M or EF Lenses on Micro 4/3?

S

sonwolf

Established
Local time
2:02 PM
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
111
Do Leica M or Canon EF mount lenses image better on a Micro 4/3 camera? Especially in the outer and corner areas of the frame. I own a couple native Micro 4/3 lenses but sometimes I need a wide aperture lens in low light situations. A problem my other lenses could solve. For the record, I own a E-PL1.
 
Not answering your question, but AFAIK (correct me if I'm wrong), since the aperture on an EOS lens is controlled electronically, using an EOS lens on an m43 requires removing the lens each time that you want to change aperture, mounting the lens on an EOS camera to change and lock the aperture, then re-mount it on the m43 body. That's a major PITA.
 
Last edited:
I frequently use a Canon FD 50mm 1.4 lens on my Panasonic GF1 and LOVE IT!! It isn't as sharp wide open as some of my EOS glass but a little sharpening in post helps a lot.

The big problem with the EOS lenses is that you have to shoot them wide open on a M 4/3 body. While I love to shoot wide open, this limits the versatility of the EOS - M 4/3 setup. I have heard that you can "set" the aperture on an EOS body and then yank the lens off in some way that keeps the lens stopped down and then mount it on the M 4/3 body. But this hardly seems practical!

I have been looking at the Samyang EOS lenses, primarily the 8mm. The Samyang lenses have aperture rings and will work fine with an EOS to M 4/3 adapter.

If you can find an EOS lens with a aperture ring it should work. But I'm not sure that this exists (other than the Samyang lenses).
 
I find the Olympus E-P2 (14-42 mm) is not bad, but when I tried the 35/2.5 CV (M mount) I have to say that the difference is visible. Here, wide open.

U28407I1291847972.SEQ.0.jpg
 
In my opinion,

First, The Canon EF (does not include FD) is one of the worst candidates for m4/3rds.

- Lenses tend to be rather large
- Electronic aperture implementation makes it difficult to use on m4/3rds
- Focusing rings are not properly damped for manual focusing.
- Like most retrofocus designs, the adapter will protrude more than the Leica M adapters to achieve the appropriate flange distance.

Second, the question is a bit loaded as I'm sure there are examples of Canon EF lenses performing as well (or even better) than some Leica M glass AND vice versa. In the small time I have spent with a 50mm Lux Asph, I haven't seen anything as sharp or as attractive on the E-PL1 or M body. Perhaps if you post some specific lenses that you are interested, some of us can post samples of those lenses on a m4/3rds camera?

Looking at your list of lenses for the R-D1, I see that you've already found some excellent examples from C/V. Have you tried them out on your E-PL1 yet? Some have reported corner issues with any focal lengths less than 35mm... is that a concern?


Mention some specific lenses and someone might post samples. I personally have access to variety of Leica and C/V lenses including 35mm nokton f/1.2, 28mm Ultron (like yours), 12mm heliar, 21 colorskopar.
 
sonwolf said:
Do Leica M or Canon EF mount lenses image better on a Micro 4/3 camera? Especially in the outer and corner areas of the frame. I own a couple native Micro 4/3 lenses but sometimes I need a wide aperture lens in low light situations. A problem my other lenses could solve. For the record, I own a E-PL1.
Click to expand...

Canon EF are unusable unless you shoot wide open. They are, by design, with electronic aperture control.
 
usayit said:
Looking at your list of lenses for the R-D1, I see that you've already found some excellent examples from C/V. Have you tried them out on your E-PL1 yet? Some have reported corner issues with any focal lengths less than 35mm... is that a concern?
Click to expand...

I do have a concern regarding the corner performance of M mount lenses on the E-PL1, but the disadvantages of using EF lenses are so numerous, everyone has convinced me M lenses are still the best choice. I am going to order a Voigtlander Micro 4/3 M mount adapter, unless there is a better choice.
 
luiman said:
I find the Olympus E-P2 (14-42 mm) is not bad, but when I tried the 35/2.5 CV (M mount) I have to say that the difference is visible. Here, wide open.

U28407I1291847972.SEQ.0.jpg
Click to expand...

An excellent example of what a CV M mount lens can deliver on a M 4/3 camera. Thanks for sharing the image.
 
EF lenses are a PITA to use unless you accept them at maximum aperture. I have several prime EF lenses that are quite good at maximum aperture--35/2, 50/1.4, 85/1.8 and 400/5.6L. I've not used any of my zooms, only the primes. Since there's only the single aperture available, each lens has to be considered as a special purpose lens. Specifically for minimum DOF or maximum focal length.

If you have a collection of Canon EF lenses, it's not a big investment in one of the Fotodiox adapters. They work perfectly and it's fun to experiment.
 
EF 24mm f/3.5L TS-E II

EF 24mm f/3.5L TS-E II

I like to use the Canon TS-E on my IR modified G1 for landscape work. Just preset the lens to f/8 and mount to the G1 with an RJ EF to m43 adapter. Works very well and only needs about 1 degree of tilt to get everything in focus from close foreground to infinity. This a manual focus lens with very precise focus control.

large.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom