Canon EF lens on FD body

D

Dangerous_Dave

Suspended / Banned
Messages
128
Name
Dave
Edit My Images
No
Has anyone managed this? I have been right round the internet and not been able to find an adaptor.

I know it is generally a daft idea as most EF lenses lack an aperture ring etc, but I own several manual EF lenses (Samyang, Zenitar) for long exposure work as well as a range of adaptors for the EF, so a single EF:FD adaptor would open lots of doors for me.

SRB Griturn have made me custom adaptors in the past, but I would rather not pay one-off rates if an off-the-shelf solution exists.

thanks
 
Just done a quick search and there seems to be a few questions asked like this across the internet.

The general concensus is that because EF lenses lack aperture control (it's all done electronically), the lenses would have to be used wide open and I guess, because most people want to run FD lenses on EF bodies (and not vice versa like you're asking) it wouldn't be economically viable for mass-production. Just my take on it... :)
 
Thanks for the replies. As it happens, I scored an EOS300 for pennies off ebay the other day, which I am going to use to get my bearings with film, but I was really after something 'battery-free' as back up on a trip to shoot the aurora. My DSLR batteries run flat in no time in those temperatures - I was getting <5 mins out of a BP511 at -10c last winter.
 
Well nikon did some good mechanic film cameras http://www.cameraquest.com/nikonslr.htm and you can get fully compatible and affordable nikon primes for them. However film is film and it doesn't have the resolution or convenience of digital.

I am not sure what the problem with your batteries is - maybe very exhausted and need replacement. Are they genuine, or very old?
My 1D III was fine for a whole day in the Alps last winter (bloody freezing, about -25C at some point) on a single charge. I am not suggesting you buy that camera, but merely indicating that it is possible to use it in winter for longer times.

P.S. Aurora is on list and I need a good enough lens.
 
Another trick with batteries in cold weather is to keep them in your pocket until you actually need to take some shots, and put it back when you stop. Helps to keep the battery warm to last longer. Just make sure there is nothing in your pocket that the terminals can short out on.
 
Even most Canon FD cameras require a battery as the shutter is electronic so no battery = no shutter = no shots.

Generally anything before the A Series such as an FTb will be fine as the batteries only power the meter but then you'll need a handheld meter or other camera.

Film cameras don't tend to eat through batteries like digital, 2 CR-2's like the EOS 300 takes will last for quite a while (Those in my Minolta Dynax 5 from about 2001 is still going fine after using it for a year and running about 10+ rolls through it with the flash being used sometimes to trigger a wireless flash)
 
Dangerous_Dave said:
Thanks for the replies. As it happens, I scored an EOS300 for pennies off ebay the other day, which I am going to use to get my bearings with film, but I was really after something 'battery-free' as back up on a trip to shoot the aurora. My DSLR batteries run flat in no time in those temperatures - I was getting <5 mins out of a BP511 at -10c last winter.
Click to expand...

Maybe the good old F1,build like a tank :)
 
Thanks again for the replies. Yes, the plan was a mechanical shutter SLR. As the plan was to use it purely for bulb shots, the metering is a minor inconvenience.

After posting, I sent an email to SRB Griturn and received a very helpful reply from their technician Ian Broomhead:

In order for the EF lens to focus to infinity on an FD body, the effective thickness of the adaptor can only be 2.00mm.
The EF bayonet is larger in diameter than the FD, so the lens cannot be located in the correct position as the rear bayonet needs to go down inside the throat of the camera by about 4mm. Regrettably, this is not mechanically possible.
Click to expand...

So plan B it is.

Regarding batteries, I suspect about 50-60% are non-Canon [sic] so yes, I can take action there. And sort out a battery grip of course.

Meanwhile I will have a shop around for a nice F1.

Thanks
 
daugirdas said:
Well nikon did some good mechanic film cameras http://www.cameraquest.com/nikonslr.htm and you can get fully compatible and affordable nikon primes for them. However film is film and it doesn't have the resolution or convenience of digital.

I am not sure what the problem with your batteries is - maybe very exhausted and need replacement. Are they genuine, or very old?
My 1D III was fine for a whole day in the Alps last winter (bloody freezing, about -25C at some point) on a single charge. I am not suggesting you buy that camera, but merely indicating that it is possible to use it in winter for longer times.

P.S. Aurora is on list and I need a good enough lens.
Click to expand...

Umm...just been thinking about this and isn't it the other way around? I know film grains are generally larger at 10+ microns but they don't work the same as pixels eg aren't superimposed by a bayer matrix. There is also the cost issue - for the price of a full frame DSLR you could have a large format camera which beats it all ends up for image quality. I certainly agree with the convenience argument, that is a no-brainer.
 
Scarecrow said:
Another trick with batteries in cold weather is to keep them in your pocket until you actually need to take some shots, and put it back when you stop. Helps to keep the battery warm to last longer. Just make sure there is nothing in your pocket that the terminals can short out on.
Click to expand...

Sod your pockets, put them in your undies :lol:
 
Dangerous_Dave said:
Umm...just been thinking about this and isn't it the other way around? I know film grains are generally larger at 10+ microns but they don't work the same as pixels eg aren't superimposed by a bayer matrix. There is also the cost issue - for the price of a full frame DSLR you could have a large format camera which beats it all ends up for image quality. I certainly agree with the convenience argument, that is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

No, not quite. 35mm was mainly professionally used for reportage and lifestyle photos back in the day.

Anything that required higher resolution like landscapes or fashion, were shot on large or medium formats, respectively.

If you tried to scan 35mm (or get it done professionally) you would quickly realise that it doesn't hold it's own against 8MP digital, let alone bigger sensor cameras. You may need to go down to 25 ISO, to get reasonable detail on film. The dynamic range will be better, but only on some selected films (the others have very high contrast).
To put this into a different perspective I have printed 8MP shots at A3 and they look fine, but I could only print 35mm (FD 300/2.8L) up to 10x15 before it 'collapsed' to clearly visible grain.

In other words if you want to shoot film for professional landscape applications you should be looking a Large format
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top