FD lenses on a DSLR

I have just bought my first DSLR, a 450d. I recently read an article written by Bob Atkins, where he claims that it is possible to use FD lenses on DSLR by using a converter. Does anyone have any first hand experience using this method? Sorry if the question has been asked before, I couldn't find anything with a search.

I have a number of Canon FD lenses that I used on my T90 35mm camera.

Any help would be very much appreciated.

It can be done. It's generally not worth the effort.

The best FD to EOS adapter was made by Canon in limited numbers and was designed for the FD300/2.8L and longer lenses only - it includes a lens group so acts as a 1.25x(?) extender.

The adapters you can buy easily are similar but not of very good optical quality - especially with shorter focal lengths. You can remove the lens and then you have an extension tube which is fine for close-up work only but will not focus to infinity.

If you can find a real Canon made adapter second-hand it is likely to cost serious money - I saw one advertised for around $600 a couple of years ago!

I converted a canon FD 50mm f/1.4 to do macro and also able to focus to infinity, but I mainly use it for macro. The lens I have is wacky bc a group of lens can be move in and out of the barrel. The aperture is set fixed to wide open.

I used m42>eos adapter w/ some rtv silicone and some reinforcement. it's worth the 40bucks total spent on lens and adapter.

Thanks guys for your replies. It is my FD macro lens that I would like to use if possible.

For macro get one of the lens-less FD->EOS converters. They can be had for around $10 and they work great. I use my 50mm f/3.5 SSC macro and Bellows FL with my T1i just like this. I was using it as a 'scanner' last night with a slide duplicator to take images of some old slides and it works as well as one would expect; i.e. not as good as a real scanner, never really worked that well with film either but for actual macro work it's great.

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/hpulley/4115967​753/

Oh and the 300mm f/4L focuses to about 30 feet as well, without glass! Long enough for some "blind" hidden birding:

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/hpulley/4115968​539/

Thanks Harry, that's what I shall get, not a lot of money if it doesn't work.

I'm interested In this too, I was thinking for video use, a 70-200 FD would be useful as the zoom and focus are both on the same ring allowing smoother focus, and zooming is much smoother as you push/pull instead of twist...

benesotor wrote in post #9139293
I'm interested In this too, I was thinking for video use, a 70-200 FD would be useful as the zoom and focus are both on the same ring allowing smoother focus, and zooming is much smoother as you push/pull instead of twist...

I don't think there was a FD 70-200, you must be thinking of the FD 70-210mm f/4 which was one-touch push-pull zoom and focus on the same ring. The EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM is also one-touch push-pull zoom and focus.

hpulley wrote in post #9133850
For macro get one of the lens-less FD->EOS converters. They can be had for around $10 and they work great. I use my 50mm f/3.5 SSC macro and Bellows FL with my T1i just like this. I was using it as a 'scanner' last night with a slide duplicator to take images of some old slides and it works as well as one would expect; i.e. not as good as a real scanner, never really worked that well with film either but for actual macro work it's great.

Have you posted any of the slides you have done this way? I'd be interested to have a look at them.

Here are a couple. Even with live view 10x I can't seem to get the focus bang on perfect but they still look OK:

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/hpulley/4159317​411/

Interesting, thanks for sharing. I love shooting slide film but accurate scans take forever unless you're up to spending well into four figures for a high speed film/slide scanner.

Like hpully's image my result with the conversion has always been a not favorable one due to excessive Chromatic aberration even with top notch L series FD lenses.

samsen wrote in post #9140323
Like hpully's image my result with the conversion has always been a not favorable one due to excessive Chromatic aberration even with top notch L series FD lenses.

You are shooting a picture of a picture. Last year a local processor destroyed a roll of print film after they processed the prints. I had to shoot images of the prints on my copystand. They came out okay but nothing like I could have done on the film scanner if the negatives hadn't been mutilated.