Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 46 of 46

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

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    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

  2. #2
    Ranger 9
    Guest

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

    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.

  3. #3
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    John

    Quote Originally Posted by mabelsound View Post
    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.

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Ranger 9 View Post
    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.

  5. #5
    OzRay
    Guest

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

    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

  6. #6
    ChrisJ
    Guest

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

    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...d=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
    Last edited by ChrisJ; 28th September 2009 at 03:50.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

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

    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.

  8. #8
    retnull
    Guest

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

    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.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisJ View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterB666 View Post
    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.

  10. #10
    Coveted Pixel
    Guest

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

    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...

  11. #11
    Senior Member JBurnett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Bridgewater, Nova Scotia
    Posts
    530
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by mabelsound View Post
    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).
    Best regards,
    John.
    http://jburnett.ca

  12. #12
    seb33
    Guest

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

    Quote Originally Posted by mabelsound View Post
    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

  13. #13
    Senior Member m3photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    28

    Re: Pentax 110 set

    Quote Originally Posted by mabelsound View Post
    ../.. 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.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    166
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    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.

  15. #15
    turbo
    Guest

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

    Quote Originally Posted by mabelsound View Post
    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.
    Last edited by turbo; 16th November 2009 at 06:58.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Miami
    Posts
    164
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    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.

  17. #17
    duckrider
    Guest

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

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

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

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

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

    More details please and any shots using it.

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Quote Originally Posted by mabelsound View Post
    ...
    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.

  20. #20
    Senior Member ggibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    743
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    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.

  21. #21
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

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

    In fact this is a complicated question, because there are many terms where upon one can like or need a legacy lens. In deed it is, as Godfrey states a question of your needs and desires.
    The charm of this system (for me) is the possibility to use almost any lens ever made.
    But everybody will tell you the outcome of his/her needs and accidental findings , although there is of course a consensus about the quality of certain lenses.

    So for my needs and interests, like harbourshots where you can't get close to the subjects anymore since 9-11 , I don't need necessarily fast glass but tele and sharp glass and make use of DOF. I can take my time and make use of a tripod, if needed.
    For this purpose I like my;
    Leica APO Telyt 180/3.4 and Elmarit 135/2.8
    OM 200/4
    Zeiss sonnar 180/2.8 and 135/3.5

    For my other interest bokehgraphy and especally smooth ( abstract ) colour transitions I like and need fast glass.
    For this I like:
    Revuenon 55/1.2 ( really nice lens)
    Nikon Nikkor-P.C 105/2.5 and Nikkor-H 50/2
    And recent additions but not much experience with yet;
    Canon FD 85/1.2 and 135/2

    These are my main considirations for these preferences.
    But there are a lot of possible arguments for other lenses like size and weight and the way they draw the OOF areas. ( For this I like my Schneider Xenar 50/2.8 for example)
    For street photography, not my biggest interest, the outcome would probably be completly different.
    So what I want to say any advice is subjective, but out of it all you can make up your mind, so it will fit best to your own interst.

    Cheers, Michiel

  22. #22
    Senior Member Y.B.Hudson III's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    re...C-m0unt..."the best ones are pretty expensive on e~pay"... a 25mm steLLar performer sold for $20± this am, and a 75mm that puts t' Summilux to shame is offered at $99...

    Hudson...

  23. #23
    Senior Member apicius9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Y.B.Hudson III View Post
    re...C-m0unt..."the best ones are pretty expensive on e~pay"... a 25mm steLLar performer sold for $20± this am, and a 75mm that puts t' Summilux to shame is offered at $99...

    Hudson...
    Just curious, which lenses are you referring to? No worries, I'm done buying - unless it's an Angenieux for $99...

    Stefan

  24. #24
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

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

    I think Hudson is referring to 25/1.3 Computar and 75/1.3 Navitar lenses.

    BTW, I keep getting queries on these lenses via PM and other means.

    Those who are really keen on getting them, get them and use them. The rest just keep ruminating.

  25. #25
    Senior Member apicius9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Thanks Vivek. I still have not dared modifying my Computar, maybe I'll find someone with a lathe - unfortunately, I mostly know woodworkers, not sure if that will work I also had looked at the Navitar a few times, but I am wondering whether it really adds something that the Kern macro Switar 75/1.9 at a much smaller size doesn't do - can it really be used wide open?

    That said, using old glass on the m4/3 is at least half the fun IMHO. I see the point that smaller lenses match the general idea the best, that's why I played around quite a bit with c-mount lenses. The quality really varies quite a bit, but there are a few gems among them in all price categories. But I also have to say that the hunt for the great fast 25mm lens has lost a bit of steam after the excellent 20/1.7 came out... I also really like the Pen F lenses from looking at them, but they have moved out of my price range. I have a few Canon FDs that I don't use very often, maybe because they are a bit clunkier, but what I have seen so far really didn't look bad at all. For some reason, I have never in my life tried a Zeiss lens, so that is still on my to do list (any recommendations in the affordable 50-60mm or shorter range?). Finally, while a bit big & heavy, I really love my Summicron 50 R on the G1/GH1, it just feels like such a quality piece, I wish I could afford the 35mm Summilux...And if I had access to a set of Leica Ms, I would definitely use them.

    Stefan

  26. #26
    Senior Member Y.B.Hudson III's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    There is no need to modify the Computar, there is a simple adjustment to the focus helicoil stop that will give infinity focus plus close focusing range the same as the switar 26mm macro; or you can use the "MS optical adapter" with out modifications, or adjustments.

    The Navitar TV lens 75mm 1.3; also badged as Machine Vision Lens 75mm 1.3; and Computar TV Lens 75mm 1.3.is very sharp with good contrast and bokeh, though it is a beast...about the same size as the summilux 75, and slightly lighter than the noctilux.

    I find the panny 20 1.7 to be practically useless...the manual fly by wire, and auto focus are clumsy and frustrating in dynamic situations.

    Hudson
    Last edited by Y.B.Hudson III; 20th January 2010 at 23:37.

  27. #27
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,606
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

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

    Hudson, Have you tried it (20/1.7) reversed? Absolutely a stunning macro lens!

    There was an old Zeiss Macro (I never had the chance to use it) that is reputed to be stellar. The reversed Pana 20/1.7 has the exact lens design of that macro.

  28. #28
    Senior Member Y.B.Hudson III's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    yehh...aperture control? sounds interesting, it's too light for a paper weight.

  29. #29
    Senior Member kevinparis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    919
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

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

    As Michiel says everybody has different needs from their lenses, legacy or otherwise

    Best legacy lens for me so far is the OM 24/2... its proving to be great both on the E-P1 as a fastish normal lens and a great WA on the FF Canon 5D
    I have created a couple of sets on my flickr page that gather all my E-P1 shots and my Legacy Lens shots together. Some of you may have seen most of these but it might make a useful reference to others
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevinpa...7623249659358/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevinpa...7622730407793/

    cheers

    K

  30. #30
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

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

    Hello Kevin, really nice set of photographs on flickr. You're so good with those lenses in evening streetwork.

    May be I should move this question to the Canon forum but I am just very curious, and others here too I hope, if the Canon 5D MarkII brings you more quality with legacy lenses, because they are actually made for FF cameras.
    I ask this because I have been thinking about the same move for some time now, although I would have to get used to walking around with such a big hump again.
    But for work, where you can take your time, it would be great to get the maximum out of all those legacy lenses, which I enjoy so much already.
    The Canon mount does have a lot of adapter possibilitys.

    To put it shortly; does the 5D bring you where you hoped for?

    Cheers, Michiel

  31. #31
    Senior Member kevinparis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    919
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

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

    Michiel

    thanks for the compliments

    The 5D experience so far has been a positive one... apart from aching arms :-)

    Its been over 10 years since I last shot on full frame - and that was on film , with lesser lenses, so my point of reference is a little hazy.

    I have just got my first adapters in the last week or so , and dull and inclement weather has restricted my use of the legacy lenses so far, but the few shots I have done with the OM24/2 have been very encouraging.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevinpa...7623230608168/

    The reduced depth of field does make a big difference in adding a degree of separation to the images. I was surprised that you could get bokeh even with a 24mm at f2.

    Another big plus of the 5D is the higher ISO... shooting at 1600 becomes the norm for me.

    Maybe the only thing I miss is the inbody IS... but you cant have everything.

    Will I be getting rid of my Olys?... no way!!!!. The 510 with the 12-60 and 50-200 still make a great holiday/sports events type platform. The E-P1 is the grab and go camera even with legacy lenses.

    The canon will let me explore my lens collection, and will be there for when I need that extra edge.

    cheers

    K

  32. #32
    Senior Member apicius9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Hudson, Have you tried it (20/1.7) reversed? Absolutely a stunning macro lens!
    What's the best way to use the lens reversed - is there a reverse macro adapter that I didn't see? I just ordered one in 52mm, hadn't even thought about reversing the pancake.

    Stefan

  33. #33
    MrAdrenalin
    Guest

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

    Hi Y.B.Hudson III,

    Could you please make a guide or describe more in detail about the helicoil adjustment for the computar 25mm 1.3 and what c-mount adapter to you use with that adjustment?

    Would also love a detailed description of the conversion of the navitar 75mm 1.3 since I have that one as well just waiting to be used.

    It would make my week here in the dark and cold and give you a free dinner if you ever visit Sweden.

    Have you tried the computar MC TV 135mm 1.8 by the way or the navitron 12.5mm 1.3?

    /Magnus

  34. #34
    MrAdrenalin
    Guest

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

    And i see in your flickrstream that you have a 50mm 1.3 computar as well. Have you tried the fujinon 50mm 1.4 and how do they compare? Do you have more pictures with all mentioned lenses? I would love to se the bokeh and handling in making portraits.

    /Magnus

  35. #35
    klythawk
    Guest

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

    Quote Originally Posted by apicius9 View Post
    What's the best way to use the lens reversed - is there a reverse macro adapter that I didn't see? I just ordered one in 52mm, hadn't even thought about reversing the pancake.

    Stefan
    If you have the 52mm reverse adapter, all you need to reverse the 20mm pancake is a 46mm to 52mm step up adapter.

    John.

  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

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

    Quote Originally Posted by kevinparis View Post
    Michiel


    Will I be getting rid of my Olys?... no way!!!!. The 510 with the 12-60 and 50-200 still make a great holiday/sports events type platform. The E-P1 is the grab and go camera even with legacy lenses.

    The canon will let me explore my lens collection, and will be there for when I need that extra edge.

    cheers

    K
    Kevin,

    Thanks for your experiences this far.
    Yes multi platform is the way to go, when one has the dough.
    I'll see what I do, the lenses will stay. Would like a full frame body with a EVF, with lots of adapters. Sure it will come, but when?

    Cheers, michiel

  37. #37
    Senior Member apicius9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Quote Originally Posted by klythawk View Post
    If you have the 52mm reverse adapter, all you need to reverse the 20mm pancake is a 46mm to 52mm step up adapter.

    John.
    Thanks - it was almost 1am when I wrote the question, I'd like to think that I would have come to that thought myself in the daylight

    Stefan

  38. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    199
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Is anyone using a Canon FD 100mm F2.0 or a FD 135mm F2.8? In particular are they using it on a GF1 or EP1 or EP2? I am looking for a faster telephoto lens that is reasonably priced and small.

    Cliff

  39. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina western foothills
    Posts
    1,860
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Quote Originally Posted by CPWarner View Post
    Is anyone using a Canon FD 100mm F2.0 or a FD 135mm F2.8? In particular are they using it on a GF1 or EP1 or EP2? I am looking for a faster telephoto lens that is reasonably priced and small.

    Cliff
    I have the FD 135 f/2.8. I haven't used it on a GF1, only my G1. Mine was very reasonable from KEH--a few scratches on the 'self' metal hood (retractable), but otherwise in great condition. I have a few 135 shots in my G1/FD gallery but I'm not a big tele shooter so it doesn't get used too much. I just mounted it on the GF1 and actually its quite nice--its a case of supporting it by the lens--and then it feels nicely balanced. The fact that they are so reasonably priced, easy to find--and nice to shoot is a plus if you want a faster longer lens.

    I was going to include a couple with the lens--and I've shot with it with extension tubes also---but Pbase appears to be doing something with their site . All in all, I can say that I like the lens, would buy it again--and now that I've tried it on the GF1, might just stick it in my bag next time out with it.

    Diane

  40. #40
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    To the entire Micro four thirds DSLR camera users in Olympus & Lumix, This is a broadband reply to all threads in the m4/3 rds. Most all the info I have read seems to be tunnel vision to comparing 1980's SLR lenses with modern kit lenses on these cameras new DSLR m4/3 rd cameras. That’s totally missing the point of why M4/3 rds adapting is such a raging fade worldwide. Photography is about the image, with soul, spirit and alluring timelessness. A modern computer designed zoom lens long ago sacrificed, flare, chromatic aberration, edge to edge sharpness, distortion and especially resolution to the annuals of mediocrity. Taking a sharp perfect image is not being a good photographer. Any fool can use a modern digital camera in auto mode and get a product. Where is the art in that?
    Enter now into the realm of the bizarre, search for Cmt. and old rangefinder lenses that take you back to the twilight zone! Photo’s with Tons of flare, ghost images, wild bohken, and with unbelievable sharpness in the center. Uncoated lenses are so impressionistic, they rule the modern world of lens, and you have to experiment, buy adapters for your m4/3 rds camera and get great grandfathers lenses. Attempt bizarre couplings like a Old Delft Rayxar 50mm F: 0.75 on a m4/3 rd's camera and see the results.
    I have tested over 75 different lenses now, many lenses of the early 1930's~1965 have 5x the resolution of today’s lenses and that’s why they are such hot sellers on eBay. True they have 16 aperture blades, create wild bohken and have distortion and flare; so what, the images are creative, unusual, interesting and very saleable. That’s the point of photography to those that understand it well, to shoot a photo in the surreal,,,,,,,, Don

  41. #41
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Eastwestphoto View Post
    To the entire Micro four thirds DSLR camera users in Olympus & Lumix, This is a broadband reply to all threads in the m4/3 rds. Most all the info I have read seems to be tunnel vision to comparing 1980's SLR lenses with modern kit lenses on these cameras new DSLR m4/3 rd cameras. That’s totally missing the point of why M4/3 rds adapting is such a raging fade worldwide. Photography is about the image, with soul, spirit and alluring timelessness. A modern computer designed zoom lens long ago sacrificed, flare, chromatic aberration, edge to edge sharpness, distortion and especially resolution to the annuals of mediocrity. Taking a sharp perfect image is not being a good photographer. Any fool can use a modern digital camera in auto mode and get a product. Where is the art in that?
    Enter now into the realm of the bizarre, search for Cmt. and old rangefinder lenses that take you back to the twilight zone! Photo’s with Tons of flare, ghost images, wild bohken, and with unbelievable sharpness in the center. Uncoated lenses are so impressionistic, they rule the modern world of lens, and you have to experiment, buy adapters for your m4/3 rds camera and get great grandfathers lenses. Attempt bizarre couplings like a Old Delft Rayxar 50mm F: 0.75 on a m4/3 rd's camera and see the results.
    I have tested over 75 different lenses now, many lenses of the early 1930's~1965 have 5x the resolution of today’s lenses and that’s why they are such hot sellers on eBay. True they have 16 aperture blades, create wild bohken and have distortion and flare; so what, the images are creative, unusual, interesting and very saleable. That’s the point of photography to those that understand it well, to shoot a photo in the surreal,,,,,,,, Don
    Amen

    And visit the bokeh thread regularly

    Keith

  42. #42
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,763
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    45

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

    Quote Originally Posted by woodmancy View Post
    Amen
    And visit the bokeh thread regularly
    Keith
    +200.

  43. #43
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,058
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Leica 77 View Post
    +200.


    Michiel

  44. #44
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California, US
    Posts
    71
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Quote Originally Posted by apicius9 View Post
    ...For some reason, I have never in my life tried a Zeiss lens, so that is still on my to do list (any recommendations in the affordable 50-60mm or shorter range?).
    The Planar 50mm f/1.7 for Contax/Yashica bayonet mount is wonderful. As for most legacy lenses, one way to look into the lens is to search Flickr. The key is to judge from the best images you find, even if most of them have weaknesses.

    The current ZM mount lenses are not cheap, except in comparison with Leica glass, but their sharpness, depth, rich color, and strong but robust contrast are a pinnacle achievement.

  45. #45
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    California, US
    Posts
    71
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Eastwestphoto View Post
    Taking a sharp perfect image is not being a good photographer. ... many lenses of the early 1930's~1965 have 5x the resolution of today’s lenses
    This novice here probably agrees with the post, except that I do not understand it. The general aesthetic declarations are clear and admirable, but what is the difference between a sharp image and one with terrific resolution?

  46. #46
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,930
    Post Thanks / Like

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

    I've been using the G1 since Dec 2008 and have played with a number of different lenses on it. In my experience, the best performing lenses on the G1 are my FourThirds SLR lenses along with the Micro-FourThirds lenses themselves.

    That's not to say I don't use it with adapted lenses too. My G1 dedicated lens kit is as follows:

    - Cosmicar 12.5mm f/1.4 TV (C-mount, covers central square of the focmat)
    - Lumix G 20mm f/1.7
    - Konica Hexanon AR 40mm f/1.8 (virtually identical in imaging quality to the Oly Pen 40/1.4 which I also had for a time)
    - Olympus Pen 70mm f/2
    - Pentax SMC Takumar 135mm f/3.5 (add Olympus EC14 for 190mm f/4.9)

    All of these have their unique and interesting rendering qualities, produce great results. In terms of absolute performance, however, none of them (except for the Lumix G 20mm) are the equal of what I can get by using one of my FourThirds SLR lenses.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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