality is much better. But you won't be able to focus to infinity. So no landscape photography. The solution here would be to buy a conversion kit that permanently changes the mount from FD to EF and corrects the slight mismatch in distance that causes this issue. This cost 150€ for machined aluminum or around 50€ 3d-printed.
Hey Flo! I was wondering if you've experienced any increased CA from your Zeiss kit on the BMPCC4k and 6k? I just purchased a Contax Zeiss 35mm f1.4 and am experiencing an abundance of CA. I'm not new to vintage glass, but this lens produces more than any of my other lenses (takumar 25 f2, helios 85mm f1.5, Nikon 50mm, etc.). However, when I threw the lens on my Canon 5D Mark iii all the CA seemed to have vanished. So I was wondering if there was something specific to the Black Magic sensors or if I got a poor performing lens.
Are you using an adaptor with glass because is a speed boost? or is because the focal distance? Because if this adapter is fixing the distance between the lens and the sensor you are loosing the real look on the FDs
You should do a Leica R comparison with these too sometime!
I would love to but I don't own any. A friend a mine does so hopefully we can make this happen soon :)!!
@@OfTwoLands If you were in the Bay Area, California, I could totally lend you my set!
I currently have the canon fds I love the soft image but using the fd to ef adapter holds the lens back with the infinity focus problem and the too soft look it gives when the lens is wide open
Yes, using adapters can always be a problem. On my bmpcc4K I always had a clean image though :).
I had the same issue when I tried to use my FD lenses on BMPCC 6K pro.
Are there and trustfull online shops Where I can buy these lenses without Fungus etc?
Keep in mind, that this gentelman uses an adapter that significantly messes up the image on FD glass... I dont think its fair to call it a comparison this way...
Swapping mounts to EF would make the image look different!
So what adapter I need to use for connect FD lenses with BMPCC 6k/4k and Canond 5D Mark ii?
Hi! Do you standardise the rear of the contax lenses? Ie: all of them have an EF adapter + EF rear lens cap? Tk u
Hey I have the 25 mm Zeiss and had no idea there was a 28… is the 28 worth it over the 25?
Hey, I haven't actually used the 25mm yet so can't really compare. All I know is that I love my 28 :)
The Contax Zeiss Distagon T* 25/2.8 is known to be one of the poorest performers in the line, with soft corners. The 28/2.8 is significantly better. The 28/2 has a rendering that is unsurpassed, but a price to match.
I have both Contax Ziess and Canon FD. HOWEVER, I think you have the NFD versions. Otherwise your build comparison would be different. Older FDs are all metal. I stay away from the NFD Canons and go for the ones built in the 70s. Anyway, great video. Thanks
I've been thinking on getting a prime lens that's a bit more serious. I am looking at the FD 1.2 or maybe the Samyang / Rokinon, then this video came up.
The Zeiss is certainly a better image technically. So for that I think they do offer more flexibility for actual paid work. The FDs I worry it is actually probably harder to find such high quality versions due to them being so common, needle in the hay stack.
I think Samyang may off the balance of vintage-ness while offering some more coma and other aberrations / defects.
Then again I also feel I don't shoot enough to justify any of them 😅
Thanks for another lovely video Flo.
Thanks for watching man !!
Haha there is no such thing as not shooting enough, I'd say go for one anyway :).
A 24 or 28mm covers a lot of subjects. I am sure if you get one you will find more things to shoot. I got quite inspired when I first got my vintage lenses.
Let me know if you do :)
what size of step up ring do you use on contax lens?
So cool.. interested to try canon fd for the price.. does conon fd give 3D pop / dimension like leica r/ zeiss? & may I asked your setting for Rode NTG mic, the volume number & the audio gain % in the setting menu? For the best audio result, less noise/hiss.. many thanks.
Thanks !! The FD don't really have that Pop, it really is more a Contax Zeiss feature.
Do you mean for the Voice over or on camera ?
For voice over I plug it directly into my macbook 16 and have the dial on 4. On camera it really depends on the location.
There's a cheap FD-EOS optical adapter in the way! Of course this will kill the image quality on the FD lenses. This is not a fair comparison.
@@OfTwoLands Thanks for the answer.. yes that 3d pop is really special character 😇. For the mic volume, it is for the rode ntg dial volume & camera % gain audio at the run n gun situation (not the voice over), more or less number.. like maybe 8 for ntg & 75% for camera gain? thanks...
I think I am almost done building my Contax Zeiss set.. 28mm f2.8, 35mm 2.8, two 50mm f1.4 (selling one if anyone is interested), and the 100mm f2.
Any others I should look for? 🙏
I would be interested in purchasing the 50mm 1.4.
@@frenchyoutube9871 I will sell it to you! It is a mint condition AEJ f1.4 model (ninja star bokeh) with a simmod EF mount, (tab shaved down for Metabones use). I'm asking 350 USD (450 CAD) +50 USD to ship anywhere in North America with tracking and insurance, let me know if you are interested :) only reason for sale is I got this one in a set and I already have the 1.4, it's one of my favourites for low light shooting
@@connorwagstaff2348 Ah, what a shame. I also use CZ in the original mount for shooting stills, so I don't think a simmodrd version would work for me. Thanks for the offer though!
@@frenchyoutube9871 I have an original too, same model but that one is part of my set. I could swap the mounts
Hello! I was seeing if you were able to provide some advice ! I use the BMPCC 6k and looking at getting the contax after your advice. What adaptor would I need for this and is the cheaper option ok to use ? Thank you !
Hey, I have linked the two adapters I use in the description. Fotodiox and K&F :).
i love vintage lenses.
Me too :) !!
What model of focus ring do youbuse in the lens?
The thing about the Zeiss Contax's is that calling them 'vintage' is potentially deceptive because the standard ones have a modern feel to them. They're like modern lenses with a tad bit of character.
Well they are vintage since they were made 30 years ago, but I know what you mean.
Lol they are from the 80's how exactly are they not vintage because they're sharp? 😂
@@connorwagstaff2348 I am just saying, words and associations can be quite strong with a lot of people. I don't actually like vintage lenses because I don't like the inherent softness and low resolving power and I would rather get my 'character' from using filters. However, the Zeiss Contax lenses are an exception because they good to great resolution yet enough of a 'look' to feel non clinical.
@@bluefilmsltd This video comparison is actually not accurate. The Canon FD lenses were adapted with an optical adapter which under certain conditions negatively impact image quality. It's quite obvious when wide open or backlit, the FD lens automatically perform worse.
At this point i imagine there may be 50 comments similar to this one but, you are using 2 of the more regular Canon fd to compare to contax t* and on top of that you're using an adaptor with a lens between your sensor and the lens...don't sound like an usefull comparison
I compare what I have :).
lol now do one with out using the canon with out mold for the comparison videos
4:59 This comparison is absolutely not fair for Canon FD lenses because you use a cheap optical FD-EOS adapter that severely compromises image quality. Everyone please be aware that this is not a true test of the Canon FD lenses!
I actually use the same adapters on both kits for some lenses.. Also, as mentioned before, it isn't a scientific test :).
@@OfTwoLands Of course this isn't about clinical pin sharp results, some like the look actually but I just wanted to point out about that half inch worth of questionable quality glass behind those FD lens. It's like stacking 3 or 4 UV filters on the front of the lens and forgetting that they're there.
The Canon FDn 50mm 1.4 are MUCH better than the FDn 50mm 1.8 ! When you compare, then compare similar Lenses (with similar aperture) do not compare a 24mm with a 28mm Lens !
Oh wow I never been this early hahaha
Haha that was very quick indeed !!
I have fd lenses
Glad to know :)
@@OfTwoLands but those zeiss look really good indeed
@@gicechicken7062 The Canon's image quality is severely affected by the cheap FD-EOS optical adapter. They perform better on shorter focal flange distance mirrorless cameras.
The FDs look so bad. Its incredible!!! I mean, they get the image on the sensor. But that quality WTF! I would say that look is at best worth 50 euros. They dont deserve to be at that price point. Very bad quality. Almost unusable!
Any canon modern cheap lens is HEADS better. Even the cheapest ones... Primes i mean.
The Zeiss though!!! wow! Mca!! The best images i have seen ever, always come from Zeiss. And Leica, they dont realy put themselves out as being profesional gear. Its more of a prestige thing. We are expensive, is what they ride. Not necesarily the actual use of theyr equipment...
Great video! Love the in-depth demos.
Glad you do guys, thank you !!
Do NOT use adapters with Lenses(es), use adapters without Lens(es), some of the best adapters are made by Novoflex.
Super vidéo. merci
Merci d’avoir regardé :) !!
Nice comparison!
Thanks!!