Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus Micro Four Thirds

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 8, 2011, 3:21 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
no-ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: scottish borders
Posts: 121
Default Lenses on a shoe string

wondering, has anyone used cheap lenses with their pen? i recently got a PL1 and it came with the 14-42mm kit lens but i was hoping to add something with a bit more reach and maybe some macro capability. I got, or i'm getting, a Miranda 70-210 lens which i won for 99p plus delivery. Adapter at 11 and i was thinking of getting a macro tube kit which is about 6.
Now, i went this route as all in its costing about 22, and i could never justify spending the 2-300+ on an actual m4/3 lens to add to my camera.
I did a fair bit of google searching but not really found anyone who has done similar (does everyone really spend hundreds more on lenses?)
If it doesnt work out, its no great loss, but would love to hear peoples views and experiences
no-ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 8, 2011, 8:00 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Depending on the type of photography that interests' you, there are a lot of very fine lenses available on the used market, designed for film cameras, that can provide outstanding results. The one limitation, however, is that the camera cannot communicate to the lens. What that simply means is that you need to manually focus the lens as well adjust the aperture on the lens to get the proper exposure. Really no different than when you used your 35mm film camera.

If you're into shooting portraits, macro, or pretty much anything that doesn't move too fast, then you have a myriad of lens choices some of which are truly amazing and relatively inexpensive.

As an example, not too long ago, I purchased a used Rokkor Minolta 50mm f1.4 lens for less than $50US. I did have to buy an adapter @ $20US. It is a wonderful lens for portraits with an extremely thin depth of field.

In addition to Minolta's Rokkor series of lenses, Olympus OM lenses are also a fine choice as are Konica Hexanon lenses. The one caveat is that the old zoom lenses, for one reason or another just don't seem to work well at all.

I've had good experiences using Olympus' OM 135mm f2.8, 135mm F3.5, 50mm f1.8. I also use Konica Hexanon 135mm f3.5 and the 50mm f1.7. By the way, Konica made some of the sharpest lenses in their day. They were known as the Hexanon AR series of lenses. They are relatively easy to find and inexpensive. yet provide outstanding results.

One point needs to be made, if you're serious about using manual focus lenses, then you really need to buy an Olympus VF-2 viewfinder attachement. It is pricy, as it sells for $250USD. It is worth every penny as ti allows you to focus much faster and much more accurately than using the LCD screen.

You can get more insight at this site:

http://www.biofos.com/cornucop/omz_ep1.html

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2011, 7:53 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
no-ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: scottish borders
Posts: 121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zig-123 View Post
Depending on the type of photography that interests' you, there are a lot of very fine lenses available on the used market, designed for film cameras, that can provide outstanding results. The one limitation, however, is that the camera cannot communicate to the lens. What that simply means is that you need to manually focus the lens as well adjust the aperture on the lens to get the proper exposure. Really no different than when you used your 35mm film camera.

If you're into shooting portraits, macro, or pretty much anything that doesn't move too fast, then you have a myriad of lens choices some of which are truly amazing and relatively inexpensive.

As an example, not too long ago, I purchased a used Rokkor Minolta 50mm f1.4 lens for less than $50US. I did have to buy an adapter @ $20US. It is a wonderful lens for portraits with an extremely thin depth of field.

In addition to Minolta's Rokkor series of lenses, Olympus OM lenses are also a fine choice as are Konica Hexanon lenses. The one caveat is that the old zoom lenses, for one reason or another just don't seem to work well at all.

I've had good experiences using Olympus' OM 135mm f2.8, 135mm F3.5, 50mm f1.8. I also use Konica Hexanon 135mm f3.5 and the 50mm f1.7. By the way, Konica made some of the sharpest lenses in their day. They were known as the Hexanon AR series of lenses. They are relatively easy to find and inexpensive. yet provide outstanding results.

One point needs to be made, if you're serious about using manual focus lenses, then you really need to buy an Olympus VF-2 viewfinder attachement. It is pricy, as it sells for $250USD. It is worth every penny as ti allows you to focus much faster and much more accurately than using the LCD screen.

You can get more insight at this site:

http://www.biofos.com/cornucop/omz_ep1.html

Zig
thanks for your input, mainly my photos are landscapes portraits and macro, i wouldnt mind a fast lens though but that is not important.
The lens i won on ebay for 99p arrived today, still need the adapter to mount it, its a K fitment, dont suppose you could recommend anything of that fitment that might be worth a haul through ebay for?
Oh, and i would love the viewfinder, but the Vf2 is waay beyond my pocket
no-ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 11, 2011, 9:06 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by no-ice View Post
thanks for your input, mainly my photos are landscapes portraits and macro, i wouldnt mind a fast lens though but that is not important.
The lens i won on ebay for 99p arrived today, still need the adapter to mount it, its a K fitment, dont suppose you could recommend anything of that fitment that might be worth a haul through ebay for?
Oh, and i would love the viewfinder, but the Vf2 is waay beyond my pocket
E-Bay is certainly one way to go. The trouble is there are a lot of manufacturers in China, etc. some of which are good and some not so good.

I have bought from Cirrus Adapters on EBay. They make good quality products.
If you can find someone selling one, you may get a good deal.

I buy most of mine through Fotodiox, here in the states. Trouble is a K-mount to micro four thirds adapter from them costs $40USD.

if interested:
http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info...roducts_id=470

Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2011, 9:18 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
no-ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: scottish borders
Posts: 121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zig-123 View Post
E-Bay is certainly one way to go. The trouble is there are a lot of manufacturers in China, etc. some of which are good and some not so good.

I have bought from Cirrus Adapters on EBay. They make good quality products.
If you can find someone selling one, you may get a good deal.

I buy most of mine through Fotodiox, here in the states. Trouble is a K-mount to micro four thirds adapter from them costs $40USD.

if interested:
http://www.fotodiox.com/product_info...roducts_id=470

Zig

Well, got an adapter off ebay, 9 all in, and fits pretty darn solid. very happy with it. Never used a manual camera before and i'm a little unsure of how to set it up for photos etc. I seem to need a fair bit of distance to get a close up, wondering, how can i reduce the distance between the camera and what i want a close up of? Currently i need a few feet! With my FZ38 i took macro shots by nearly bumping the lens off the subject. I guess i need to adjust the way i take photos.

no-ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2011, 2:41 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
no-ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: scottish borders
Posts: 121
Default

One of my first shots with my 99p miranda 70-210 lens. cropped slightly to better position the mini

no-ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2011, 7:22 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Wes James's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: NE Florida
Posts: 332
Default DIfference between adaptors??

So one could spend $40 on the Fotodiox adaptor- or $250 on the Olympus adaptor... what does the extra ~$200.00 get a person??
Wes
Wes James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 22, 2011, 9:08 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
zig-123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cape Cod, Massachusetts
Posts: 5,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wes James View Post
So one could spend $40 on the Fotodiox adaptor- or $250 on the Olympus adaptor... what does the extra ~$200.00 get a person??
Wes
Hi Wes,

In actuality, Olympus only makes an adapter that will allow a fourthirds lens to be used on a micro fourthirds camera.

Fotodiox as well as a host of other suppliers make adapters that will allow you to mount a specific lens to a microfourthirds camera body. i.e. if you have 3 lenses from 3 lens manufacturers say one from Nikon, one from Canon, and the 3rd from Minolta each one of them will require it's own adapter.

By the way, the Olympus adapter allows full communication between a four thirds lens and a microfourthirds. This would explain part of the cost. But not all of it as I think they are still too expensive.
Zig
__________________
http://scortoncreekgallery.smugmug.com/

So you want to be a better photographer? Open your eyes and take a look at what is all around you.
zig-123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23, 2011, 3:18 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Wes James's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: NE Florida
Posts: 332
Default Ah, ha.... thanks!

Ah, ha... got it- Thanks for setting me straight. Your explanation makes much more sense!
Wes
Wes James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 24, 2011, 11:40 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

I have a variety of old MF lenses I use with my m4/3 cameras (G1 and EPL1). I quite like the Chinon's (Pentax mount) and the Canon's FD mount. I recently bought a 28-50mm Super Paragon (Pentax K mount) for cheap, which I haven't received yet. I'm not familiar with this brand and haven't found a whole lot of info. on the net.We'll see.

As Zig mentioned, the biggest limitation of those old lenses is the fact that they won't AF. Yes, we used to MF in the old film days but I think film cameras made the job much easier. My old Ricoh film camera had a combination of split/blurry prism that made MF a breeze. Today's cameras simply enlarge the image to facilitate manual focusing and even though the EVFs are good, IMO the old system is much more accurate. The EPL1 for instance, w/o using the external Olympus EVF, manual focusing through that pathetic low res LCD is a nightmare.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:31 PM.