Zuikor OM 21mm f2.0 on R-D1

[rvaubel]

Does any one know if it is even possible to mount the Olympus 21mm f2.0 on our beloved R-D1?. I have access to machine shop and could have an adapter fabricated. Since it must be a retrofocus design, there shouldnt be problems with rear elements running into the focus lever in the camera body. Of course it wouldnt rangefinder couple but so what. Maybe some issue of infinity focus.
I wouldnt go to this extreme if there were any fast wide angles available in an M mount. After all, a 21mm has a 32mm equivalent so its not even that wide. Plus the alternatives @ f2.8 are the very expensive Leica aspheric and the big and bulky not so cheap Zeiss.
I'd take an Avedon if I ever saw one for sale.
I wish Mr. K would consider producing a fast 21mm to supplement his fast 28 and 35's. The Oly was compact and light and f2.0 What with the R-D1 and the upcoming Digital M, one would think there would be a market for a lens along these lines. I'd use it only my film body camera too.
Dreamin for a fast and wide
Rex

 

[ChrisN]

If you are quick, you might be able to get one from Cameraquest. Stephen Gandy sourced some adapters with a coupled rangefinder mount - sort of!

Now use your Nikon, Leica R, Olympus OM, Pentax K (Pentax 42 by adding the M to K adapter) or Contax /Yashica (RTS) lenses on your Leica M mount camera WITH rangefinder coupling! How can you do that? The adapter has the rangefinder coupling, not your SLR lens.

You focus normally with your rangefinder, and then transfer the focus distance to the distance scale on your SLR lens. OK, so it's not as convenient as a RF coupled M mount lens, but it is a lot more convenient than guessing the focus distance when you use SLR lenses on your M. If you want to use your favorite Nikon, Leica R, Olympus OM, Pentax K, Pentax 42, or Contax MM lenses on your Leica M, this is the best way to do it! These adapters generally fit all Leica M mount cameras, except the Leica M6 TTL which strangely enough has a different internal construction in the light chamber.​

More at: http://www.cameraquest.com/adaptslrRFM.htm

 

[plummerl]

Unfortunately, the OM adapters are sold out! I'd love one also.

larry

 

[rvaubel]

I think I remember an focusing adapter like that but I dont recall it was a OM lens to M body adapter. That would be perfect. Think of all the cool OM lenses that could be utilized.
I mentioned that I have access to CNC equipment. I could actually make my own, if I got crazy enough. I'm going to contact Stephen to find out if that is what he had made. Maybe he can give me some pointers (like its a big pain in the ass)

Rex

 

[plummerl]

The adapters that Stephen sold were (I believe) made by Novoflex. They are more than just a mount adapter. The adapter is coupled to the rangefinder. You focused the adapter, and then transferred the reading to the lens.

larry

 

[VictorM.]

The 21mm f/2.8 was an Avenon, also sold as Bower or Kobalux, in ltm.

 

[rvaubel]

Thanks everyone for all the leads
The R-D1 @ISO 800 needs at least f2.8 in the light I shoot in. My CV28/1.9 is great but often a little long 43mm equivalent. The Zuikor 21mm would be perfect. But if anyone knows of a 21mm or shorter, f2.0 or faster, I would like to hear about it.
Rex

 

[Trius]

You will pry the Zuiko 21/2.0 out of my cold, dead hands. OMs live in my house partially (if not largely) because of this lens.

 

[rvaubel]

Dear Trius
Don't you think your being a little unfair in not sharing the affections of your sweet little 21mm Zuikor( with that f2.0 apeture)? I know my R-D1 would love a chance to go on a date with Miss Zuikor. Perhaps, as proud parents, we could arrange a meeting.
Don't worry, you can trust me
Rex

 

[Sean Reid]

Rex,

The Zeiss 21 is just 5mm longer than the Leica when both have their hoods mounted. They're nearly the same size and weight. I'm testing both right now and working on the article. If you're going to be shooting wide-open wouldn't you want the RF for focus? If the Leica is too expensive (and it is for many of us) I'd get the Zeiss and work around the F/2.8 limitation. My bet is that it will end up being more useable for you than a non-coupled lens.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[fgianni]

Certainly up to F4 I don't see the need of RF coupling for a 21mm lens, however at 2.8 or even worse at 2.0 I am not sure you can get good results with guess focusing.

 

[Sean Reid]

Hi Ian,

Of course, each photographer needs to decide for him or herself but in the tests I've been doing this year I've found that even a 15mm lens at F/11 needs to be focused accurately to perform it's best. This was a bit of a surprise to me but I'm now quite certain about it. DOF, unfortunately, is no substitute for accurate focus. That doesn't negate zone focus, of course, but I think one would want to have at least the option of focusing precisely.


Cheers,

Sean

 

[bmattock]

Certainly up to F4 I don't see the need of RF coupling for a 21mm lens, however at 2.8 or even worse at 2.0 I am not sure you can get good results with guess focusing.

According to DOFMaster (http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html), at 10 feet distant from the subject, f2.8 gives you nearly 10 feet of acceptable sharpness. f2 gives you 6 feet. For subjects 30 feet away - DOF approaches infinity (reaches it with f2.8).

I'd say scale focusing is not too bad with the RD-1's smaller sensor and a 21mm lens from a 35mm camera.

Unless I'm doing something wrong, that is.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[Sean Reid]

Hi Bill,

I know, but I'm suggesting that conventional wisdom about this is wrong if one needs to have very sharp focus at a given distance. It's very much on my mind right now as I'm writing a review of 14 -16mm lenses.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[fgianni]

According to DOFMaster (http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html), at 10 feet distant from the subject, f2.8 gives you nearly 10 feet of acceptable sharpness. f2 gives you 6 feet. For subjects 30 feet away - DOF approaches infinity (reaches it with f2.8).

I'd say scale focusing is not too bad with the RD-1's smaller sensor and a 21mm lens from a 35mm camera.

Unless I'm doing something wrong, that is.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

Bill

Maybe it's just me, but with the RD-1 and 21mm selected, at f2.8 dofmaster gives only 2.8 ft DOF in front of the subject (and 2.15 ft at f2.0).

Personally I am too crap at guess focusing to be able to work reliably with these margins, of course I am sure there is people around able to do much better than me.

 

[bmattock]

Bill

Maybe it's just me, but with the RD-1 and 21mm selected, at f2.8 dofmaster gives only 2.8 ft DOF in front of the subject (and 2.15 ft at f2.0).

Personally I am too crap at guess focusing to be able to work reliably with these margins, of course I am sure there is people around able to do much better than me.

I see your point! I was thinking in terms of total DOF, not near-far limits. I guess you'd kind of have to guess it long in order to have more room in front of the subject. And leave us not forget - are you going to be shooting f2 or f2.8 on a lens of this nature much? Perhaps indoors, but under what circumstances? Can I take a guess that it would be not often?

Well, I have a 42mm lens on my Olympus 35 EC (zone focus). It has click stops for distances 3,4,5,7,10 and infinity. I've had some mistakes indoors, but outdoors, all my mistakes have been covered by DOF so far. I figured if I could do it with a 42mm, then a 21mm (30 or so effective, right?) would be cake.

Not that RF coupling isn't much nicer, it is. But zone focus works - people used it for years! I am also not that good at judging distance, but overall, the thought of using the Olympus 21 lens mentioned makes me think I could pull it off ok.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[rvaubel]

I had assumed zone focusing @ f2.0 would be covered by DOF. I have the VC 28/1.9 and use it wide open for head shots. The DOF is good enough to give good results, i.e. not razor thin. I would assume that a 21mm of the same apeture but closer, to get the same head shot, would give about the same DOF with respect to the subject. However, I do use the rangefinder to achieve focus. I'll have to try shooting using zone focusing to see if, on these close subjects, I can achieve critical focus
Rex

 

[Trius]

Rex: I trust you. I just don't trust the lens to come home. In a word ... "no". 😉

 

[Sean Reid]

Hi Rex,

I guess it will depend on how critically focused you want to be.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[fgianni]

I see your point! I was thinking in terms of total DOF, not near-far limits. I guess you'd kind of have to guess it long in order to have more room in front of the subject. And leave us not forget - are you going to be shooting f2 or f2.8 on a lens of this nature much? Perhaps indoors, but under what circumstances? Can I take a guess that it would be not often?

Well, I have a 42mm lens on my Olympus 35 EC (zone focus). It has click stops for distances 3,4,5,7,10 and infinity. I've had some mistakes indoors, but outdoors, all my mistakes have been covered by DOF so far. I figured if I could do it with a 42mm, then a 21mm (30 or so effective, right?) would be cake.

Not that RF coupling isn't much nicer, it is. But zone focus works - people used it for years! I am also not that good at judging distance, but overall, the thought of using the Olympus 21 lens mentioned makes me think I could pull it off ok.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

Oh I agree 100% with you: zone focus works.

I use it regularly with my SMENA Symbol, and my M4-P+35mm summicron, but almost always at f8+.

Given that I am not good judging distance, I'll end up using the uncoupled Zuiko f2.0 at f4.0 or less (less open I mean), and if you do that you might be better off buying a CV 21mm f4.0 which is not much more expensive than the Olympus->M adaper.

Of course if you have several Zuiko wide angle lenses then the adapter becomes really an attractive option.