Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Introducing myself (+ a question)

  1. #1
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Hi all,

    My friend found this forum and recommended it to me. After browsing around, I liked to see the high level of participation and respect between members, so I decided to join the fun. I participate in a few other photography forums. They all have their own personalities and particularities. Photography is my hobby and I'm far from being a pro. I do enjoy playing with cameras/lenses and I'm not loyal to any particular brand. I've had Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Sony (still have an A200, which I may be selling soon) and now I'm a proud owner of a G1 with the two lens kit (14-45mm and 45-200mm). I already love this camera!!! I've had many Panas P&S starting with the 3 MP LC33. Currently I have a FZ28. I also have a Sony R1, which has been one of my fav. cameras ever. My favorite subjects are plants (primarily macros of flowers and leaves), wild life and architecture. I tend to photograph my 12-year old son a lot but in general, I don't feel comfortable taking candid pictures of strangers.

    OK, I think this should give you guys a brief idea about myself (ah, forgot to mention that I'm a huge Beatles fan!). Now, let's get down to business, shall we?!?

    I've been reading a lot about using those old lenses on the G1. Since I don't really have a collection of lenses, I'm not attached to any particular brand at this point. OK, I do have a couple of old Pentax primes, so I bought the Pentax K to m4/3 adapter (haven't received it yet). The thing is, it seems that there are a variety of shapes for the same adapter (and also some huge difference in price between them). The question is, is there a difference in lens performance between those adapters based solely on the shape of the adapter? If so, which ones should I be looking for and consequently, which ones should I avoid? I have my eyes on a number of Canon FD lenses but before I go crazy spending money left to right, I want to buy the best adapter for them.

    Thanks,
    Tullio

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Hi Tullo,
    I can't answer your question but I will say hello and welcome to the forum.

    terry

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,604
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    I don't use Pentax K and/or FD adapters.

    I do enjoy playing with cameras/lenses and I'm not loyal to any particular brand.


    Welcome!

  4. #4
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Thanks, Terry and Vivek.
    Tullio

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Hello Tullio,
    I have a Pentax K adapter from one of the cheap Hong Kong sellers and it works just fine, as with most regular mount adapters. I work mostly with two adapters just because I had already a lot of 4/3 adapters for my E-3. Now I go for the direct adapters, les of a hassle, but both ways work fine.

    Love your Avatar as an old Beatlefan.
    Michiel

  6. #6
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Thanks, Michiel. I always thought that the more pieces you put between the lens and the sensor, the worse the IQ. If I understand it correctly, you use a 4/3 to m4/3 and then a PK to 4/3 on top of it and then the Pentax lens and that works just fine? I'm thinking I already spent money on the wrong adapter as I do have a PK to 4/3 adapter already. Perhaps I should have bought the 4/3 to m4/3 instead!
    Tullio

  7. #7
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Hello

    and welcome aboard.

    I personally like the FD series lenses and so if you are asking about adaptors I would steer you in the direction of the Ciecio7 adaptor

    you may wish to read this page of mine.

    my experiences and opinions of FD lenses and adaptors is found by a quick search on my posts.

    As well as the FD lenses, if you happen to have a 35mm or full frame body around you may wish also to look at the OM lenses ... I have some of these for exactly that reason.

    my OM lenses

    of which I will soon transfer the 300 and 200 to my father in law

    and my FD lenses

    of which I mainly use the 50 (macro and portrait), 200 (general mid telephoto and great with extension tube for some macro) and 300 (for birds and wildlife).

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina western foothills
    Posts
    1,860
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    My understanding is that all the FD adaptors seem to work well. I have a Cameraquest (which is likely made by Rayqual). Today I would buy the RJ/jinfinance FD adaptor I think--from ebay.

    Welcome to the forum. Terrific group of people here and fun and knowledge are shared freely LOL.

    Diane

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    There is nothing magic about the adapter - it's just a piece of metal holding the lens at place in front of the camera. One or two doesn't matter. Think stacked extension tubes... all they add is air.

    I have used several legacy lenses, sometimes with one adapter, sometimes with two. It works fine. In principi it is better with one adapter only, simply for the mechanical stability but in real life it hasn't matter, in my experience.

    The expensive and the inexpensive FD->4/3 adapters both work just as well, again in my experience (RayQual and Jinfinace). For a while I used double adapter solutions only, then I slowly moved over to single adapter solutions (nearly) only. I like the idea about having the same mount on the lenses in my bag. That way they can share lens caps and it is less fiddling when switching lenses.

    ....and Welcome here,

    /Jonas

    EDIT: Some redundant info there. I type slower than I shoot, but still faster than I think.

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Quote Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
    Thanks, Michiel. I always thought that the more pieces you put between the lens and the sensor, the worse the IQ. If I understand it correctly, you use a 4/3 to m4/3 and then a PK to 4/3 on top of it and then the Pentax lens and that works just fine? I'm thinking I already spent money on the wrong adapter as I do have a PK to 4/3 adapter already. Perhaps I should have bought the 4/3 to m4/3 instead!
    Yes just works fine, there is only air in between.
    Some of the lenses I use.
    ( Many more of other brands, but that would go to far )
    Michiel

    OM lenses (with two adapters)


    Konica Hexanon lenses (with one direct adapter)

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    North Carolina western foothills
    Posts
    1,860
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    The only issue with some adaptors early on was that some had difficulty focusing to infinity and had to be returned or machined. Otherwise--air.

    Diane

  12. #12
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Thank you all for your replies and welcoming to the forum. The reason I thought the shape of the adapter was perhaps something to consider is because some seem to be deeper than others and that could affect IQ (degrade sharpness primarily). If that's not really the case, then I'll just go for the cheaper ones.

    pellicle and Michiel, you've got quite a collection of lenses!

    Is anyone familiar with Rexatar lenses? I did a search here but got result. From the few samples I've seen on the net, it has potential. I'm contemplating a 135mm f/2.8 Canon FD mount.
    Tullio

  13. #13
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Hello
    Quote Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
    Thank you all for your replies and welcoming to the forum. The reason I thought the shape of the adapter was perhaps something to consider is because some seem to be deeper than others and that could affect IQ (degrade sharpness primarily).
    thinking logically if there is nothing between the lens and the sensor how can it (nothing) effect image quality?

    the primary issues for an adaptor are:
    • physical accuracy of manufacture (to keep the lens at the precise distance for the focusing scales to be meaningful)
    • black inteiror (so there are no internal reflections of light reducing contrast)
    • strong and light


    the Ciecio7 adaptor is the one for FD which meets all these criteria and is the lowest price.

    :-)

  14. #14
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    ...thinking logically if there is nothing between the lens and the sensor how can it (nothing) effect image quality?
    You are correct come to think of it. But, it may affect the camera's ability to perform infinite focusing.
    Tullio

  15. #15
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Good Evening Tullio

    Quote Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
    But, it may affect the camera's ability to perform infinite focusing.
    indeed ... which was covered in my blog article which I linked to :-)

    what ever you decide remember to have fun with the toys you buy

  16. #16
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Got my PK to m4/3 adapter this evening. It's much deeper than I thought ( 1 1/4 inch perhaps...I don't have a ruler with me), which will make the ensemble quite a large one, particularly with the 135mm lens that I bought (but haven't received it yet). However, the adapter is solid (all metal) and well constructed. Hopefully the camera will be able to achieve infinite focus. Tomorrow I'll play with my Pentax 50mm 1.7 and Sigma 24mm macro. I'll post some results.
    Tullio

  17. #17
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Tullio

    it will be no larger than your spotmatic was as the lens mount will be more or less the same distance from the back of the camera ... in reality I don't find that my 200 f4 (quite a compact telephoto) or my 50mm feel 'bulky' when its all together :-)

  18. #18
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    I'm curious as to how well the 135mm will perform on the G1 hand held (w/o the OIS).
    Tullio

  19. #19
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,929
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Quote Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
    I'm curious as to how well the 135mm will perform on the G1 hand held (w/o the OIS).
    135mm is a very long lens in FourThirds format: you need to keep the exposure time up around 1/400-1/500 second as a minimum to get good, crisp results. Of course a tripod does magic.

    I use an old Pentax SMC Takumar 135/3.5 for my long lens. It's small, light, and has beautiful imaging. This is my adapted lens kit:


    My most used lenses are the 20, 25 and 40 mm focal lengths.

  20. #20
    Senior Member pellicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southport, Australia
    Posts
    1,429
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Hi

    Quote Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
    I'm curious as to how well the 135mm will perform on the G1 hand held (w/o the OIS).
    as Godfrey points out the 135 is long on a 4/3 camera ... hope you did not buy it for the way it looks on a 35mm camera if so then a 50mm or even a russian Helios 55mm would be more the thing to go with ;-)

    I've taken a few shots with the FD200 f4 @ f4 to know that in daylight its great and with reasonable technique can be hand held succesfully






    I wound the ISO up to 400 to get really fast shutter here, but works as well at lower speeds if you're careful

  21. #21
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    Quote Originally Posted by pellicle View Post
    ... hope you did not buy it for the way it looks on a 35mm camera if so then a 50mm or even a russian Helios 55mm would be more the thing to go with ;-)
    Nope...I bought for the fun of it as already have (and really like) the 45-200mm. I only paid $20 for the lens, well worth a try.
    Tullio

  22. #22
    Senior Member Tullio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    403
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Introducing myself (+ a question)

    BTW, nice pictures, Pellicle. I've taken a few shots with my Pentax SMC-A 50mm 1.7 on the G1 (will post some results soon). Bottom line? Not good at f1.7, period. Images were very soft and CA/PF were noticeable on many shots. I also noticed a huge difference in AUTO WB rendering between f1.7-f4 and f5.6 and above (I know WB performance has been addressed in f/w 1.1 AND 1.2 - should we assume that Pana did not get it right the first time??? - but since I still haven't installed the f/w upgrades on my G1, I don't know whether the fix in 1.2 has changed this behavior or not) . The images were much warmer at wider apertures and much colder at smaller apertures. The solution is not to use AUTO WB. Now I'm waiting for the Yashica 135mm and Canon FD 50mm 1.4 lenses I bought a couple of days ago. I'm curious to see if the Canon FD outperforms the Pentax. I think it will.
    Tullio

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
  •