Are you seriously asking if it's a good deal? $150 is nothing for a modern camera that gives good results. $150 gets you no where near this quality brand new... it doesn't even get you an iPhone. 
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
Avowed digital hater here but at this price level even I can't ignore this newfangled stuff any longer :angel: So what's it like to shoot one of these things with manual lenses? Am I right that I get aperture-priority exposure, but to control shutter speed and ISO, I have to delve into menus? Focus by magnified live view?
Also, the 2x crop means I'd be without even a "normal," as I don't own any legacy lenses wider than 28mm. Hmm.
Also, the 2x crop means I'd be without even a "normal," as I don't own any legacy lenses wider than 28mm. Hmm.
Dave Jenkins
Loose Canon
Your 28 would be a 56mm on M4/3 -- a very usable normal.
Thardy
Veteran
I've used my Panasonic GF-1 with M, and LTM adapters. All I have to do to focus is push in the dial (used for shutter speed and aperture selection) located by your right thumb, and the screen is magnified to allow focusing. I use this mode with the EVF attached and it's pretty easy. Kind of like focusing a medium format camera.
The camera does become aperture controlled and will pick the correct shutter speed. The GF-1 has buttons and dials for most of the things that need to be changed on the fly.
I have an Olympus EPL-2 kit coming and I'm curious to see how non MFT lenses are handled, and how easy it is to use.
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
^Thanks, that helps a lot. The E-PL1 doesn't have dials though, except for the mode selector. I understand there is a dedicated button for the magnified view.
Dave: I really lean towards the wide side of 50mm--my sweet spot seems to be 40--but I see the Panasonic 14/2.5 is quite affordable. I could start out with a 28 and 40 (Vivitar 28/2.5 AR mount and Hexanon 40/1.8) and add the Pany later, giving me an almost "classic" 28 - 56 - 80 line-up. Any number of 50 --> 100 and longer lenses if I want. This could work.
Dave: I really lean towards the wide side of 50mm--my sweet spot seems to be 40--but I see the Panasonic 14/2.5 is quite affordable. I could start out with a 28 and 40 (Vivitar 28/2.5 AR mount and Hexanon 40/1.8) and add the Pany later, giving me an almost "classic" 28 - 56 - 80 line-up. Any number of 50 --> 100 and longer lenses if I want. This could work.
raid
Dad Photographer
The CV 25/4 would make a great normal lens that is sharp and small and not expensive.
kuzano
Veteran
Legacy lenses a PITA and not likely better....
Legacy lenses a PITA and not likely better....
Having had Oly digital since the E300 and the E-1 and with the Kodak sensor, as well as panny, I ran the gamut of legacy lenses, although I am too cheap for Leica.
It's just not worth the trouble. I don't actually believe any more that MF legacy lenses create necessarily better images than the native 4/3 and m4/3. I've used most of the Oly Zuiko OM primes down to 28mm and up to 100. It's just a hassle.
When I want MF, I'll put a Zuiko prime on the front of one of my OM1 or OM2 bodies, with a split focus screen at 45 degrees.
For Digital, I'll use the lenses made for the camera. This is a continuing dialogue I read all over the net with all use of Legacy lenses. The glass today in primes and Zooms is better and offers as good image quality over 40 year old glass. And those legacy lenses make your camera bag heavier than the native lenses anyway.
Shoot your leica glass on a Leica, or a Bessa, or other standard film rangefinder. Shoot Oly glass on your Oly.
I also agree with the post about the worth and advisability of IBIS. I wouldn't consider any EVIL wihtout IBIS and dust shake removal. That's again, Oly territory.
Also, I hear conflicting report about the status of AA filters after the experiment with the EPL-1. I hear yes on same AA in the EPL-2 and I hear no... both of those reponses about 50/50. Who hear really knows and can document continued use of the weaker AA filter.
Until I hear otherwise, it's another EPL-1 for me. With all the contradictory information, I also don't believe the EPL-2 focuses faster. I think that part of the equation is covered by the versions of glass, I suspect the MKII 14-42 focuses just as fast on an EPL-1 as an EPL-2. Again, I'll listen to anyone with real experience AND documentation.
Legacy lenses a PITA and not likely better....
Having had Oly digital since the E300 and the E-1 and with the Kodak sensor, as well as panny, I ran the gamut of legacy lenses, although I am too cheap for Leica.
It's just not worth the trouble. I don't actually believe any more that MF legacy lenses create necessarily better images than the native 4/3 and m4/3. I've used most of the Oly Zuiko OM primes down to 28mm and up to 100. It's just a hassle.
When I want MF, I'll put a Zuiko prime on the front of one of my OM1 or OM2 bodies, with a split focus screen at 45 degrees.
For Digital, I'll use the lenses made for the camera. This is a continuing dialogue I read all over the net with all use of Legacy lenses. The glass today in primes and Zooms is better and offers as good image quality over 40 year old glass. And those legacy lenses make your camera bag heavier than the native lenses anyway.
Shoot your leica glass on a Leica, or a Bessa, or other standard film rangefinder. Shoot Oly glass on your Oly.
I also agree with the post about the worth and advisability of IBIS. I wouldn't consider any EVIL wihtout IBIS and dust shake removal. That's again, Oly territory.
Also, I hear conflicting report about the status of AA filters after the experiment with the EPL-1. I hear yes on same AA in the EPL-2 and I hear no... both of those reponses about 50/50. Who hear really knows and can document continued use of the weaker AA filter.
Until I hear otherwise, it's another EPL-1 for me. With all the contradictory information, I also don't believe the EPL-2 focuses faster. I think that part of the equation is covered by the versions of glass, I suspect the MKII 14-42 focuses just as fast on an EPL-1 as an EPL-2. Again, I'll listen to anyone with real experience AND documentation.
raid
Dad Photographer
raid
Dad Photographer
Zeiss Planar 85mm/1.4 on EP2
raid
Dad Photographer
TV lens 25/1.4:
raid
Dad Photographer
Canon FD 7.5mm on EP-2:
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
That's all very well if you have the money to buy new lenses. I don't.
raid
Dad Photographer
How much would a digital lens cost with the qualities of a Zeiss Planar 85mm/1.4?
I bought into the Olympus EP system only because of the legacy lenses. It brought back to life systems that were vansihing due to lack of spare parts, such as the 35mm SLR Rolleiflex system.
I bought into the Olympus EP system only because of the legacy lenses. It brought back to life systems that were vansihing due to lack of spare parts, such as the 35mm SLR Rolleiflex system.
mretina
Well-known
Zeiss Planar 85mm/1.4 on EP2
is that Rollei QBM to micro 4/3? ..amazing discovery for me. I need to research better and I am already looking for a EPL1. T
also googled AA filter and kind of understood what AA is and why low AA is good at low ISO.
Film is film but it is nice to keep up with these things.
Thanks everybody!!
raid
Dad Photographer
Yes, it is. The 85.1,4 becomes a 170mm /1.4 lens with the DOF of a 85mm lens.
I have five Rolleiflex SLR cameras that keep on breaking down, and to salvage the wonderful vintage QBM Zeiss lenses, I went digital. The Zeiss lenses do very well on the EP-2. The EP-2 has a 10x magnification, so focusing wide open is a piece of cake.
The Zeiss 50/1.4 becomes a wonderful portrait lens and the 28mm lens becomes a normal lens.
I have five Rolleiflex SLR cameras that keep on breaking down, and to salvage the wonderful vintage QBM Zeiss lenses, I went digital. The Zeiss lenses do very well on the EP-2. The EP-2 has a 10x magnification, so focusing wide open is a piece of cake.
The Zeiss 50/1.4 becomes a wonderful portrait lens and the 28mm lens becomes a normal lens.
kuzano
Veteran
Now there you go, NOT reading my post.....
Now there you go, NOT reading my post.....
You make it sound like I've got a pile of dough to spend on lenses. I don't. I live on retirement income and I'm not going out and spending tons of money on new equipment.
However, I've always sought out good deals, and I've always turned my older inventory into current equipment without digging into my lifestyle income.
From what I hear people talking about with legacy lenses, I keep hearing terms like Leica-this, Zeiss-that, Contax-whatever... and a lot of fast Nikon, Olympus, Pentax and Minolta Rokkor glass.
I contend that if you have a bunch of old legacy glass in the fast prime arena, you have enough inventory to sell to acquire a stable for M4/3 consisting of one high quality and fast prime in the wide area, and a couple of very good native zooms that will so closely match all that fancy legacy stuff, that you'll seriously wonder why you're wasting your time on manual focus. The last few PENs and the new EM-5 have just reduced manual focus to ridiculous energy spent. Furthermore, if I still want manual focus override, I have plenty of options with these cameras and native lenses.
Now, let me say, that I speak of this only in regard to my personal preferences. I'd rather shoot a system that was designed from the ground up to the last detail, than fuss with legacy glass. For me, the rewards are not worthwhile. I'm getting image quality with Oly lenses, that I never saw with those old legacy lenses unless they were on the camera's they were built for.
So, I'm saying a new PEN and 3 Oly mzuikos cover it for me. And I'm not talking about SHG glass either. HD, or lenses from Oly matching HG are just fine. The bag is light, and catching images is as easy as it gets in todays photographic arena.
So, no, I'm not buying a bunch of new equipment, but I am converting my old inventory, some of which is still bringing very good prices in the market, to the new systems.
Can we agree to disagree and still be friends. I'm just doing it different than some of you would do it.
Now there you go, NOT reading my post.....
You make it sound like I've got a pile of dough to spend on lenses. I don't. I live on retirement income and I'm not going out and spending tons of money on new equipment.
However, I've always sought out good deals, and I've always turned my older inventory into current equipment without digging into my lifestyle income.
From what I hear people talking about with legacy lenses, I keep hearing terms like Leica-this, Zeiss-that, Contax-whatever... and a lot of fast Nikon, Olympus, Pentax and Minolta Rokkor glass.
I contend that if you have a bunch of old legacy glass in the fast prime arena, you have enough inventory to sell to acquire a stable for M4/3 consisting of one high quality and fast prime in the wide area, and a couple of very good native zooms that will so closely match all that fancy legacy stuff, that you'll seriously wonder why you're wasting your time on manual focus. The last few PENs and the new EM-5 have just reduced manual focus to ridiculous energy spent. Furthermore, if I still want manual focus override, I have plenty of options with these cameras and native lenses.
Now, let me say, that I speak of this only in regard to my personal preferences. I'd rather shoot a system that was designed from the ground up to the last detail, than fuss with legacy glass. For me, the rewards are not worthwhile. I'm getting image quality with Oly lenses, that I never saw with those old legacy lenses unless they were on the camera's they were built for.
So, I'm saying a new PEN and 3 Oly mzuikos cover it for me. And I'm not talking about SHG glass either. HD, or lenses from Oly matching HG are just fine. The bag is light, and catching images is as easy as it gets in todays photographic arena.
So, no, I'm not buying a bunch of new equipment, but I am converting my old inventory, some of which is still bringing very good prices in the market, to the new systems.
Can we agree to disagree and still be friends. I'm just doing it different than some of you would do it.
raid
Dad Photographer
Do whatever works best for you. I want to use film cameras most of the time, with occasional use of the EP cameras. In my case, it would not work well to sell my nice film camera lenses to buy digital camera lenses. The top film lnses can result in images that have life to them, while the modern razor sharp lenses give images without soul. I don't know how else to explain it.
Thardy
Veteran
raid
Dad Photographer
Thanks.
The 7.5 circular fisheye lens becomes more useful with a copped 15mm perspective on the EP-2. It was a lens for very special effect images, and now it is a very wide angle lens for regular photos.
The 7.5 circular fisheye lens becomes more useful with a copped 15mm perspective on the EP-2. It was a lens for very special effect images, and now it is a very wide angle lens for regular photos.
batterytypehah!
Lord of the Dings
@ kuzano - With regard to who's not reading posts right, I never said a word about lens quality. You perceived that was my motivation, and chose to go off on a rant against using legacy lenses. Fine, just don't direct it at me.
I have a limited budget, and nothing of significance to sell because I'm not giving up film. I can justify a camera body and some adapters, altogether around $200, because I'll easily save that much in CN film and developing within a year or two. Raid got a great package deal, but I may just not be so lucky.
I also simply prefer manual focus, but that's just me.
I have a limited budget, and nothing of significance to sell because I'm not giving up film. I can justify a camera body and some adapters, altogether around $200, because I'll easily save that much in CN film and developing within a year or two. Raid got a great package deal, but I may just not be so lucky.
I also simply prefer manual focus, but that's just me.