Site Sponsors
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 150 of 306

Thread: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

  1. #101
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    I don't know of any RF lenses of that focal length ...the photos I investigated on flickr had some WA RF lenses that didn't smear, I'll have to go back and look at my previous post...
    C-mounts are of course welcome as well. I appreciate any tip! I think the G 7-14/4 is a bit expensive for my needs and the other option I'm contemplating right now is the Olympus ZD 9-18. But I really wouldn't mind anything smaller and manual.

    Thank you, /Jonas

  2. #102
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    I suppose the only real option besides the 7-14 for full sensor coverage, fast, and wide will be 35mm Arri lenses. Unfortunately I don't have the budget to experiment with these...

    What is the price of the 7-14? I haven't seen an indication of where that might end up.

  3. #103
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    I suppose the only real option besides the 7-14 for full sensor coverage, fast, and wide will be 35mm Arri lenses. Unfortunately I don't have the budget to experiment with these...

    What is the price of the 7-14? I haven't seen an indication of where that might end up.
    35mm Arri, well... I would like to buy a Canon 50/0.95 and if I find one there will certainly be no Arri 35mm lens.

    The 7-14 may cost around USD 1.200. That's a figure I saw mentioned at DPR. It may be a rumor only, or the estimated list price, or the actual price. With Panasonic I never really know. A company charging USD 10 for a rear lens cap can do anything I guess.

  4. #104
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by petermcwerner View Post
    I have not tested the 35mm but will
    I have tested eight different 35mm lenses today (including the kit lens and some zooms at 35mm); I shall publish the results when I get down to it.

    Lenses tested:

    - The kit lens
    - 3 Leica R zoom lenses: Vario Elmar 21-35, 35-70, Elmarit 35-70
    - Angenieux 35-70 for Leica R
    - Nikkor 35mm/2.0
    - Ultron 35mm/1.7
    - Zeiss Jena Flektogon 35mm/2.4 (M42)

    To make a long story short:

    All lenses were compared at f/5.6 (same as the kit lens). All of them provided good results on the G1; differences were small except for the Nikkor, which was not sharp, I might have a Monday-morning lemon.

    My biggest surprise was the Ultron, which showed no smearing at f/5.6 and very little at 1.7, contrary to the 28mm I had tested earlier, which displayed heavy smearing.

    Details will follow when I can upload more pictures. Right now I have reached my upload limit.

    In terms of money, the M42 Flektogon seems the best buy ($100-200 on ebay)

    Regards
    Peter
    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  5. #105
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    Yup; landscapes, documentary in general, architecture, panoramas...
    Then again, for other images I really don't care about the corners:
    You are right, Jonas,
    for that portrait sharpness in the corners is not an issue.
    Peter
    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  6. #106
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Peter, I'm curious why the corner sharpness (or lack thereof) is not a problem in the portrait shot, but is in Deepdiver's 35/1.2 photo?

  7. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by petermcwerner View Post
    You are right, Jonas,
    for that portrait sharpness in the corners is not an issue.
    Peter
    I should have mentioned that the image was taken with the G1 and the Pentax CCTV 25/1.4 - a smeary lens.

    The problem for me is that I feel a bit limited when mounting lenses that don't cover the sensor, or produces a lot of smear. The little Pentax 25/1.4 is good for parties and pubs and such. But if I do anything else, if so only have a walk with the camera, I prefer a lens I know delivers.

    BTW, I also have the CV35/1.7. With my copy borders are OK at f/4 and corners at f/8. That is when looking really critically allowing some CA only and no general smearing at all.

    regards, /Jonas

  8. #108
    Senior Member apicius9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Thank you for this discussion, very interesting, especially because the CV 35/1.7 is also on my list. I have only had the G1 and adapters (Canon FD & c-mount) for a very short time and as a beginner feel a bit intimidated by all the beautiful pics posted here but I will eventually post some when a few of the cine lenses I snatched up will come in.

    Here is a naive question that may not be worth a new thread: If I get other lenses, say an Exakta lens, and use an adapter Exakta to c-mount to get it on my G1, will that be better or worse than using any other adapter route? I would just rather invest in more glass than in more adapters...

    Thanks,

    Stefan

  9. #109
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by apicius9 View Post
    Here is a naive question that may not be worth a new thread: If I get other lenses, say an Exakta lens, and use an adapter Exakta to c-mount to get it on my G1, will that be better or worse than using any other adapter route? I would just rather invest in more glass than in more adapters
    I did not know such an adapter existed. You will then need another adapter, c-mount to mft. If it is a long or heavy lens, it might put more strain on the lens mount of the G1 then if you go through adapters with bigger diameter, e.g.

    Exacta->Leica M (if such an adapter exists) + Leica M->mft

    My preference is to always go through 2 adapters, standardizing on Leica M as common denominator

    1. Lens to Leica M
    2. Leica M to mft

    The first type of adapter is usually both cheaper and easier to find than the direct Lens->mft adapters and I can leave the first adapter on the lens and the second one on the body if I want. Like that I can change lenses quite fast.

    I know there are different opinions whether to use one or two adapters, it is a personal choice, others prefer to always use direct adapters.

    Cheers
    Peter
    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  10. #110
    Senior Member apicius9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Danke Peter! I have direct G1 adapters for c-mount and Canon FD, and I find there is a large variety of - very affordable - adapters to c-mounts (more than to Leica M, for example). But I see the point that a heavier lens might benefit from stronger connection with a wider diameter, I will keep that in mind.

    Stefan

  11. #111
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,077
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by apicius9 View Post
    Thank you for this discussion, very interesting, especially because the CV 35/1.7 is also on my list. I have only had the G1 and adapters (Canon FD & c-mount) for a very short time and as a beginner feel a bit intimidated by all the beautiful pics posted here but I will eventually post some when a few of the cine lenses I snatched up will come in.

    Here is a naive question that may not be worth a new thread: If I get other lenses, say an Exakta lens, and use an adapter Exakta to c-mount to get it on my G1, will that be better or worse than using any other adapter route? I would just rather invest in more glass than in more adapters...

    Thanks,

    Stefan
    Stefan

    You may also want to consider the CV Nokton 35 1.2. While much larger and heavier and more expensive than the 35 1.7 it gives you much more creative flexibility since you can shoot in much lower light at lower ISO and also for portraits you can do a better job of separating the subject from the background.

    Best

    Woody

  12. #112
    emory
    Guest

    Heavy Zoom lens on g1?

    I have the Tamron 70-210 3.5 SP with a Canon FD adapter:

    http://www.adaptall-2.com/lenses/19AH.html

    It weighs 30.3 oz. (860g) and does not have a tripod socket of its own.

    My question: Has anyone tried mounting a heavy lens of this sort on the G1 via an FD adapter? With the G1 mounted on a tripod, would the heavy lens damage either the G1's mount or the adapter? Which of the FD adapters available would be preferable?

    Thanks for your thoughts.

    emory

  13. #113
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Heavy Zoom lens on g1?

    Quote Originally Posted by emory View Post
    I have the Tamron 70-210 3.5 SP with a Canon FD adapter:

    http://www.adaptall-2.com/lenses/19AH.html

    It weighs 30.3 oz. (860g) and does not have a tripod socket of its own.

    My question: Has anyone tried mounting a heavy lens of this sort on the G1 via an FD adapter? With the G1 mounted on a tripod, would the heavy lens damage either the G1's mount or the adapter?
    emory,

    I once mounted a Kinoptik Tegea weighing 1400g, but I felt very uneasy and would not repeat the experience.

    In the first English G1 manual that was on the net but not printed, they had a warning stating a max. lens weight of 1000g. I would still be careful not to make any brusque movements, like moving the tripod without supporting the lens.

    OTOH I doubt whether your adaptall lens will deliver sufficient sharpness on the small G1 sensor.

    Peter
    Last edited by petermcwerner; 20th March 2009 at 05:04.
    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  14. #114
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Houston TX USA
    Posts
    273
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Dear all;

    got my englet 12mm, and wollensak 25.... the 25 rocks, the 12 is fun, but does not cover sensor.



    Englet 12mm cropped pretty heavily


    Wollensak 25mm 1.5

    The whole set is here:
    http://www.jonesii.net/2009%2003%201...ine/index.html

    The 25mm 1.5 covers very close to full frame at 4/3, no machining
    The 12 has a nice big black circle at 4:3 (see first photo in set), and severe vignetting at 16:9, no machining
    (feel free to add to spread sheet)

    I have lost the link to the spread sheet, can someone start a thread with only the sheet in it?

    Dave

  15. #115
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    Peter, I'm curious why the corner sharpness (or lack thereof) is not a problem in the portrait shot, but is in Deepdiver's 35/1.2 photo?
    Just my very personal appreciation that in the portrait it doesn not disturb me, I could not explain why. After all, "portrait" lenses in the 1930es, like the
    Leitz Thambar or later the Rodenstock Imagon, etc. were reliying on undercorrected spherical aberration.

    However, I do not think I would knowingly buy and use such a lens nowadays. I have a 73mm/1.9 Hektor of about 1938 vintage, I must try it on the G1...

    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  16. #116
    Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1117

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by djonesii View Post
    Dear all;

    got my englet 12mm, and wollensak 25.... the 25 rocks, the 12 is fun, but does not cover sensor.
    djonseil, my 25/1.5 Wallensak projects by about two threads beyond the bottom of my Hawk adapter, and I think it is hitting the light baffle on the G1 - do you have the same problem?

  17. #117
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by djonesii View Post
    I have lost the link to the spread sheet, can someone start a thread with only the sheet in it?
    The link is here:

    http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?k...QQ-HJwvNDobeEw

    Also started a new thread.

  18. #118
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by petermcwerner View Post
    Just my very personal appreciation that in the portrait it doesn not disturb me, I could not explain why.
    OK...still curious why lack of corner sharpness disturbs you in the other photo, when there is essentially nothing in focus in the corners anyway, making it difficult to even recognize any lack of sharpness.

  19. #119
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    OK...still curious why lack of corner sharpness disturbs you in the other photo, when there is essentially nothing in focus in the corners anyway, making it difficult to even recognize any lack of sharpness.
    I cannot explain why, aesthetically it hurts me , but I would not know how to put it in words. I guess everyone's sense of harmony or beauty is different. I respect your view although at times we disagree. Why do some people like a Picasso and others not?
    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  20. #120
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    I completely understand why some like a Picasso, and some not...what I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around, is being disturbed by something that can't be seen...if one doesn't like the photo on its own merits, then there is no need for further discussion. But not liking it due to invisible aberrations?

  21. #121
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    I completely understand why some like a Picasso, and some not...
    I don't..., but I suggest we leave this discussion at this point, I am not sure everybody is interested in our way of appreciating art...
    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  22. #122
    emory
    Guest

    Re: Heavy Zoom lens on g1?

    Quote Originally Posted by petermcwerner View Post
    emory,

    I once mounted a Kinoptik Tegea weighing 1400g, but I felt very uneasy and would not repeat the experience.

    In the first English G1 manual that was on the net but not printed, they had a warning stating a max. lens weight of 1000g. I would still be careful not to make any brusque movements, like moving the tripod without supporting the lens.

    OTOH I doubt whether your adaptall lens will deliver sufficient sharpness on the small G1 sensor.

    Peter
    Thanks for your answer, Peter.

    The only place to add a DIY tripod mount ring on the Tamron would be on the breech mount ring itself, and that appears to be a precarious solution at best.

    I guess I'll have to make tests with the G-1 (or GH-1) when I finally get one, but I always found the Tamron SP to be quite sharp. At any rate, the thought of having a de facto 140-420 zoom with a constant maximum aperture of 3.5 is intriguing, isn't it?

    Have a great weekend.

    emory

  23. #123
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Houston TX USA
    Posts
    273
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by woodmancy View Post
    djonseil, my 25/1.5 Wallensak projects by about two threads beyond the bottom of my Hawk adapter, and I think it is hitting the light baffle on the G1 - do you have the same problem?
    Mine seems to work fine. There are no threads past the bottom of the adapter, there is a black inner ring that is well less than a mm beyond the bottom, but it does not seem to touch anything in the camera.

    I have taken a few shots at infinity, and without a great deal of analysis at this point, I would say it has infinity focus. Take that with a grain of salt as I have not finished looking at it.

    Dave

  24. #124
    Ranger 9
    Guest

    Results of my C-mount lens expedition

    Are we still posting C-mount lens pictures in this thread? I'll assume we are; having received notice that my RJ Camera adapter was on the way (we probably should stop calling it the 'jinfinance' adapter, since he has gone to the trouble of having 'RJ Camera' engraved on them!) I made an expedition to a used-camera sale last weekend.

    One vendor who attends these sales regularly has tables and tables of old video gear, old projectors, and other old stuff that I generally had classified as "junk" until I was in the position to start playing the C-mount game!

    I went through his tables looking for candidate lenses, keeping in mind three criteria: (1) the lens had to be "interesting" somehow (wide maximum aperture, focal length not close to something I had already, etc.); (2) the base diameter couldn't exceed 37mm, to avoid mounting issues (I actually carried a caliper with me and measured them); and (3) it had to be cheap. How cheap is cheap? Read on...

    Most of the lenses I found were either bulky video-camera zooms that didn't pass the 37mm-base-diameter test, or cine lenses that didn't meet the "cheap" criterion. So I only came home with two:

    12.5mm f/1.9 Cosmicar: There's already an f/1.4 Cosmicar on the C-mount spreadsheet, but the f/1.9 version caught my eye because, unlike the f/1.4, its base diameter is well under 37mm so it doesn't require machining to mount on my G1 adapter. I suspected that it wouldn't cover the full format, since the f/1.4 version doesn't either, but I thought it still might be useful enough to be worth the asking price of $15.

    36mm f/1.1 GE: I presume "GE" stands for "General Electric," and that this battered optic had spent its working life on the front of surveillance camera. Its focal length and aperture were similar to the 35mm f/1.2 Voigtlander Nokton I already own, but I picked it up anyway for two reasons: it's very compact, which the Nokton certainly isn't, and at a price of $7, I figured it was worth trying.

    I didn't have a chance to try out either one until this evening, when I took them to the ISCA "World of Wheels" hot-rod show. Sample pics and a brief writeup on each lens follow.
    Last edited by Ranger 9; 20th March 2009 at 20:36.

  25. #125
    Ranger 9
    Guest

    Cosmicar 12.5mm f/1.9

    I figured the Cosmicar wouldn't cover the full format, and it doesn't, but I bought it with the idea that it might make an interesting "point-of-view" lens. With its relatively small but protruding front element, its 10-inch minimum focusing distance, and its nearly-90-degree angle of view (if you use the full round image) I thought it would be good for sticking into confined spaces to see what they might look like from a bug's-eye view.

    I wound up not using it that way at World of Wheels... instead I just used it as a conventional if peculiar wide-angle. I apologize that the caliber of sample pictures that follows isn't up the the standard set by butterdada and some of our other C-mount buffs, but still...




    I decided to rationalize that the eccentric round view field was appropriate for shooting in the "trad-rod" section, since these are somewhat eccentric cars. Their builders go to tremendous effort to research and reproduce the worn, beat-up look of early hot rods; some trad-rod builders take pains to keep everything absolutely period-correct, while others incorporate state-of-the-art components that are completely hidden from view! The Cosmicar seems to have low linear distortion, and sharpness (at least in the center) seems good considering that I was shooting at f/1.9, as I was for all the pictures in this post.



    Even cooler than the trad rods was this collection of bizarrely artistic trophies. The Rebels rod club, whose members were responsible for the most fascinatingly over-the-top trad rods, was having its own show-within-a-show and would award the trophies to members whose cars were judged best (however they decide that!)

    Whoever thinks up these trophies has an amazing sense of humor, along with fabulous craft skills. It would just about be worth the effort of building a trad rod just to have the chance to win one of these...







    Although all these images are pretty blurry once you get out to the edge of the circle, the central sections seem quite usably sharp. Contrast looks good and it seems reasonably resistant to specular flare, as in this pointy Cadillac grille:



    Conclusion: All in all, seems like a good $15 worth as long as a round image is acceptable. Of course I could crop out the edges to get a rectangle, but then the angle of view is considerably less than that of the 14-45 kit lens. I suspect I'll reserve it for situations in which an oddball look is appropriate -- trad-rod shows, for instance!
    Last edited by Ranger 9; 20th March 2009 at 20:45.

  26. #126
    Ranger 9
    Guest

    GE 36mm f/1.1

    This lens turned out to be a pleasant surprise: it seems well-made, operates smoothly, and covers pretty much the full G1 frame. Its performance isn't bad, either, for an f/1.1 lens; I didn't try it at any smaller apertures, but imagine it might clean up quite well.

    Its biggest limitation is that its minimum focusing distance is only about 8 feet; that seemed to blow my ambitions of using it as a compact portrait lens, although it turned out there's a somewhat dodgy workaround for that which I'll cover shortly.


    Here's the nose of the P-32, Chip Foose's new show car. The edges of the image go noticeably soft, but the center section (such as the grille) seems quite crisp even at f/1.1. I'll try to get some 1:1 crops up later for any pixel-peepin' papas who might be interested...



    This classic decal, on one of the trad rods, was shot from about 5 feet. That's considerably closer than the GE's mount will focus -- but I realized that since its C-mount threads are of ample length, I could simply unscrew it slightly from the adapter to get closer. Of course I had to keep hold of it to make sure it didn't fall off! But if I did want to shoot head-and-shoulder portraits with this lens -- the image quality looks as if it might be quite pretty -- I could put a shim between the lens and the adapter to hold it more tightly.



    Here's another view of the Rebels' fascinating trophy shelf. Barrel distortion is evident in this view, as is the fact that sharpness falls off considerably toward the corners.



    But for subjects that don't have a lot of straight lines, center detail and contrast seem respectable.



    This is about as close as the lens will focus without unscrewing it from its mount. Obviously the shallow DOF at f/1.1 makes focusing touchy, so I had to use the G1's focus assist for all these closer photos. In this case my focus point was the numerals on the speedometer, and a 1:1 view would show that they're quite sharp.



    Everyone likes pictures of... bokeh! So here's one; the fact that it includes Mandi Hanquist, "Miss I-80 Speedway," is just an unavoidable accident of fate. Avid bokologists know that for reasons of geometric optics, you can only have desirably soft bokeh either in front of or behind the main subject, not both. Usually it's considered more desirable to have the smooth bokeh behind the focus plane, but on the GE lens it's the opposite: notice how out-of-focus details behind Mandi and her friend look rather "edgy," while objects in front of them have a nice, smooth blur.



    One typical use for wide-aperture lenses is taking pictures in low light, so on the way out I stopped at the sculpture court in front of the arena and made this picture. The barrel distortion noted earlier is evident, but highlight flare seems reasonably controlled -- highlights spread slightly (which should give the lens a nice pearly glow for pretty-girl pictures) but it doesn't seem prone to generate the vivid flare spots that some ultra-speed lenses produce when there's a light source within the picture.




    Conclusion: Not only can I say confidently that this is the best $7 f/1.1 lens I own, it looks as if it may be good enough to be of actual practical use!

  27. #127
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Ranger, the 36/1.1 certainly is worth $7, maybe even 8 or 10. Vivek has this lens in the database, recording full sensor coverage, he reports it 'glows' wide open, and is soft, but your example might simply be better. I'm curious; if you unscrew the lens for closer focus, can it still reach infinity?

  28. #128
    Senior Member petermcwerner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland
    Posts
    511
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: GE 36mm f/1.1

    Quote Originally Posted by Ranger 9 View Post
    This lens turned out to be a pleasant surprise: it seems well-made, operates smoothly, and covers pretty much the full G1 frame. Its performance isn't bad, either, for an f/1.1 lens; I didn't try it at any smaller apertures, but imagine it might clean up quite well.
    Conclusion: Not only can I say confidently that this is the best $7 f/1.1 lens I own, it looks as if it may be good enough to be of actual practical use!
    I think this 36mm is quite usable and the slight unsharpness on the edges is not disagreable; thank you for sharing
    Cheers
    Peter
    Peter Werner
    Leica M8, R9+DMR & Digilux 2; Nikon D700; Panasonic FX01, FX150 & G1; Samsung TL350 (WB 2000)

  29. #129
    Ranger 9
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by monza View Post
    Ranger, the 36/1.1 certainly is worth $7, maybe even 8 or 10. Vivek has this lens in the database, recording full sensor coverage, he reports it 'glows' wide open, and is soft, but your example might simply be better. I'm curious; if you unscrew the lens for closer focus, can it still reach infinity?
    Or I may just not be as critical as Vivek! I'll have to try it stopped down sometime and see what it can do.

    A little "glow" is often nice in a portrait lens, and I suspect this may be the way I'll use it the most.

    If I unscrew it for closer focus, I have to screw it back in all the way to get it to focus to infinity. The C-mount thread just acts like an "extension tube"; it has to be de-extended to get back to infinity position.

  30. #130
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Canon FD 24mm F1.4 L wide-open









  31. #131
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    D.O. Industries Navitron TV 75mm F1.3 wide-open







  32. #132
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Voigtlander Macro APO-Lanthar 125mm F2.5 M42 mount wide-open












  33. #133
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Voigtlander Macro APO-Lanthar 125mm F2.5 M42 mount wide-open













  34. #134
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Thank you, cool posts with samples making me salivate a little...

    Quote Originally Posted by butterdada View Post
    Canon FD 24mm F1.4 L wide-open
    ...well, not this one. The bright rings around background OOF highlights never appealed to me. I know some like that stuff but it is not for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by butterdada View Post
    D.O. Industries Navitron TV 75mm F1.3 wide-open
    Very nice. That is a lens I would love to try. Is it very big? Do you have any details about the mount?

    Quote Originally Posted by butterdada View Post
    Voigtlander Macro APO-Lanthar 125mm F2.5 M42 mount wide-open
    The grand macro, one of the best. Too long and heavy for me but maybe it even is worth the hassle of some workout.

    Thank you for all the images,

    --
    Jonas

  35. #135
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    Very nice. That is a lens I would love to try. Is it very big? Do you have any details about the mount?
    http://cgi.ebay.com.hk/ws/eBayISAPI....m=130292061386



    Kodak Anastimat 25mm F1.9 wide-open



  36. #136
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses


    Canon FD 85mm F1.2 L wide-open + iso 1600

  37. #137
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses



    Canon FD 135mm F2 wide-open

  38. #138
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Elgeet Rochester 1 inch F1.9 wide-open

  39. #139
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    It's ok to stop down once in a while.

  40. #140
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    90
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    I have a thread of Navitron 75mm F1.3 as below:
    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6941




    Be careful, it can't go to infinity because the rear part is a little bit too big
    that is blocked in front of the sensor. Some mod should be done but quite difficult I think.

    But as long as you use it as a portrait or close up lens, it is quite usable. Closet focus distance is 1m, extension tube may prefer.

  41. #141
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    [QUOTE=butterdada;96187]http://cgi.ebay.com.hk/ws/eBayISAPI....m=130292061386

    Thank you.

    Quote Originally Posted by pentacon6 View Post
    I have a thread of Navitron 75mm F1.3 as below:
    http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=6941

    (...) But as long as you use it as a portrait or close up lens, it is quite usable. Closet focus distance is 1m, extension tube may prefer.
    Hi pentacon6,
    Yes, I remembered there was something about that lens and the mount. I found your thread with the four lenses.
    Well, I would be interested if somebody was able to make it work for any shooting distance. As I haven't seen the lens in real life I don't know if that is possible at all. It sounds as it may be undoable.

    thanks,

    --
    Jonas

  42. #142
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    90
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    To Jonas,
    You are welcome. From the observation, the modification should be
    quite precision. I think the diameter of the rear lens should be trimmed
    down for 1mm and the about 1mm shorter to prevent it hit the shutter
    plane. The standard of C mount lenses are not in consistent standard.

  43. #143
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    I guess the trimming can be done by somebody with the proper tools. For mechanics I'm a kitchen table guy and so I'm not prepared to do it myself.
    It seems as it could be worthwhile provided the rear lens element will stay untouched and if it possible to measure the distances making sure nothing will touch the shutter. I wouldn't mind paying for the work if the modification could be ordered.

    thanks again, /Jonas

  44. #144
    Senior Member Y.B.Hudson III's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Post a pic of the rear element of the Navitar 75 in the infinity position... there might be a easy fix...I have modified other Navitars with similar problems.


    hudson
    Last edited by Y.B.Hudson III; 2nd May 2009 at 11:18.

  45. #145
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    90
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by Y.B.Hudson III View Post
    Post a pic of the rear element of the Navitar 75 in the infinity position... there might be a easy fix...I have modified other Navitars with similar problems.


    hudson



    The one at right top is Navitron. You may find out the rear parts of the element is extra longer than other lenses. That' why I suggest a trim down of diameter and the extra long part.
    Last edited by pentacon6; 2nd May 2009 at 11:30.

  46. #146
    Senior Member Y.B.Hudson III's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Try this. With the focus ring on infinity, Remove the rear element retainer ring. For test purposes the rear element can then be retained in place with surgical tape. If the removal of the rear element retainer ring provides the required clearance, the rear element can then be cemented in place.


    The focus helicoil and c-mount can be removed to provide easier access to the lens...
    Last edited by Y.B.Hudson III; 2nd May 2009 at 11:46.

  47. #147
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    90
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Hope this help. However, the lens seems has no trace of screw on the lens body.
    I really have no idea how is the c-mount removable.

    May you give me hints, Hudson?

  48. #148
    Senior Member Y.B.Hudson III's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Pentacon6... I will write up the procedure with pics and post it later this evening. (California time )

  49. #149
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Infinity of my D.O. Industries Navitron TV 75mm F1.3 is ok
    No need for modification~

    Last edited by butterdada; 2nd May 2009 at 16:42.

  50. #150
    butterdada
    Guest

    Re: My DMC-G1 with manual focus lenses

    Canon FD 135mm F2 wide-open



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
  •