Reading mode: Light Dark

E-510 and fast primes

Go to last post
Quentin (UK)

Quentin (UK)

Senior Member
Messages
2,434
Reaction score
1
Location
Saffron Walden, UK
..or lack thereof...

I am a new purchaser of the E-510. I see a couple of old mates (I use the word "old" advisedly) here (Jono, Ga, probably others); its a small world; in fact I was dithering about whether to buy an E-410 or 510, called Jono to discuss, and blow me the fine fellow had gone and purchased his own 510 the previous day. Great minds...

So far so good, the 510 was intended as a carry anywhere solution as (a) I can't afford a Leica M8 at the moment and (b) there are no more affordable compacts that meet my quality requirements. I have been pleasantly surprised with the output from the 510 based just on the kit lens, but I now want to look at a 35mm equiv. (so 17 or 18mm or so) fast prime instead of the zoom. I don't understand why Olympus don't make more primes for the E series themselves.

Bearing mind I'm a quality freak completely new to Olympus and the E system, what lenses from experience come closes to my gold of a carry anywhere fat, slightly wide prime?

And finally a comment that my fave Raw converter, Silkypix, works excellently with 510 files, even though it only currently officially supports 410 files. I assume full support will be added very soon.
--
Quentin
http://www.brightnewlight.co.uk
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/micropayment/
--
'Where have I been all my life?'
 
I suspect you should look at the 11-22. I've just ordered one which is now in transit. If you search on the lens you will find lots of posts where the owner considers it as good as a prime.
 
True, but the OP didn't mention that as a requirement. In fact he said FAT! ;-)
 
No, but it may be the lens that comes closest to his target.
 
Quentin (UK) said:
And finally a comment that my fave Raw converter, Silkypix, works
excellently with 510 files, even though it only currently
officially supports 410 files. I assume full support will be added
very soon.
--
Click to expand...
Are you sure that SilkyPix can convert E-510 raw files currently ?
 
Mark Thornton said:
No, but it may be the lens that comes closest to his target.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but I doubt it. If he wants to use it as a "poor man's M8" as implied in the OP then small, fast prime lenses are the order of the day... but unfortunately Olympus don't make any in the "slightly wide" area of interest.

Lots of options using manual lenses via adaptors though, perhaps this is the route to pursue. Manual lenses make it more Leica-like ;-)

--
John Bean [BST/GMT+1] ('British Stupid Time')

PAW 2007 Week 24:
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2321711/2/164945750/Large



Index page: http://waterfoot.smugmug.com
Latest walkabout (21 March 2007):
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2641073
 
Depends on whether you are more interested in the classification of the lens or the results. I have an adapter and some old primes but I wouldn't recommend that approach.
 
Mark Thornton said:
Depends on whether you are more interested in the classification of
the lens or the results. I have an adapter and some old primes but
I wouldn't recommend that approach.
Click to expand...
A bit of a generalisation there Mark. "Some old primes" covers a multitude of possibilities both good and bad. I get rather good results from some Pentax lenses I use, and another poster here gets stellar results with a Nikon 20/2.8 on his Panasonic L1. He uses that combo for pretty much the same sort of thing the OP is asking about here.

For sure it's not the route everyone wants to take, but your implied criticism of the results can't be generalised beyond you personal experience - which differs from mine and others I know.

--
John Bean [BST/GMT+1] ('British Stupid Time')

PAW 2007 Week 24:
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2321711/2/164945750/Large



Index page: http://waterfoot.smugmug.com
Latest walkabout (21 March 2007):
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2641073
 
Wow .. I had an email from Jono about how he ended up with a 510 and Gareth's just bougth one and now you ! - I wouldn't mind but I've only just got the 400 and am finding out that these 10Mp bodies are far better than the 7/8Mp ones before them, and the 400 at least, I'm enjoying as much as I did the E1 (me enjoy a DSLR - Wow, that's a new one ! apart from the Cute little Nikon D40 and the E1 I had, they're just boring tools ;-) ..

Anyway Folks - the E510 has to drop at least £100 before I could justify one as it's a Leisure cam and I'd have to make sure the Body IS was a LOT better than the Sony version let alone the useless Pentax equivalent first

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 
John Bean (UK) said:
A bit of a generalisation there Mark. "Some old primes" covers a
multitude of possibilities both good and bad. I get rather good
Click to expand...
True. As it happens my old primes are Pentax M series lenses. My issue with them isn't the results but the inconvenience in obtaining them. Manual stop down is a pain. My main use so far has been for macro --- I had the lenses and extension tubes in the cupboard and just needed a cheap adapter. If used wide open, it may not be so bad.

However the OP is also looking for a focal length around 17mm. Are there any compact primes of that length that could be adapted for 4/3? I also have the Pentax 20mm F4 M which is light/compact, but it hard to see why I would use it in preference to the 11-22 or even the kit lens. As far as I can remember the later Pentax 20mm F2.8 A was much bigger.
 
Mark Thornton said:
John Bean (UK) said:
A bit of a generalisation there Mark. "Some old primes" covers a
multitude of possibilities both good and bad. I get rather good
Click to expand...
True. As it happens my old primes are Pentax M series lenses. My
issue with them isn't the results but the inconvenience in
obtaining them. Manual stop down is a pain. My main use so far has
been for macro --- I had the lenses and extension tubes in the
cupboard and just needed a cheap adapter. If used wide open, it may
not be so bad.
Click to expand...
I think that's the point really. Many discrete uses for small, fast primes encourage them to be used wide open, where the (agreed) inconvenience of manual stopdown are negated. Using a nice but big zoom lens makes you not only more noticeable when using it but of course makes it harder to carry the camera unobtrusively as well.
Mark Thornton said:
However the OP is also looking for a focal length around 17mm. Are
there any compact primes of that length that could be adapted for
4/3?
Click to expand...
I doubt it, that's why people settle on a 20mm compromise for this kind of application.

I also have the Pentax 20mm F4 M which is light/compact, but
Mark Thornton said:
it hard to see why I would use it in preference to the 11-22
Click to expand...
Size, it's all down to size. And weight too, to a lesser extent. If you see no need to have a smaller lens then there is no need - for you. But other people do have a need for a smaller lens, sometimes.

I sometimes use an ancient K-mount Tokina 24/2.8 on my E-1 as a "standard" lens, but my favourite lens is the ZM 35 macro which is much smaller than any zoom, razor sharp at any aperture and very convenient to use. Of course my FL preferences differ from the OP whose need for a wide prime requires a different solution.

--
John Bean [BST/GMT+1] ('British Stupid Time')

PAW 2007 Week 24:
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2321711/2/164945750/Large



Index page: http://waterfoot.smugmug.com
Latest walkabout (21 March 2007):
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2641073
 
John Bean (UK) said:
I doubt it, that's why people settle on a 20mm compromise for this
kind of application.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately a 20mm designed for use on 35mm will have compromised either the size or the maximum aperture.
 
Mark Thornton said:
John Bean (UK) said:
I doubt it, that's why people settle on a 20mm compromise for this
kind of application.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately a 20mm designed for use on 35mm will have compromised
either the size or the maximum aperture.
Click to expand...
20/2.8 is par for the course. The Nikkor 28/2.8 in particular is very, very good and even the AF version is still remarkably small - especially compared with any zoom. The older MF version is even smaller of course.

The great advantage of 4/3 is the availability of inexpensive adaptors to fit almost any lens, so lens choice for idiosyncratic uses is almost unlimited.

--
John Bean [BST/GMT+1] ('British Stupid Time')

PAW 2007 Week 24:
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2321711/2/164945750/Large



Index page: http://waterfoot.smugmug.com
Latest walkabout (21 March 2007):
http://waterfoot.smugmug.com/gallery/2641073
 
I have the latest (paid) version of Silkypix Developer and it will not decode 510 ORF's. How did you get it to function for you? E410 ORF's - no problem, but not E510.
--
Good shooting...

Ben

 
John Bean (UK) said:
... A bit of a generalisation there Mark. "Some old primes" covers a
multitude of possibilities both good and bad. I get rather good
results from some Pentax lenses I use, and another poster here gets
stellar results with a Nikon 20/2.8 on his Panasonic L1. He uses
that combo for pretty much the same sort of thing the OP is asking
about here. ...
Click to expand...
Thank you, John. ];-)

The only normal FoV primes available for the 4/3 at present are the Panasonic/Leica Summilux-D 25/1.4 ASPH and Sigma 24/1.8. I'm sure the Summilux-D is a superb lens, not so sure about the Sigma (although some folks have claimed it to be excellent). Neither is exactly what I prefer for street shooting, a 20mm f/2 would be ideal, so I went with a Nikon-> 4/3 mount and fitted a Nikon 20mm f/2.8AF-D. A little recalibration of the focusing index and I can use it much as I use a 35-40mm lens on a Leica M, focusing by scale and exploiting the DoF:

http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/24e.htm
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/24g.htm
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/25.htm
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/25a.htm

It's a little more difficult to do precise, critical manual focus with the optical viewfinder, due to the short focal length and deep DoF with this lens, but the focusing aids available in Live View mode do well. However, since I bought the Oly 11-22, I am finding it easier to become accustomed to a physically larger lens and take advantage of the excellent AF system in the L1, as well as the fact that the 11-22 is an extremely good performer at nearly all settings.

Olympus 11-22:
http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW7/26.htm

I've become more comfortable nowadays using the zooms for this focal length range. The 11-22 is rapidly taking over where I thought the Nikon 20 was going to be my most used lens. I still wish for an Olympus or Panasonic/Leica 20 mm f/2, however.

Godfrey
http://www.gdgphoto.com



Train In Passing [unnumbered] - Mountain View Station 2007
Pentax K10D + DA21mm f/3.2 Limited
 
The only way I can use Silkypix to convert my 510 raw files is to convert them to dng first.
I did check their website and there is a beta version 3.0.10 but they say:
  • New support: Canon EOS-1D MarkIII
  • New support: Leica V-LUX1, DIGILUX2, D-LUX2
--
Leo P
 
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