Canon FD 50mm 1.4 lens on a Nikon D610? I currently have a AF-S Nikon 50mm 1.8 lens and have been coveting the 1.4. In preparing to offload an old Canon AE-1 (which has been on a shelf...

Konimom Loc: Virginia

I currently have a AF-S Nikon 50mm 1.8 lens and have been coveting the 1.4. In preparing to offload an old Canon AE-1 (which has been on a shelf in my closet for 20 years or so), I realized it was outfitted with a Canon FD 50mm 1.4 lens. So my question is, if I buy a $10 adaptor ring, will it provide the same results on my Nikon D610 as a Nikon 50mm 1.4? While I know it's a manual focus, will all other things be equal and thus I'll be able to determine if I want to spring for the auto focus Nikon lens, or will there be no comparison, and it's not worth the effort of acquiring the adaptor ring? Perhaps, I'd even just want to stick with the Canon manual focus lens? Thoughts?

amehta Loc: Boston

I would say there is no comparison, and I believe the adapter rings only work the other way, Nikon lens mounted on a Canon body. You could rent the 50mm f/1.4 for a weekend instead.

amehta Loc: Boston

amehta wrote:

I would say there is no comparison

I don't mean that the FD lens is inferior, but that it will perform best on a different mount, so it is not a fair comparison with the lens designed for that mount.

wingclui44 Loc: CT USA

Konimom wrote:

I currently have a AF-S Nikon 50mm 1.8 lens and ha... (show quote)

I will say no too! I did the same using an adapter for a Canon FD lens on my Nikon, the IQ were so poor, color fringe was all over the image, because the low quality of glass element in the adapter.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Konimom wrote:

I currently have a AF-S Nikon 50mm 1.8 lens and ha... (show quote)

What do you want for it...It'll adapt just fine on my rig. I'm always on the lookout for fast glass.

Konimom Loc: Virginia

The adaptor I'm looking at doesn't have any glass....

wingclui44 wrote:

I will say no too! I did the same using an adapter for a Canon FD lens on my Nikon, the IQ were so poor, color fringe was all over the image, because the low quality of glass element in the adapter.

Konimom Loc: Virginia

My real question is if it works okay, will it be a true representation of what a Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.4 will look like, or are there more considerations that I'm not aware of?

amehta Loc: Boston

Konimom wrote:

The adaptor I'm looking at doesn't have any glass....

Could you please post a link for it? Thanks.

amehta Loc: Boston

Konimom wrote:

My real question is if it works okay, will it be a true representation of what a Nikon AF-S 50mm 1.4 will look like, or are there more considerations that I'm not aware of?

Why do you want the f/1.4 when you already have the f/1.8? This is a serious question, and I think your answer will be part of my response to your question.

Konimom Loc: Virginia

Amazon has several, but here is one:
http://www.amazon.com/XCSOURCE%C2%AE-Adapter-Canon-Nikon-Mount/dp/B00BJG6O90/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1390486875&sr=8-2&keywords=canon+to+nikon+lens+adapter

amehta wrote:

Could you please post a link for it? Thanks.

amehta Loc: Boston

Konimom wrote:

Amazon has several, but here is one:
http://www.amazon.com/XCSOURCE%C2%AE-Adapter-Canon-Nikon-Mount/dp/B00BJG6O90/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1390486875&sr=8-2&keywords=canon+to+nikon+lens+adapter

Thanks.

Here's the key:

Feature:
Completely manual control, manual focus and manual exposure
Made of Aluminum and Brass with High Quality
NOT support focus infinity in manually, for MACRO shooting only

Everything I've read about this points out that the Nikon mount puts the lens farther away from the sensor than the Canon mount, and this adds even more distance. So the key part of the adapter ring description is "for MACRO shooting only", and you are basically using this as an extension tube. It will not be representative of normal shooting with the Nikon 50mm f/1.4.

Konimom Loc: Virginia

I love Bokeh and also, the lower light capability....But since I'm not sure how much an advantage this would be, I'm interested in fooling around with the Canon lens I have, provided it's a good comparison...

amehta wrote:

Why do you want the f/1.4 when you already have the f/1.8? This is a serious question, and I think your answer will be part of my response to your question.

amehta Loc: Boston

Konimom wrote:

I love Bokeh and also, the lower light capability....But since I'm not sure how much an advantage this would be, I'm interested in fooling around with the Canon lens I have, provided it's a good comparison...

I thought that's what you would say. Bokeh is not a characteristic of the aperture, it is a characteristic of the lens. The Nikon 50mm f/1.4G will not have the same bokeh as the Nikon 50mm f/1.4D. The Canon lens will tell you nothing about the bokeh of the Nikon lens.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

amehta wrote:

I thought that's what you would say. Bokeh is not a characteristic of the aperture, it is a characteristic of the lens. The Nikon 50mm f/1.4G will not have the same bokeh as the Nikon 50mm f/1.4D. The Canon lens will tell you nothing about the bokeh of the Nikon lens.

I would say to some degree bokeh is based on aperture...or at least the amount of bokeh you get in an image is. An apeture set at f1.4 is going to produce more bokeh than set at f4.

It's the quality of bokeh that is based on the lens.

amehta Loc: Boston

Cdouthitt wrote:

I would say to some degree bokeh is based on aperture...or at least the amount of bokeh you get in an image is. An apeture set at f1.4 is going to produce more bokeh than set at f4.

It's the quality of bokeh that is based on the lens.

We might disagree on the definition of bokeh. I would say that depth of field is the indicator of what is out of focus, and bokeh is the quality of how that looks.

Does Konimom care about the amount of blur, or the quality of the blur? If it's the amount, that can be simulated with her Nikon 50mm f/1.8. If it's the quality, only the Nikon 50mm f/1.8G will show her what that particular lens does.