Thread: Canon FD vs K35

Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 39
  1. #21  
    Be aware that the direction of the iris rotation is "backwards" on Canon FD glass. Whereas the iris direction on Canon K35 glass is "normal", same as with most true cinema glass. Not as big of a deal as backwards focus direction, but still something to keep in mind.

    I've always been curious as to the trends in iris direction and focus direction. Several lens-makers switched the direction of the iris at some point. Other stuck with the iris direction or focus direction that fell out of favor.

    As with Zeiss "superspeeds", there is a cult status surrounding the K35's. In part due to the relative rarity of the K35's. That cult status results in K35's being imo overpriced on the used market. Much in the way pre-1973 Porsche 911's are overpriced as a result of cult status.

    K35's are not without their headaches. You may find the discussion in the link interesting:


    https://cinematography.com/index.php...erican-hustle/


    excerpt:

    "With regards to the Canon K35 lenses, there are 3 key points that are very vulnerable to DEAD PLAY or DEAD MOTION in the focus mechanism. Since it is a floating front objective design (as opposed to a fixed head design) the focusing transport is vulnerable to backlash - especially if not maintained.



    The K35's helical assembly is aluminum on brass which can wear very easily over time especially if this lens is from the 1979 era. The brass on aluminum helical assembly mates the parts together and has an approximate measured error of .0015” or 0.038mm backlash. This alone could account for an unreliable focus transport.



    Another point of interest is in the lens helical capture. This is a brass on aluminum on brass configuration that is threaded in place to the correct height and is held in position with loc-tite! This setup can potentially come loose or wear down over time and create a noticeable backlash. This means a measured .002” or 0.050mm end to end play which can easily create backlash especially if combined with some helical wear.



    The third point is the floating objective. The mechanism is held in by a fit and located by a brass key. Play in either or the mentioned parts could lead to an image shift as well as backlash. Remember, we were driving these lenses with powerful Preston focus motors and most likely overwhelmed the focus transport components.



    A final point worth mentioning is that these lenses typically have fairly strong traces of secondary color that can sometimes convolve the image quality and make seeing focus difficult at wide open. I'm not convinced that this was our case but it's a possibility."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #22  
    Thats a bit lame I think. Any set of lenses can be worn out. My K35s where rattling quite a bit. Had them serviced and they where like new again. Sure most older lenses are built a bit fragile but then you also have the option to rehouse them. Lot if well made rehousings for both FDs and K35s out there.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se
    Flame / VFX / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #23  
    I've gone and insulted your babies. Babies I wish I owned.

    It appears that some of the negatives he encountered are not a result of age but a result of the design itself. When the K35's were developed they were still 'figuring out' how to make cinema glass. They are a design of that time. Hence, no iris gearing because back then iris motors weren't yet a thing. Or focus motors. The K35's were simply not designed for the rigors of focus motors. And yes, re-housing helps greatly with things.

    I've taken this off-course from the Canon FD's. Didn't mean to. Sorry about that.

    For a time there were a couple of rehoused FD lenses on eBay that sat un-purchased. I considered building an FD set of primes but felt they aren't going to be that different from the CY set I already own. I decided to go with something way different from the Contax glass I own- Otus primes. That way I'll own poor-man's Superspeeds and poor-man's Masterprimes.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #24  
    Senior Member Nick Morrison's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    8,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    Thats a bit lame I think. Any set of lenses can be worn out. My K35s where rattling quite a bit. Had them serviced and they where like new again. Sure most older lenses are built a bit fragile but then you also have the option to rehouse them. Lot if well made rehousings for both FDs and K35s out there.
    Yeah once they get rehoused this issues go away / no longer matter.
    Nick Morrison
    Founder, Director & Lead Creative
    // SMALL GIANT //
    smallgiant.tv
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #25  
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    94
    I own 7 of the brand new GL Optics Mk4 rehoused FDs (14, 24, 28, 35, 55, 85 and 135) and absolutely love them. They really stepped up their game a lot since the Mk3 housings. Not only is CF improved but they also replaced the iris from the original 8 blade to a 13 blade iris.








    I just shot a project with A Cam on K35s and B Cam on my FDs and they match surprisingly closely. The FDs are definitely cooler and slightly contrastier - as a result I usually use a 1/8 or sometimes a 1/4 Ultra Contrast to get a better match.

    As far as a direct match to the K35s I only got around to compare a TLS rehoused K35 set at Keslow LA to the old GL Optics Mk3 housing (with the original iris) of the FDs.

    Here is the K35 85mm wide open straight out of the camera:




    Here is the GL Optics Mk3 FD 85mm wide open straight out of the camera:




    With a color temp adjustment of +600K and I believe +5 green, I got a fairly close match:




    And last but not least here is a direct comparison: left frame: K35, right: FD (+600K, +5 Tint)




    As you can see the K35 have lifted, warmer and more muddied shadows. Bokeh seems nearly identical.
    I'll have to dig out the original high res files as well as R3Ds to share here.


    Cheers!
    Tim
    __________________________________________________ _____________________________
    timsessler.com & brooklynaerials.com | RED Monstro 8K VV
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #26  
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    94
    And here are a couple frame grabs from the GL Optics Mk4 FDs - mostly with a pretty heavy 1/2 Ultra Contrast on Monstro @ 8K (not graded):

    55mm:











    85mm:

    __________________________________________________ _____________________________
    timsessler.com & brooklynaerials.com | RED Monstro 8K VV
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Sessler View Post
    I own 7 of the brand new GL Optics Mk4 rehoused FDs (14, 24, 28, 35, 55, 85 and 135) and absolutely love them. They really stepped up their game a lot since the Mk3 housings. Not only is CF improved but they also replaced the iris from the original 8 blade to a 13 blade iris.








    I just shot a project with A Cam on K35s and B Cam on my FDs and they match surprisingly closely. The FDs are definitely cooler and slightly contrastier - as a result I usually use a 1/8 or sometimes a 1/4 Ultra Contrast to get a better match.

    As far as a direct match to the K35s I only got around to compare a TLS rehoused K35 set at Keslow LA to the old GL Optics Mk3 housing (with the original iris) of the FDs.

    Here is the K35 85mm wide open straight out of the camera:




    Here is the GL Optics Mk3 FD 85mm wide open straight out of the camera:




    With a color temp adjustment of +600K and I believe +5 green, I got a fairly close match:




    And last but not least here is a direct comparison: left frame: K35, right: FD (+600K, +5 Tint)




    As you can see the K35 have lifted, warmer and more muddied shadows. Bokeh seems nearly identical.
    I'll have to dig out the original high res files as well as R3Ds to share here.


    Cheers!
    Tim
    Those are really nice Tim. I have not seen them before.

    Just a note... As you say the difference between your FD and the K35 is very slim. I bet its so slim so if you pick up another, same focal length K35, it might be the difference between 2 K35´s are bigger. If you shot a color chart and pick match those then I think nobody would be able to tell which was what. Looks like a hint more cromatic errors around the bar that holds the chart on FD but if they where closed down just a stop I think that would be difficult to spot.

    I have a set of FD´s at Easterns Enterprises waiting for rehouse. But I might take them to GL instead.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se
    Flame / VFX / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #28  
    Senior Member Jacek Zakowicz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,289
    I just shot a project with A Cam on K35s and B Cam on my FDs and they match surprisingly closely. The FDs are definitely cooler and slightly contrastier - as a result I usually use a 1/8 or sometimes a 1/4 Ultra Contrast to get a better match.

    As far as a direct match to the K35s I only got around to compare a TLS rehoused K35 set at Keslow LA to the old GL Optics Mk3 housing (with the original iris) of the FDs.
    It looks like the K35 85mm lens has the very common Thorium element "browning/yellowing" issue- hence the color shift. Almost like putting 81/85 orange filter. The FD apparently does not have this problem and it is faster and more neutral as the result- that's what we are seeing- This is definitely not intentional on the 85mm K35- this is a flaw in the glass related to the age of the glass. If you look through the K35 at a white card it would appear beige/brown tinted- make no mistake- not a good thing. I think the FD would be a better choice optically- if nothing else to get more light through it and easier color correction/coloring on the more neutral image...
    BTW I also see this issue on the 35mm K35s and sometimes the 55mm
    Jacek Zakowicz, Optitek-dot-org, jacek2@optitek.org
    Professional Broadcast and Digital Cinema Equipment
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #29  
    Jacek the issue with the 85mm K35 could turn better if left in the sun or under a UV lamp,no?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #30  
    Senior Member Karim D. Ghantous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Melbourne AU
    Posts
    1,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Sessler View Post
    I own 7 of the brand new GL Optics Mk4 rehoused FDs (14, 24, 28, 35, 55, 85 and 135) and absolutely love them. They really stepped up their game a lot since the Mk3 housings. Not only is CF improved but they also replaced the iris from the original 8 blade to a 13 blade iris.
    I don't suppose you are willing to say how much you paid for that set?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Sessler View Post
    And here are a couple frame grabs from the GL Optics Mk4 FDs - mostly with a pretty heavy 1/2 Ultra Contrast on Monstro @ 8K (not graded):
    Lovely images!
    Good production values may not be noticed. Bad production values will be.
    Pinterest
    | Flickr | Instagram | Martini Ultra (blog)
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts