Turtle
Veteran
Hi All, I thought I'd post a link to some writing I've been doing on the A7R with Canon FDn and Zuiko OM lenses: http://thephotofundamentalist.com/?p=544
I know both sets have been written about already, but thought I'd let you know my thoughts. There are definitely some absolutely brilliant lenses in these line ups and I'm stoked. Thus far I have covered various lenses from 20mm up to 50mm and will keep building on this piece. I know its important to those looking to build up a strong set on a minimal budget. The good news is that this is not going to be difficult.
... its also abundantly clear that there is quite a bit of inaccurate information being circulated. There are quite a few lenses here that I'd be very happy to use professionally and some of them cost me peanuts
Lenses that really stood out for me:
Canon 50mm FDn f1.4. Wow.
Zuiko OM 50mm f3.5 Macro. Flexible all rounder.
Canon FDn 35 f2.8. Matches the Zeiss 35mm f2.8 FE at landscape apertures.
Zuiko 28m f2.8. Not supposed to be as good as the 24mm f2.8 and 28mm f3.5. Mine is. Superb.
... and the 85mm f2 MC is looking very appealing for portraits and its tiny. Has lovely siganture.
.... and the 20mm Canon FDn give you a very wide angle with a very good level of performance. It might not be a 21mm ZM Biogon or 24 f3.8 Elmar, but it's miles cheaper and better on the A7R than either of the two aforementioned lenses.
Modest 24 and 28mm f2.8 Canon FDn lenses? Actually very good.
There are still a few 'Parts' to come
I know both sets have been written about already, but thought I'd let you know my thoughts. There are definitely some absolutely brilliant lenses in these line ups and I'm stoked. Thus far I have covered various lenses from 20mm up to 50mm and will keep building on this piece. I know its important to those looking to build up a strong set on a minimal budget. The good news is that this is not going to be difficult.
... its also abundantly clear that there is quite a bit of inaccurate information being circulated. There are quite a few lenses here that I'd be very happy to use professionally and some of them cost me peanuts
Lenses that really stood out for me:
Canon 50mm FDn f1.4. Wow.
Zuiko OM 50mm f3.5 Macro. Flexible all rounder.
Canon FDn 35 f2.8. Matches the Zeiss 35mm f2.8 FE at landscape apertures.
Zuiko 28m f2.8. Not supposed to be as good as the 24mm f2.8 and 28mm f3.5. Mine is. Superb.
... and the 85mm f2 MC is looking very appealing for portraits and its tiny. Has lovely siganture.
.... and the 20mm Canon FDn give you a very wide angle with a very good level of performance. It might not be a 21mm ZM Biogon or 24 f3.8 Elmar, but it's miles cheaper and better on the A7R than either of the two aforementioned lenses.
Modest 24 and 28mm f2.8 Canon FDn lenses? Actually very good.
There are still a few 'Parts' to come
sreed2006
Well-known
That is a lot of work there, and written up very well. Thank you for posting it.
xyz3450
-
Thank you for the link to your reviews and for posting here. You have done a lot of work. Would you mind commenting on how you find the ergonomics of using the zuiko OM lenses on the sony A7? How is the balance, ease of use, quickness of manual focusing etc.?Thanks again....
Turtle
Veteran
Its a pleasure.
The ergonomics are perhaps best described as 'OK'. The adapted length means everything is a bit further forward than you would expect (especially if you are interchanging with native primes, like the 35 FE). Because the aperture ring is right on the tip of the lens, this can feel a bit strange at first, but like most things, you get used to it.
Weight is not a problem because the lens and adaptor combo is still not all that heavy. I find balance with the 35 FE to be 'perfect', so clearly it feels more nose heavy than this, but its fine. The Zuiko OM lenses are very short, which helps. The 85mm, for example, is a bit longer than the wides and on top of the adaptor, it feels a bit on the long side to me, but this is not a lens you are going to be slipping through crowds with (most likely not anyway). Used for portrait work, I can't say I noticed any issue. I was more concerned with nailing precise focus, which is tough at f2 on this lens. Its much easier at f2.8!
As an aside, the very high central resolution of the OM wides really helps focus peaking snap in and out.
All in all, for landscape use, maybe a bit of street with the 28/35mm lenses, it all works well and feels fine in the hand. Native lenses will feel better, however. With the 35mm FE mounted the entire camera and lens assembly feels like one thing with no evident tipping point. Weighing in at only 110g helps...
As an owner of the A7 (as you do), I feel this is where these adapted lenses really sing. They provide ample resolution at medium apertures and no real advantages with the A7R. They do, however (if you get a good copy) bring out all that 24MP goodness for a very low price.
QUOTE=conyon;2351034]Thank you for the link to your reviews and for posting here. You have done a lot of work. Would you mind commenting on how you find the ergonomics of using the zuiko OM lenses on the sony A7? How is the balance, ease of use, quickness of manual focusing etc.?Thanks again....[/QUOTE]
The ergonomics are perhaps best described as 'OK'. The adapted length means everything is a bit further forward than you would expect (especially if you are interchanging with native primes, like the 35 FE). Because the aperture ring is right on the tip of the lens, this can feel a bit strange at first, but like most things, you get used to it.
Weight is not a problem because the lens and adaptor combo is still not all that heavy. I find balance with the 35 FE to be 'perfect', so clearly it feels more nose heavy than this, but its fine. The Zuiko OM lenses are very short, which helps. The 85mm, for example, is a bit longer than the wides and on top of the adaptor, it feels a bit on the long side to me, but this is not a lens you are going to be slipping through crowds with (most likely not anyway). Used for portrait work, I can't say I noticed any issue. I was more concerned with nailing precise focus, which is tough at f2 on this lens. Its much easier at f2.8!
As an aside, the very high central resolution of the OM wides really helps focus peaking snap in and out.
All in all, for landscape use, maybe a bit of street with the 28/35mm lenses, it all works well and feels fine in the hand. Native lenses will feel better, however. With the 35mm FE mounted the entire camera and lens assembly feels like one thing with no evident tipping point. Weighing in at only 110g helps...
As an owner of the A7 (as you do), I feel this is where these adapted lenses really sing. They provide ample resolution at medium apertures and no real advantages with the A7R. They do, however (if you get a good copy) bring out all that 24MP goodness for a very low price.
QUOTE=conyon;2351034]Thank you for the link to your reviews and for posting here. You have done a lot of work. Would you mind commenting on how you find the ergonomics of using the zuiko OM lenses on the sony A7? How is the balance, ease of use, quickness of manual focusing etc.?Thanks again....[/QUOTE]
kxl
Social Documentary
Thanks for posting. I use the 50/1.4 FDn with my A7R and am really impressed that such an old lens performs so well on a state of the art digital body. I'd seen images from the FD "L" lenses on an A7 and they are superb. I would love to own an FD 24/1.4 L, but they're a bit on the pricey side.
Bille
Well-known
A few pretty images with the FD 50/1.4 on sony digital http://sebimagery.com/blog/2015/1/18/no-pants-day-9-canon-fd-50mm14-versus-sony-fe-5518
CliveC
Well-known
Really glad to read these things, even though they're from a while ago. I have a lovely set of FD and OM lenses that prepares me for full frame mirrorless. Picked up the majority before the prices have been driven up too high (though not when the market was at the bottom).
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I owned the the OM 24/2.8, 28/3.5 and 28/2.8. I sold the first two and kept the 28/2.8.
I never did extensive pixel peeping on 24/2.8 shots, but there was something about the images I didn't like. The geometry just didn't "feel" right to me - maybe I had a bad sample with some distortion.
The 28/3.5 was fine, but the2.8 was at least its equal, so I went for the gain of a stop brighter.
As for the 35/2.8 (which you did not test,) I really do not understand the knock against it. I've had two copies and have been happy. Maybe I've been lucky. If you can secure a copy, you might have some fun.
I have multiple 50s, including the 3.5 macro. To be honest I typically reach for the 50/1.4 or 50/1.8 miJ before the macro.
I agree about the Zuikos being a touch (though just) cooler and having slightly more shadow detail. I prefer that, especially the shadow detail, which is hard to replace if you don't have it.
I also have the 100/2.8, which is a wonderfully small and excellent short telephoto lens.
I use my Zuikos on an X-Pro1 (as well as film bodies) so don't really see any potential edge or corner issues. The only thing I don't like is the flange distance issue, which you mentioned. It does negate the size advantage of the Zuikos.
I never did extensive pixel peeping on 24/2.8 shots, but there was something about the images I didn't like. The geometry just didn't "feel" right to me - maybe I had a bad sample with some distortion.
The 28/3.5 was fine, but the2.8 was at least its equal, so I went for the gain of a stop brighter.
As for the 35/2.8 (which you did not test,) I really do not understand the knock against it. I've had two copies and have been happy. Maybe I've been lucky. If you can secure a copy, you might have some fun.
I have multiple 50s, including the 3.5 macro. To be honest I typically reach for the 50/1.4 or 50/1.8 miJ before the macro.
I agree about the Zuikos being a touch (though just) cooler and having slightly more shadow detail. I prefer that, especially the shadow detail, which is hard to replace if you don't have it.
I also have the 100/2.8, which is a wonderfully small and excellent short telephoto lens.
I use my Zuikos on an X-Pro1 (as well as film bodies) so don't really see any potential edge or corner issues. The only thing I don't like is the flange distance issue, which you mentioned. It does negate the size advantage of the Zuikos.
raid
Dad Photographer
I often use Canon FD wide angle lenses on my M8 and M9 cameras via Canon adapter B and with zone focusing.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
And just to clarify, yes, the Zuiko 50/3.5 Macro is really good and I find it useful. But I typically use the faster 50s just to have shallower DOF available if needed. Especially the 50/1.8 lenses are significantly smaller than the 50/3.5, making an OM feel even more like an RF.
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
Just discovered this. Thanks for the terrific work and the excellent, enjoyable writeup. Much appreciated.
sevres_babylone
Veteran
I've become interested in the Sonys and this article is extremely helpful. Thanks for work you put into it.
TR3B
Established
Great Info!
Just starting in myself and would like to hear some input regarding OM adapters. Do I need a $100 Novoflex adapter to avoid pitfalls or will a cheapie fit just as well without issues?
Just starting in myself and would like to hear some input regarding OM adapters. Do I need a $100 Novoflex adapter to avoid pitfalls or will a cheapie fit just as well without issues?
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
My cheap OM adapter works fine on the A7.
Indeed, after the A7 took an unscheduled tumble off the video head, knocking out the VF and bending the lens mount, the only lenses that work are my OMs courtesy of the $14 adapter. (The pricey Metabones G adapter will not lock into place, nor will the M adapter, so this A7 is going to remain an OM body + Varavon LCD hood for fine focusing.)
Indeed, after the A7 took an unscheduled tumble off the video head, knocking out the VF and bending the lens mount, the only lenses that work are my OMs courtesy of the $14 adapter. (The pricey Metabones G adapter will not lock into place, nor will the M adapter, so this A7 is going to remain an OM body + Varavon LCD hood for fine focusing.)
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
I don't know whether Turtle's write up addressed using the Sony's digital zoom, but it is a handy tool, for non-critical work at least, when you have a lens without quite enough reach for the circumstance.
Below is the 85/2 OMZ at 1:1 on the A7:
Earlier that day, my daughter and I were at a haul-out for harbor seals. It was high tide and I could not get as close I can at low tide, when they are all resting. So I extended the 85/2 x 4 digital zoom for this:
Digital bodies tend to be kitted with native zooms. But it is possible on the A7 series to zoom any adapted lens x 4. Your OM 28 can be 28-96mm in a pinch.
Below is the 85/2 OMZ at 1:1 on the A7:
Earlier that day, my daughter and I were at a haul-out for harbor seals. It was high tide and I could not get as close I can at low tide, when they are all resting. So I extended the 85/2 x 4 digital zoom for this:
Digital bodies tend to be kitted with native zooms. But it is possible on the A7 series to zoom any adapted lens x 4. Your OM 28 can be 28-96mm in a pinch.