love how you did this ungraded bro most people dont.. i have a bunch of canon fds i have the 50mm 1.4 but that looks os close to my panasonic 50mm 1.8 and i want more vintage look may pick this one up. i have a 35mm f2 and that thing has so much character lol
Absolutely - I always try to do ungraded - that was something I always searched for when looking to buy lenses and could never find so it's my contribution to the world aha. I love my FD 50! One of my faves. Another option for character would be the konica 50 1.4 and also super cheap. I have some ungraded test footage of that on listed as well.
@@averykevans6894 interesting idk if im familiar with that. i havent gotten anything besides canon fd cuz ill go down the vintage rabbit hole and go nuts lol
@@A1Bokeh I'm deep in there aha. The Konicas are also still pretty cheap. The 50 1.4 f22 version is the one you want and they're only about $70 on eBay
@@dark-california IMO yup. The 1.4 is better in many ways for me. It is sharper at every f-stop til 5.6 at which point they even up a bit. The flares on the 55 is beautiful to me but it doesn't "match" the other FD SSC as well. The 1.4 also has an extremely pleasant glow at 1.4/2 that the 1.2 doesn't. The 1.2 has its own type of glow but for me it isn't as nice. Both great lenses but if I had to choose again if pick the 1.4. with that said I am selling this 1.2 aha :)
Hi Avery, thank you so much for your videos. Would be nice to know in what condition your lens is. Cause I saw different test footages with this one and they didn't have this much of a glow and dreamy effect.
Lens was in good condition. Was the footage you saw wide open? I've seen a fair bit from various copies of this lens and when wide open and ungraded it is dreamy and gets dreamier as you go towards infinity focus. Closer up it's not as dreamy. If the footage was graded then it also wouldn't be as dreamy because when you add contrast to it it gets less dreamy. One of my least favorite things about test footage on RU-vid is how hard people grade the footage - to the point where it doesn't look anything like it originally did. One of the main reasons I always post a completely ungraded example so people can actually see what the lens looks like
@@averykevans6894 thank you for your reply. To be honest I don't now, but probably it was graded a lot. Did you have any lens hood or maybe mattebox? Which profile did you use on this one? I'm trying to decide which one I can buy, I've already bought 17mm f4 ssc and 28mm f2 SSC and I'm not sure about 55 f1.2 ssc or ssc aspherical even if the second one costs like 1.6k bucks but you know, like you said in one of your videos at some point you begin to pay a lot even if you get just 10-15% more
@@sergeiantonov5371 I didn't use a hood or a matte box here. My favorite FD 50 is actually one of the cheaper ones. The 50 1.4 - phenomenal little lens. Of course the 55 1.2 aspherical is incredible it's just for the price it's a bit much
Hi, Im looking for manual old lens which has cool flares, do you have any recommendations besides this fd 55mm and super takumar? This fd has really cool flares.
Friend sold me his mint version (ok 8/10) of this lens for $200. Do you find the f1.2 easily switches to the f1.4 on the dial? Mine seems to go from f1.2 to f1.4 very loosely.
What a deal! It should feel the same between every change, I would guess there is some sort of damage or wear on that specific ridge where the bearing travels from and into. If you feel confident in servicing FDs it would be easy to verify
For these basic test videos I don't. I just rack the shutter so the only thing coming through is from the original glass. For actual projects I do though yes
I never got around to doing the side by side. Had a buddy wants to buy the Minolta. I strongly favored the Canon. It retained contrast and detail considerably better than the Minolta when backlit. I also strongly favored the flares from the Canon. Since they were basically the same in terms.of sharpness for me the Canon won.
