Legacy lenses for m4/3: which is worth the money and effort?

[47th_vacuum_space]

I'm probably making two huge mistakes here, the first being the ordering of a GF-1/20mm kit (and thus the inauguration of a third camera system in my drawer), and the second being signing up for this forum, as I already spend way too much time talking about photography on the internet. but, in for a dime, in for a dollar!

I'm quite excited about the GF-1, as I love the idea of a pocketable, large(ish)-sensor interchangeable lens camera. And the 20/1.7 seems like a home run.

But I also came on board interested in adapters and legacy lenses. I ordered two from eBay--the Leica M (as I am fairly heavily invested in this system for film and have an R-D1) and Pen-F. I also picked up a Pen Zuiko 40/1.4 on eBay.

I was initially kind of excited at the idea of the C-mount stuff, and eagerly perused the coverage chart and bokeh thread today. But I was kind of shocked to see how expensive the full-coverage lenses have already become--and, except for the interesting edge smearing effects and weird bokeh, the 20/1.7 seems to render most of them moot.

My question is this. What other legacy systems are worth adapting to the m4/3 cameras? I use Pentax SLR stuff and have the K-7, so there's no need for me to adapt those--plus, even though they're very small by SLR standards, they're certainly not smaller than the m4/3 autofocus lenses. Leica M and Pen seem to be the ones most worth it--tiny, well-made, and sharp all the way across the frame.

It would be nice to use, say, Robot lenses, or Voigtlander Prominent, or some other, more obscure RF system optics, but there don't seem to be adapters yet. I'm tempted by Amedeo's Contax/Nikon (I have his excellent Contax-Leica and will try out a few things using it), but we'll see.

It seems, then, that Pen and Leica are the sweet spot? Am I missing something?

Thanks for all the great info you guys have posted on here, and with any luck I won't burn up too much of my time here.

John

 

[Ranger 9]

I'd suggest that you go ahead and get a K-mount adapter, if only as an inexpensive way to get some extra utility out of lenses you already own. That, M-series, and Pen should be enough to keep you busy for quite a while.

I agree it's too bad the larger-coverage C-mount lenses have gotten expensive, although since these were made for high-end cinematography they've always been fairly pricey. There are still a lot of inexpensive C-mounts that originated on the video side, but as you've noticed from the database, these generally don't have as much coverage.

 

[pellicle]

John

My question is this. What other legacy systems are worth adapting to the m4/3 cameras? I use Pentax SLR stuff and have the K-7, so there's no need for me to adapt those--plus, even though they're very small by SLR standards, they're certainly not smaller than the m4/3 autofocus lenses. Leica M and Pen seem to be the ones most worth it--tiny, well-made, and sharp all the way across the frame.
...
It seems, then, that Pen and Leica are the sweet spot? Am I missing something?

my personal findings are that if one is not going to take advantage of lenses specifically for the system then those lenses which are either
1) already in your posesssion
2) well priced
seem to be the best bet.

For example in "normal to wide" that unless looking for some 'funky look' I find that the C mount lenses (for example) are generally not superior in many / any ways to the 14-45mm kit lens. I found also that my FD 28 f2.8 and my OM 21mm f3.5 while nice lenses are not giving any substantial advantage over the kit either.

I find the best use of adapted lenses in the telephoto area where I find the best value from adapting lenses.

Because of the field of view I actually consider 50mm to be a mild telephoto lens and I'd say that my 50mm is my most used lens now. Especially for indoor 'candid' portraiture.

I recently picked up a very snug 200mm FD f4 telephoto which slips nicely into the netting on my day pack and makes a great lens to have with you for adding that extra reach or ability to focus on details It seems to work nicely from f4 all the way down to f11 so I just leave it on f4 now and benefit from having as much light as possible.

some samples






I also have a nice light and compact 100mm which is great for short telephoto and macro work using extension tubes ... gives me good working distance.

so to me, adding value to my micro 4/3 system by adapted lenses is mainly in the 50mm to 200mm range.

 

[Vivek]

There are still a lot of inexpensive C-mounts that originated on the video side, but as you've noticed from the database, these generally don't have as much coverage.

In a way, I am glad to see this general impression. That ought keep the prices down.:toocool:

 

[OzRay]

If m4/3s keeps maintaining traction (Olympus, Panasonic and possibly even Fuji), or the others bring out APS-C bodies with interchangeable lenses, then I reckon the price of M mount lenses and similar will increase, if not skyrocket.

Cheers

Ray

 

[ChrisJ]

Welcome to the forum mabelsound

Probably the cheapest high quality lenses available are the Pentax Auto 110 lenses, unfortunately they have no aperture control, see here for my workaround with sample images

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10483

There is a m4/3 mount made for them, very expensively. and it doesn't address the aperture problem.

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/PENTAX-110-TO-G1-GH1-OLYMPUS-E-P1-MICRO-43-M4-3-M43_W0QQitemZ320425177320QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLens_Accessories?hash=item4a9ad430e8&_trksid=p3911.c0.m14

The suggestion for a K mount adapter is good as it will give any Pentax M lenses you have a new lease of life, and they're still fairly cheap on eBay.

Chris

 

[PeterB666]

My Olympus E-P1 works very nicely with my collection of OM lenses which I have picked up very cheaply. I also had a Schneider 40mm f/1.9 lens on an old Robot film camera that has now had a new lease of life thanks to my E-P1 and a rather expensive combo C-Mount and Robot lens flange adapter. Even so, paying for the adapter has netted me a very nice shot telephoto lens that is ideal for portraits and night work.

 

[retnull]

Agreed that C-mount lenses in normal focal lengths will not provide "superior image quality". They can, however, give you an unusual, distinctive personality to the image, if that's what you're after.

I was lucky enough to get an Angenieux 25mm 0.95 before the prices skyrocketed. It is one of my favorite lenses ever, though it certainly does not look "ordinary". Without m4/3, I never would have encountered this lens.

Having said that, I plan to buy the new Panasonic 20/1.7, which will probably live on the G1 for 90% of the time.

 

[47th_vacuum_space]

Probably the cheapest high quality lenses available are the Pentax Auto 110 lenses, unfortunately they have no aperture control, see here for my workaround with sample images

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10483

Hey Chris--yes, I was very impressed by your thread! I'll be keeping my eye on the possibility of an adapter with aperture control...indeed, I have been mulling over just buying a Pentax 110 set and sitting on it until somebody comes up with a good adapter. Your solution is impressive though!

The suggestion for a K mount adapter is good as it will give any Pentax M lenses you have a new lease of life, and they're still fairly cheap on eBay.

Like I said, though--I have a Pentax K-7! It's a spectacular camera, and a pleasure to use--I'm just going to stick with that for when I want to do my Pentax shooting on digital.

I also had a Schneider 40mm f/1.9 lens on an old Robot film camera that has now had a new lease of life thanks to my E-P1 and a rather expensive combo C-Mount and Robot lens flange adapter.

That's the exact lens I was thinking of when I was thinking about Robot--that and the 75. I used to have the 40/1.9 on a Robot Star and liked it a lot--I even had it adapted to the R-D1 for a while, but sold it, as I missed rangefinder coupling too much. Now, however, it would work just as well as any other lens. Those Robot lenses are heavy, beautiful hunks of brass.

 

[Coveted Pixel]

K adapter! It's been fun using the E-P1, walking around with the FA43 Ltd, shooting video wide open with the FA31 on the GH1..

I have the Voigtlander Color Skopar 20 in Pentax K-mount and that one is a perfect FL, size, etc.. great 20mm on the K7 and good MF normal on the M43..

The 43 is somewhat compact

the Voigt 125, though was too big to hold and use

Having been a Pentax snob for a while, I was also surprised to find out how good some of the Olympus OM primes are, like the 24 2.8, 35 2.8, and some of the Nikkors as well. And the Oly's are cheap....! Since I had already surgically converted all these Olympus primes and Nikkor primes (about 10 lenses in all) to Pentax Mount, all I needed to get was the Pentax-K adapter...

 

[JBurnett]

But I also came on board interested in adapters and legacy lenses. I ordered two from eBay--the Leica M (as I am fairly heavily invested in this system for film and have an R-D1) and Pen-F. I also picked up a Pen Zuiko 40/1.4 on eBay.

You've got a good strategy going here. With such a compact camera, the ideal complement is compact, lighteight and fast lenses. With the 20mm you have wide/normal covered, with the 40mm Pen (or something similar from your Leica stable) you'll have portrait-length covered.

If you want something in a medium tele (e.g. 135-200mm equivalent), the CV 75mm f/2.5, 90mm Tele-Elmarit f/2.8, or even an Olympus OM 100mm f/2.8 fit the compact/lightweight bill pretty well. Faster lenses will be larger/heavier.

If macro is something you're interested in, there are lots of choices, including the "native" 45mm. Others will require an adapter of some sort. There are excellent 50mm-range legacy macros from a variety of manufacturers. The Olympus 4/3 50mm f/2 and 35 f/3.5 are both excellent, but they also require an adapter (4/3 to m4/3).

 

[seb33]

I'm probably making two huge mistakes here, the first being the ordering of a GF-1/20mm kit (and thus the inauguration of a third camera system in my drawer), and the second being signing up for this forum, as I already spend way too much time talking about photography on the internet. but, in for a dime, in for a dollar!

I'm quite excited about the GF-1, as I love the idea of a pocketable, large(ish)-sensor interchangeable lens camera. And the 20/1.7 seems like a home run.

But I also came on board interested in adapters and legacy lenses. I ordered two from eBay--the Leica M (as I am fairly heavily invested in this system for film and have an R-D1) and Pen-F. I also picked up a Pen Zuiko 40/1.4 on eBay.

I was initially kind of excited at the idea of the C-mount stuff, and eagerly perused the coverage chart and bokeh thread today. But I was kind of shocked to see how expensive the full-coverage lenses have already become--and, except for the interesting edge smearing effects and weird bokeh, the 20/1.7 seems to render most of them moot.

My question is this. What other legacy systems are worth adapting to the m4/3 cameras? I use Pentax SLR stuff and have the K-7, so there's no need for me to adapt those--plus, even though they're very small by SLR standards, they're certainly not smaller than the m4/3 autofocus lenses. Leica M and Pen seem to be the ones most worth it--tiny, well-made, and sharp all the way across the frame.

It would be nice to use, say, Robot lenses, or Voigtlander Prominent, or some other, more obscure RF system optics, but there don't seem to be adapters yet. I'm tempted by Amedeo's Contax/Nikon (I have his excellent Contax-Leica and will try out a few things using it), but we'll see.

It seems, then, that Pen and Leica are the sweet spot? Am I missing something?

Thanks for all the great info you guys have posted on here, and with any luck I won't burn up too much of my time here.

John

Come and watch my video test with third part lens on GH1:

vimeo.com/sebfarges

 

[m3photo]

Re: Pentax 110 set

../.. I have been mulling over just buying a Pentax 110 set and sitting on it until somebody comes up with a good adapter.

I'm in exactly the same position, the only difference being that I also bought a dud 110 body and tried to make an adapter myself but it ain't so good ...
I'm pretty sure the 18mm and 50mm lenses will be with me all the time once that adapter arrives on the scene. The one currently on sale is too expensive and as stated, does not solve the aperture problem.

 

[47th_vacuum_space]

Surely someone can fashion a 110 aperture control out of an old leaf shutter? I have a couple of defunct leaf shutter cameras on my shelves, perhaps I should try it myself.

In the end, BTW, I sold the K7 and kept my Pentax film rig. m4/3 has completely and successfully replaced any need for a DSLR. And the Pen lenses have proved to be the perfect manual focus optics for m4/3.

Maybe someday Voigtlander will make native manual focus m4/3 lenses.

 

[turbo]

Surely someone can fashion a 110 aperture control out of an old leaf shutter? I have a couple of defunct leaf shutter cameras on my shelves, perhaps I should try it myself.

In the end, BTW, I sold the K7 and kept my Pentax film rig. m4/3 has completely and successfully replaced any need for a DSLR. And the Pen lenses have proved to be the perfect manual focus optics for m4/3.

Maybe someday Voigtlander will make native manual focus m4/3 lenses.

That's what I did. Posted here.

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10061


@mabelsound: The Pentax K/SM lenses work very well on a G1. I also have the K20D and oddly, some of the Pentax lenses look better on the G1 than the K20D. Maybe it's the different sensor size, haven't really tried to figure it out.


Just noticed that K/SM looks like a terrorist name.

 

[Photomorgana]

MF lenses absolutely worth the effort. I don't remember the last time I used the kit lens from my G1.

You can use pretty much any lens you want on m4/3, but I prefer those that were made for smaller frames and shorter register distance. Here are my favorites:

1. C-mount (25mm and up, made by Kern-Pailard, Cooke, Angenieux, Kodak, meyer, dallmeyer) They were made for 16mm motion picture, but those brands above had the best glass and construction, and fit excellent on m4/3 bodies.

2. Arri Standard mount (made for both 16 and 35mm motion picture format, made by Cooke, Kinoptik, Angenieux, Baltar) Those lenses were used in professional movie making for decades and all top notch quality and good size for m4/3, even those that were made for 35mm motion picture format, because 35mm film very similar in size to m4/3 sensor.

3. Olympus Pen lenses (like 42mm f1.2 and 65mm f1.5, etc) again excellnet size due to the fact that they were made for half frame film, similar in size to m4/3. Glass is excellent as well, and build quality is decent.

4. Leica-M lenses or Voigtlander (even though they were made for 35mm photography, they still have somewhat compact size due to short register distance of RF cameras. I do like some lenses, but price can be a killer, however don't expect to pay much less for excellent quality lenses like Kinoptik, Cooke etc. Leicafiles have been modifying and using those for decades and some go for more money than Leica glass.

Like I said before, anything is usable and many lenses are great. (I have tried many FD (all sold now), Oly OM, Leica-R, Angenieux Exakta some Nikkor) While I still like the results, I can't really get the exposure and color consistency off of them. (maybe because of larger glass) Also, while image is cleaner, due to the larger than needed glass diameter, they lack the character and uniqueness. And finally I can not justify putting large lenses on m4/3 body, the balance is not there. All that said I love using OM, Leica-R and Ange Exakta on my 5D body and I will never sell them, but I use bunch of c-mount and Arri on my m4/3 for the most times (and when I need wide angle shot - I'll use 7-14mm Panasonic)

Oh and almost forgot, making movies with some bright, high-end C-mount and Arri-mount lenses is a magical experience.

 

[duckrider]

Not according to Randy Newmans song I do like short people!

 

[Vivek]

Duckrider, That is a legendary lens (sans the hood)!

More details please and any shots using it.

 

[Godfrey]

...
My question is this. What other legacy systems are worth adapting to the m4/3 cameras? I use Pentax SLR stuff ... =
It would be nice to use, say, Robot lenses, or Voigtlander Prominent, or some other, ...
It seems, then, that Pen and Leica are the sweet spot? Am I missing something?

I've spent a bit of time over the past year working with different lenses on my G1. Pentax, Nikkor, Olympus OM, Olympus Pen F, Konica, Contax/Zeiss, and a couple of C-mounts.

They all work very well indeed, actually, but some better than others. the Pen F lenses are indeed a sweet spot (IMO sweeter than any of the RF lenses in the shorter focal length ranges, on par in the longer range) but there are some SLR lenses that have proven excellent performers too.

Best results have come from a diverse group of lenses:
Cosmicar 12.5mm f/1.4
Nikkor 20mm f/3.5 AI
Nikkor 28mm f/2 AI
Konica Hexanon AR 40mm f/1.8
Olympus Pen F G.Zuiko 40mm f/1.4
Pentax-M 50mm f/1.4
Olympus Pen F G.Zuiko 70mm f/2
Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 AI
Pentax SMC Takumar 135mm f/3.5 (with and without the Olympux EC14)

I've seen excellent results from the Nikon 85mm f1.8 AF-D and Cosina/Voigtländer 75m f/2.5 as well.

The Lumix G 20mm f/1.7 outperforms anything else in its focal length class on both speed and overall image quality. Similarly, the Macro-Elmarit-DG 45mm f/2.8 ASPH OIS and Olympus ZD 50mm f/2 Macro also outperform anything in that focal length range. (Although both the Pen F 40/1.4 and Konica 40/1.8 are very very close!)

There are no native primes in the 10-14mm range yet (Panasonic's is coming up, and I'm waiting for it) nor are there any in the 70-80mm range, or 135mm range, as yet. So this leaves viable slots in my lens needs for adapted lenses.

Going through my photos, and evaluating my use and needs, I've sold off some lenses, bought others, and have arranged my G1 specific kit to the following:

Cosmicar 12.5/1.4 :: doesn't quite cover the format, but very fast and sharp, great for unusual square format work. I wait for the release of the Lumix 14 and Olympus 9-18 before I invest in another lens in this range.

Lumix G 20/1.7 :: simply an outstanding lens for the size, weight and money. The Olympus 17/2.8 is also a good performer and I wouldn't put it down at all, but the speed and longer focal length of the 20mm is more to my liking.

Konica Hexanon AR 40mm f/1.8 :: This lens and the Olympus Pen 40/1.4 are so similar in imaging qualities and performance it's uncanny. I decided to sell one and keep the other, and kept the Konica 40 because I've adapted its mount to use on the FourThirds SLR bodies too, although I don't do that very often. I intend to acquire the Macro-Elmarit 45mm eventually, there's no rush, but this lens will stay in my kit for its mount versatility and excellent imaging qualities.

Olympus Pen F G.Zuiko 70mm f/2 :: a delightful lens, I like it a lot. They also made a 60mm f/1.5 which I'd one day like to try. Until a native mount lens in this focal length and speed become available, I'll be hanging onto this one.

Pentax SMC Takumar 135mm f/3.5 :: I don't shoot with long focal lengths very often, but this exquisite little lens is worth keeping around for what it cost me ... which was nothing! It's very small and light for its speed and focal length, the imaging qualities are outstanding (no CA, zero rectilinear distortion) and its focusing is silky smooth. It's small and light enough that I can slip it in my bag and hardly notice its there. And it works well with the Olympus EC14 teleconverter as well, netting me a lot of focal length versatility in a very compact package.

As you can see, I'm a prime lens guy. There are some excellent mFT zooms but I just don't use zooms much.

I also use my FourThirds SLR lenses on the G1 and they are all outstanding performers: 11-22/2.8-3.5, 14-50/2.8-3.5, 25/2.8, 25/1.4, 35/3.5 Macro, and 50/2.

So, in answer to your questions, there are certainly good reasons and good results to come from adapting lenses from a variety of system. Exactly what suits you best depends on your needs and desires. The Pen F lenses are excellent, practically all of them, albeit a bit on the "collectible/expensive" side. There is a mount adapter from hawks_factory (on Ebay) for Robot mount. RF lenses in shorter focal lengths seem to have some problems, so for normal and shorter focal lengths I stick with mFT and FT lenses overall, the C-mount Cosmicar being an exception for its specific qualities.

 

[ggibson]

Thanks for asking this question, I'm also feverishly looking at legacy lenses and would like to hear opinions also. I just last night received my M adaptor, and I think the cool look alone is worth adapting old Leicas

Leica/Leitz Summicron-C 40mm f2

Haven't had much opportunity to get out and shoot yet though (been raining like crazy here in the Bay Area).

I love the swirly bokeh from some of the c-mount lenses too. The best ones are pretty expensive on ebay though.