Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
OM lenses.Crap, now I need a 50/1.2 and a 24/2
The specs don't allow for a lens with an aperture larger than f/1.26. It looks like you need f/1.4 lenses or slower.Well you can always just buy a Noctilux or a 50/1.1 Voigtlander and put it on your NEX, instead. But both of those are actually larger than using the reducer, not to mention pricier.
Plus, you only get one focal length. If you get an SLR 50/1.2 and a plain (inexpensive) adapter, and a reducer, you end up with two focal length options.
Yup, I love the idea of my 50mm Takumar becoming both a fast (FF equiv) 50mm and also a fast 85mm lens! Just need to take the adaptor off!Well you can always just buy a Noctilux or a 50/1.1 Voigtlander and put it on your NEX, instead. But both of those are actually larger than using the reducer, not to mention pricier.
Plus, you only get one focal length. If you get an SLR 50/1.2 and a plain (inexpensive) adapter, and a reducer, you end up with two focal length options.
It will be interesting in how fast the camera can drive the lens and how the lenses will feel with CDAF. It will be interesting to see what happens to corner sharpness too--it might improve some lenses and do the opposite for others. I wonder what would happen with the 17mm PC lens?The glamour in the real world ends up hitting cold hard facts.
nice calcs monza, wonder if the adapter will transpose these equivalent Apertures for the likes of the EF to nex reducer adapter, rather than just putting actual aperture data into the exif.24 Summilux on NEX, $6k. Equivalent FOV, 36mm. Equivalent DOF, f2.1. Equivalent max aperture, f/1.4.
35/1.4 C/Y on NEX, ~$1000. Equivalent FOV, 38mm. Equivalent DOF, f/1.5. Equivalent max aperture, f/1.0.
Yes, DOF should be the same. DOF is determined by the geometry between the subject and the apparent aperture of the lens (meaning the image of the aperture when looking at the front of the lens).Very interesting. I assume that much will depend on the optical quality of the adapter, Hopefully, the adapter for m4/3 will be 0.5x. In that case, I look forward to using my OM WA lenses on m4/3. Does anybody know how the adapter will affect DOF? Will it be the same as if the lens were used on a 35mm camera?
Thing is that when you compress an image the look is of more DOF. Will that translate to this adaptor? Probably. They are saying that the compression will get rid of a lot of other artifacts so I assume the compression will do the same for the DOF.Yes, DOF should be the same. DOF is determined by the geometry between the subject and the apparent aperture of the lens (meaning the image of the aperture when looking at the front of the lens).
This adapter essentially just takes what would have been the FF-sized image plane and shrinks it down to APS-C (or m4/3). Whatever was in focus will still be in focus, whatever was not will still not be in focus.
That is, if I understand it correctly. . .
Interesting that if using the GH1/2's true multi aspect 16:9 mode in still or movie mode would produceConsider the Sigma 8-16 zoom made for APS-C. With 0.71x factor, on the m43rds, it becomes the widest ultrawide possible.
.