SHOW ME YOUR 4:3 Alternative Lenses

Voigtlander Color Skopar 50mm 2.5:

4250154679_7fa4444062.jpg


Voigtlander Nokton SC 35mm 1.4 :
4295035197_be91ab8c0d.jpg
 
Creagerj said:
Oh man, I want to get into this. I just ran a search on ebay for C-mount lenses, there are hordes of them, some going for basically nothing.
Click to expand...


Just keep in mind, that there are tons of C-mount lenses that fit, but the number that will actually cover the entire sensor is much fewer. If you don't mind cropping or having a semi-circular vignette around the image, they look like fun.
 
My new cv 21mm. The 17mm Olympus finder seems to work out well at estimating the field of view. At least until I decide on a good mate.
 

Attachments

  • 21_5.jpg
    21_5.jpg
    44 KB · Views: 0
adapter RF lens to m 4/3

adapter RF lens to m 4/3

I took the Color-Yashinon DX 45mm F1.7 fromYASHICA Electro 35 GSN rangefinder camera and modified to M4/3 mount.





Test shoot




 
Last edited:
What is everyone's experience with Nikon (F-mount) glass via an adapter? I just got an E-P2 and have a bunch of sweet Nikon lenses, although the majority are "G" (no aperture ring) types.

Specifically I have fast 35, 50, 85 and 105 primes that I suspect would work well but not sure if there is much "point" to adapting these, when I also have native micro-4/3 and converted M-mount lenses to play with. The Nikon adapter and lenses would obviously be very bulky on an E-P2 body...
 
I just got my E-P2 a couple of weeks ago and really like it. My lens collection for it includes that 14-42 lens that came with the kit, the 20/1.7 Panasonic, and the 7-14/4 Panasonic. They all seem to give really great results, though I really haven't fully tested the 7-14mm lens.

So let me ask everyone -- with all these various lens adaptations and combinations, is anyone actually noticing a difference in the final picture? I mean, is a 50mm f/2 Summicron going to give better results than any of the micro 4/3-specific lenses once the image hits the sensor and goes through all its digital acrobatics?

As well, how are you guys finding working with lenses that are exclusively manual focus on these cameras? Hate to say it, but my personal (limited) experience of using the manual focus option on my E-P2 has made me prefer the auto-focus. Maybe I'm just getting old and it's my eyes....

Would be interested in reading thoughts on this......thanks!
 
Last edited:
attachment.php


Sorry for bad cellphone pic, it's E-P2 with Nikon 50/1.2 and it's amazing combo. I use voigtlander adapter and it has worked like a charm with all Nikon lenses I've thrown at it so far.

EDIT: To add one picture taken with this combo, more in other threads so no need to repost them right? 😀

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • Oly_with_nikon_50_12.jpg
    Oly_with_nikon_50_12.jpg
    111.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 20100521-_5210964.jpg
    20100521-_5210964.jpg
    167.3 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Voigtlander Nokton Classic 40mm



Voigtlander 75mm Color Heliar



Voigtlander 15mm Aspherical Super Wide Heliar



Voigtlander 25mm Snapshot Skopar



Olympus 50mm f1.8 Zuiko



Unbranded 25mm C-Mount CCTV lens



I've not used the Voigtlander lenses (most of which I already had for my Bessa R3A, although the 25mm Skopar is a recent acquisition) nearly enough, I was incredibly pleased with the results I got from the Olympus 50mm off my old OM-1, and the C-mount lens is intruiging but one to be used in small doses, I think. Cheaper than buying a 'lensbaby'...
 
Vince Lupo said:
So let me ask everyone -- with all these various lens adaptations and combinations, is anyone actually noticing a difference in the final picture? I mean, is a 50mm f/2 Summicron going to give better results than any of the micro 4/3-specific lenses once the image hits the sensor and goes through all its digital acrobatics?

As well, how are you guys finding working with lenses that are exclusively manual focus on these cameras? Hate to say it, but my personal (limited) experience of using the manual focus option on my E-P2 has made me prefer the auto-focus. Maybe I'm just getting old and it's my eyes....

Would be interested in reading thoughts on this......thanks!
Click to expand...


I've been wondering the same thing, is there any advantage to using legacy lenses other than the fact that you have them?
Also, without the EVF these cameras have to be held out at arms length, like any ps digi, and I was wondering about manual focus under these conditions.
 
Ducky said:
I've been wondering the same thing, is there any advantage to using legacy lenses other than the fact that you have them?
Also, without the EVF these cameras have to be held out at arms length, like any ps digi, and I was wondering about manual focus under these conditions.
Click to expand...

I've tried to focus with manual lenses with out EVF, never again 🙂 Then again with EVF it's very easy to focus. Actually I prefer the manual focus experience of my E-P2 to any of dSLR:s I've used. Bright image and easy zoom (which I never use unless I have some really wide lense and try to focus close).

As far as advantage, well there are amazing legacy lenses to be had with great characteristics where micro 4/3:s lenses are few and far between (althou I love 17mm and I hear good things on 20mm, pana wide zoom and leica macro).

Few more pics taken with Nikon 50/1.2
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • flower.jpg
    flower.jpg
    158.8 KB · Views: 0
  • runninggirl_2.jpg
    runninggirl_2.jpg
    135.6 KB · Views: 0
  • runninggirl.jpg
    runninggirl.jpg
    135.9 KB · Views: 0
In my case, I already had the 15, 40 and 75mm Voigtlander lenses, and I already had the 50mm Olympus lens, so all I had to get was the adaptor, and they give me possibilities I've not yet got with M4/3 lenses.
I did buy the 25mm Skopar more recently, but I also wanted to fill the gap in my Voigtlander lens set for when I use my Bessa R3A, so i didn't just buy it to use with my E-P1.

As far as focussing goes, the 15mm and 25mm Voigtlander lenses I don't bother focusing most of the time, I just set the hyperfocal and away I go. This is how those lenses were meant to be used.
The 40 and 75mm Voigtlanders take a bit more focusing, and with the 75mm I really need to use the focus aid (zoom in on the green square) to be certain, although last time I used it was on a very windy day which didn't help.

I did find that the Olympus 50mm Zuiko was a delight to use though. When I tried that, it just snapped into focus really quite obviously and I never needed to use the focus aid.
 
Ducky said:
I've been wondering the same thing, is there any advantage to using legacy lenses other than the fact that you have them?
Also, without the EVF these cameras have to be held out at arms length, like any ps digi, and I was wondering about manual focus under these conditions.
Click to expand...

Legacy lenses can fill in gaps in the current micro four thirds lineup. For example, I am using my 50/1.4 super tak on my e-p2. Or, they can replace more expensive lenses. Rather than buy the panasonic leica macro, I just use my 50/4 macro tak which cost me $60.

Also, you are ending up with a crop of the image so you should get the sharpest part, the center.

I stil prefer to manual focus in most situations rather than use autofocus. Manual focusing with the micro four thirds lenses works okay, but it just doesnt feel as nice. My takumars, for example, have the nicest manual focus feeling out of any of my lenses.

I find it pretty easy to manual focus with the screen. Generally I use the viewfinder. I dont use the zoom function as much as I thought. The image in the viewfinder (or on the screen) seems to snap into focus pretty well. However, if I am wide open with my 50/1.4 I do zoom because the depth of field is pretty narrow there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom