Reading mode: Light Dark

Opinions on using OM adapter on an E-series...

Go to last post
K

kikoba

Member
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Location
US
To all:

Just wanted to get some opinions from people who have used OM lenses on an E-series Oly. I have an OM-1 and a small investment in OM lenses. How do the lenses hold up when mated to the 4/3 system? I know I lose functionality. This is more a question about image quality.

Thanks,

Trip
 
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=16612903
--
SIGNATURE

'Street Photographers: Such photographers use the theater of the street as their subject matter, transforming the pathos, tension, mystery, and inadvertent humor of real life into images of drama and insight into the human condition.'

'January 18, 2002 should forever be remembered as The Day Photography Died. As of that day, the Olympus OM System, which single-handedly defined late 20th century camera design, is no more. Just type 'Olympus OM1' into Google.com, and marvel at the virtual shrines erected to the OM1 and its sister cameras and you WILL appreciate why the 'Olympus M System' was THE GREATEST 35mm SLR SYSTEM IN THE WORLD ... EVER.' R.I.P OM System.' (John from UK)

 
Personal opinion only:

They don't hold up all that well, although it's not THAT bad. I have an OM 50mm f/1.4, 200mm f/4 and 300mm f/4.5 along with a couple of cheap teleconverters.

Focus is harder than it used to be on an SLR; I miss about 1/2 the time, and that with 3 months of practice and 20/15 vision (just checked yesterday!).

The images are a bit.... "grainy" is the best I can describe it.... definitely different than the smooth sharpness I get from the digital Zuiko lenses. It's most noticeable in the bokeh, and it's not necessarily unpleasant - it's kind of nostalgic. The biggest difference I've noted is the colors - a definite warm cast, although it could be due to the white balance being fooled rather than the glass in the lenses having a color hue. I shoot raw and color correct later, usually.

I'm at work right now, I'll post crops of some sample pics I took last weekend when I get home tonight, if you're interested.

ECM
 
I have a recently acquired Cameraquest adapter for my MF Nikon lenses. I guess I'm old school, I like shooting manually and stopping the aperture ring on the lens. For the past couple of days I've been testing the adapter with a Nikkor 28mm 2.8, 50mm 1.8, A Tamron 70-300mm and Tokina 70-210 and I like the results. Like a previous poster on this subject said... Good glass is good glass. I am considering getting the Oly overpriced eyecup to help my 40+ year old eyes.

If you like the idea of taking photos with legacy equipment, I would say give it a go, having more tools in the toolbox isn't a bad thing. Plus you can always take your old camera with you as a backup should your new technology fail when you're miles from home. Personally, I like the advantages of AF zoom lenses and use them too, but it's kinda cool shooting with the old stuff, the images are nice, and it keeps you sharp, ie. making you think when you should compensate in those difficult situations.

The only down side I've come across is with my 70-300 and 70-210 in their respective macro modes. For some reason the lens will only focus in a small area in the middle of the frame, leaving a lot of the frame blurred. I guess I can't have it all, so I'm going to get an extension tube.

When I bought the Cameraquest adapter, I was prepared to take a gamble to see how it performed. You can return it within ten days and only be out $20 or so. Mine's a keeper

--
Eric
 
I'd love to see some of your samples. I will also continue to search the forums for info. Thanks.
 
kikoba said:
To all:

Just wanted to get some opinions from people who have used OM
lenses on an E-series Oly. I have an OM-1 and a small investment
in OM lenses. How do the lenses hold up when mated to the 4/3
system? I know I lose functionality. This is more a question
about image quality.
Click to expand...
When looking at my pictures before post processing, I am getting to the point I can tell whether I'm using an 4/3rds Olympus, Sigma, or OM lens, since each lens has a slightly different color shading (and the 14-54 is different from the 50-200). Of course another difference is the bokeh (Bokeh on my Vivitar Series One 70-210mm is much better than that of my 50-200mm lens for instance).

I would imagine the issue on how well the lens works in general.

Of the various OM lenses I bought off of ebay when I was in my OM lens stage, two of the lenses don't stop down at all. Since I don't have an OM camera and got these lenses 2nd hand, I don't know if the lens was broken before I got it and the depth of field button (which the OM adaptor keeps on) is not working, or if there is a problem with some lenses in general. I tend to think I just got two bum lenses, since it works on several of the lenses.

If you are in central Massachusetts, you can arranage to come over to my house in Ayer if you want to try out my OM adaptor (I got one of the free ones before Olympus started charging for it). Also if you are in Massachusetts, Hunts seems to have some OM lenses in their used lens case.
 
Hi,
kikoba said:
How do the lenses hold up when mated to the 4/3
system? I know I lose functionality. This is more a question
about image quality.
Click to expand...
In the best case scenario, they hold up very, very well in my experience.

The main two issues are quality variation and manual focus ability. The quality of some OM lens lines varies depending on the revision of the lens. An example is the 50mm f1.8; the early versions are good, but the later 'made in japan' multicoated versions are stunning.

Can you focus accurately with the small 4/3 viewfinder? In my opinion this is one of the reasons why people think they are soft; even being minutely off focus will give a soft image. Focusing manually is difficult enough on the relatively large E1 viewfinder. I wouldn't rely on them with the E500's dark tunnel finder.

With that out of the way, try the 50/1.8, 24/2.8, 100/2.8, 200/5. The results I've been getting have been at least as good as what the 14-54 gives, and sometimes better.

David

--



http://downward-spiral.co.uk
http://downward-spiral.co.uk/deargreenplace
 
I would say: it depends, on what you want to do.

I use a C/Y adapter from cameraquest-and I love it and I keep buying C/Y lenses from e-bay, because they are rather cheap (more Yashica then Contax).

Do not expect to have those old school lenses perform better then the medium lineup of zooms ( 14-54, 50-200 ) in my case-they just won't-and the 50mm macro even more so.
And keep in mind that you have to close the aperture of old lenses 1-4 clicks.

For macro- oh well- I got me a Yashica medical with built in ring flash (Dental eye II believe) 100mm f4 for less then a undedicated ringflash would have cost-and it is fun to use it.

Just added a 95mm f=1/2.5 Soligor Macro (up to 1:1)-woha-this one looks great so far.

I have a Zeiss Planar 85mm 1:1.4 as well-oh my I got it rather cheap- but this one has been used a lot-and beaten hard-but it is fun to use as well-bokeh is a dream, and the scratches might even help, to make it softer.

Wide angle? forget it! As Canon seems to have no good WA-lenses to meet the needs of cheapo FF users-those 5D guys drive the WA-prices for Zeiss and even Yashica through the roof-and with the 2X crop they are even less interesting.

OM-lenses-hmm I do not own any, but I would guess that the Teles will do fine, the Macros even better- and while the light-monsters might be soft, it's better to have a 1:1.4 and use it while beeing soft, then not beeing able to take the shot.
 
I too have had some good results..

Bagged this one today, using an old Vivitar 75-205 zoom (cheapo ebay purchase) combined with a Vivitar 2x teleconvertor (also cheapo) mounted on my E300:



the next couple with the OM 50mm f3.5 macro:





I would make the following points:

1) using the adapter has given me access to a wider selection of lenses to play with - it really is fun seeing what results you can get with these old lenses

2) I paid 65 pounds for my adapter off eBay (bought it even before I'd got my camera!) and consider to be money well spent

3) With the lack of AF, getting a half decent shot is literally hit and miss. I must have taken 30 or 40 shots of the swans today (in fairly good late afternoon light) and I've only 1 or 2 keepers.

Good luck

Chris
 
Hi Trip,

I have used a lot of my older OM mount lenses along with some Leica R and Tamron Adaptall lenses. There are samples in my pbase galleries indicating the lenses used.

What it does for me is slow me down to where I am more deliberate. The quality issue is lens by lens. Not all mine turn out good, but there are some gems.
--
Bob Ross
http://www.pbase.com/rossrtx
 
I'd have to agree with Chris. I was terrible with manual focus and most of my shots were not very sharp. Out of the hundreds I took only a handful were what I considered good, these being two:





--
Travis - E-300
 
I use a Tokina 90mm macro with the OM mount on my E-300. It is optically superb, so the 2X equivalence factor is not a problem. I looked a little at my other OM lenses and the non-zooms are good enough, but my beloved 65-200mm zoom doesn't seem to work. But I only use the 90mm because the other lenses have focal lengths covered by the two zooms I got with the E-300, which are themselves optically superb. Manually stoppping down slows the process down, but since I am usually taking macros with long shutter speeds anyway, this isn't a problem. I wouldn't just get an E-syustem body and plan to use OM lenses. Stopping down manually is way too slow, except for long exposures, and the zooms are good. The only gap in the lens lineup was a long macro and now there is the Sigma 105mm and supposedly an Olympus 100mm sometime. So, the bottom line is that using the old lenses is not really a factor, except if you already have a good macro or some other lens.
 
I have an OM 50/1.4, 200/4.0, Oly2x-a converter and they work quite well for a static subject. However the digital lenses are noticeably better in image quality, color and contrast, and much more "friendly".

I enjoy playing with them from time to time, but starting again would not invest in an adaptor or OM lenses. Money is better spent on E equipment. After all, 35 more years of lens development has made a difference.
Cheers,
Don
 
OM Zuiko 600mm for the price of a 50-200 2.8.



This was taken on a less than stellar tripod from my backyard in Phoenix AZ where it hasn't rained in 133 days and we are all choking on the dust. It was pretty far down on the horizon so I had to crop a 1600x1200 window from the original shot. As I've only had the lens for a week or so, I had to try it out. I'm looking forward to the full moon.

It looks like this on the camera



Once I get better at focusing the big bugger I hope to have some better examples.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top