Adapted telephoto primes

So I've accepted that I'm never shelling out ~$4000 Canadian for either a PL 200 or an Olympus 300. However, I really enjoy shooting with fast primes. I've adapted a Minolta 200mm F4 MF lens with decent results (I think).

Curious who else has adapted 200mm+ lenses as a workaround or a fun project? Would love to see the results.

Is adapting passe now that we have more and more 3rd party lenses? Seems like it was more popular 5+ years ago.

Thanks in advance.



















--
My flickr page: https://flickr.com/photos/199751246@N07/

GreenEyesGTA said:

So I've accepted that I'm never shelling out ~$4000 Canadian for either a PL 200 or an Olympus 300. However, I really enjoy shooting with fast primes. I've adapted a Minolta 200mm F4 MF lens with decent results (I think).

Curious who else has adapted 200mm+ lenses as a workaround or a fun project? Would love to see the results.

Is adapting passe now that we have more and more 3rd party lenses? Seems like it was more popular 5+ years ago.

Thanks in advance.

Click to expand...

I used and still use adapted teleprimes.

I started out my ILC photography journey with a E-PL3 and 14-42mm kit lens. High quality Pro teleprimes did not exist in the system. While I added the 40-150mm Plastic Fantastic which was good for larger animals or when I absolutely needed autofocus, my most-used lens for the longest time was a Canon FD 300mm f4 SSC.


Bald Eagle. SOOC JPEG.


Anna's Hummingbird. Cropped and processed.


Golden jackals (Pench NP, India). SOOC JPEG.

Part of the reason was that I could not afford the $400 'L' version of this lens. The SSC is somewhat softer than the L (not by much) and produces CA which may or may not be fixable in post.

My challenges with the CA were why I did not 'upgrade' to the FD 400mm f4.5 although if online forums are to be believed, it's the sharpest lens ever. Sadly the results I've seen online weren't much different from those of the 300mm f4 SSC.

Instead I got what I consider to be a far superior lens: the Canon FD 300mm f2.8 L. This lens is absolutely incredible. It isn't as sharp as the 300mm Pro (which is my most used lens now) but it has a lovely rendering which clinically sharp modern lenses do not have. I rarely use it now, but have gotten some of my favourite images with it.


Hanuman Langur (Grey Langur). Look at the lovely rendering of the fur, and the background! Processed (not cropped).


Indian Roller. SOOC JPG.


Indian Wild Boar, Satpura NP. This lens lens adds a welcome softness to the bristly hairs and the Chital (deer) carcass. SOOC JPG.

To answer your question about their relevance - I think it's easier than ever to use adapted lenses now. You might have noticed that none of these photos were shot on cameras that had focus highlighting. The E-M5 had a 'hack' using an art mode which did not work very well. Now you can use any recent camera and have a button to highlight in-focus areas as bright red (my preferred colour), and cameras like the G9 and OM-1 have large viewfinders which make manual focusing even easier.

I haven't used my 300mm f2.8L in a while, although I keep toying with the idea of pairing it with a Metabones Speedbooster (I tried a Roxsen focal reducer and it pairs better with slower lenses), which would give me a 210mm f2 lens. Or I can pair it with a 40 MP Fuji body or a 60 MP FF body, although I'd rather not deal with two systems.

A couple of years back, there was a fire sale on Samyang lenses in M43 mount and I purchased a 135mm T2.2 which is one of the sharpest lenses I own and has lovely rendering. I absolutely love using it with my Sigma 56mm f1.4 in lieu of my 50-200mm zoom when the subject allows it. The images are superior, although you do lose autofocus and the flexibility of a zoom.

--
Semi-reformed pixel peeper.

GreenEyesGTA said:

Curious who else has adapted 200mm+ lenses as a workaround or a fun project? Would love to see the results

Click to expand...

500/4ii

faunagraphy said:

Click to expand...

Wow! Amazing shot and I'm not normally one for birds in flight photos...

faunagraphy said:

To answer your question about their relevance - I think it's easier than ever to use adapted lenses now. You might have noticed that none of these photos were shot on cameras that had focus highlighting. The E-M5 had a 'hack' using an art mode which did not work very well. Now you can use any recent camera and have a button to highlight in-focus areas as bright red (my preferred colour), and cameras like the G9 and OM-1 have large viewfinders which make manual focusing even easier.

Click to expand...

Yes I muddled through with a GH3 (no focus peaking) and when I got a GH4 that changed everything...

faunagraphy said:

A couple of years back, there was a fire sale on Samyang lenses in M43 mount and I purchased a 135mm T2.2 which is one of the sharpest lenses I own and has lovely rendering. I absolutely love using it with my Sigma 56mm f1.4 in lieu of my 50-200mm zoom when the subject allows it. The images are superior, although you do lose autofocus and the flexibility of a zoom.

Click to expand...

Wasn't even aware Samyang made M43 lenses... sounds like a good one. I have a minolta 135mm F3.5 "Celtic" which is... ok. Given that I paid $20 on craigslist I suppose it's pretty good.

--
My flickr page: https://flickr.com/photos/199751246@N07/

HicHic said:

GreenEyesGTA said:

Curious who else has adapted 200mm+ lenses as a workaround or a fun project? Would love to see the results

Click to expand...

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68239172

500/4ii

Click to expand...

Impressive! I've never heard of this lens but love the results...

GreenEyesGTA said:

HicHic said:

GreenEyesGTA said:

Curious who else has adapted 200mm+ lenses as a workaround or a fun project? Would love to see the results

Click to expand...

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/68239172

500/4ii

Click to expand...

Impressive! I've never heard of this lens but love the results...

Click to expand...

It's one of the best EF telephoto lenses.

I use a Metabones to adapt my 300mm f/2.8 Olympus Fourthirds and Canon EF tele primes to my E-M1II and E-M1III.

The Olympus because I think it has the best overall (sharpness + bokeh rendering) of any Olympus/OM lens) plus I wanted to keep using it beyond the now defunct Olympus DSLR era.

The Canon because I wanted to get extra reach with it beyond what my Canon system could do. However since getting the R7 (which has the same pixel pitch as a 20M 4/3 sensor) I don’t do that much now other than for deep sky Astrophotography using OM Capture

peter

Messier Object said:

I use a Metabones to adapt my 300mm f/2.8 Olympus Fourthirds and Canon EF tele primes to my E-M1II and E-M1III.

The Olympus because I think it has the best overall (sharpness + bokeh rendering) of any Olympus/OM lens) plus I wanted to keep using it beyond the now defunct Olympus DSLR era.

The Canon because I wanted to get extra reach with it beyond what my Canon system could do. However since getting the R7 (which has the same pixel pitch as a 20M 4/3 sensor) I don’t do that much now other than for deep sky Astrophotography using OM Capture

peter

Click to expand...

Do you know how the Olympus 300/2.8 compares to the Canon EF 300/2.8ii?

GreenEyesGTA said:

faunagraphy said:

Click to expand...

Wow! Amazing shot and I'm not normally one for birds in flight photos...

Click to expand...

Thank you! It was pure instinct (past practice). It's hard to nail shots of moving animals with MF

GreenEyesGTA said:

Wasn't even aware Samyang made M43 lenses... sounds like a good one.

Click to expand...

They do! The Samyang / Rokinon 7.5mm f3.5 fisheye is a native M43 lens and quite good.

Sample shot (I sold it to buy an 8mm Pro because I was shooting a lot of 'insects in their environment' shots with the Samyang and needed autofocus):

GreenEyesGTA said:

I have a minolta 135mm F3.5 "Celtic" which is... ok. Given that I paid $20 on craigslist I suppose it's pretty good.

Click to expand...

The Rokinon / Samyang 135mm, along with others like their 85mm f1.4, is a DSLR lens which they also sell in M43 mount by simply extending the bottom to the correct flange distance. So you can buy it in whatever mount is the cheapest (e.g. Canon EF), and attach the right adapter to it.

I bought mine in the native M43 mount because Adorama had a fire sale for around $140.

--
Semi-reformed pixel peeper.

On m4/3 that's all I use. A bird shooter this end and I did do a page up on it years ago for in here ..........

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58091516

I use a Canon FD 300 F/2.8L, 500 F/4.5L, 800 F/5.6L and a beautiful small zoom, the Canon FD-100-300 5.6L.

Thousands of shots over the years and the favourite lens by a long way is the Canon FD 500 F/4.5L.Sharp with CA never being an issue, very smooth fast internal focus and well balanced.























And so on.

Also used them on APS-C and FF, but there's a few of us that have done it for sure.

All the best and nice shot in your posts.

Danny.

--
------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/194823742@N03/
-----------------
Theorists. Looks good on paper, just not photographic printing paper.

nzmacro said:

Thousands of shots over the years and the favourite lens by a long way is the Canon FD 500 F/4.5L.Sharp with CA never being an issue, very smooth fast internal focus and well balanced.

And so on.

Also used them on APS-C and FF, but there's a few of us that have done it for sure.

All the best and nice shot in your posts.

Danny.

Click to expand...

Beautiful work.

Silly people, adapting their long tele primes...


Tamron Adaptall-2 SP LD IF - 360B 300mm F2.8


Tamron Adaptall-2 SP LD IF - 65B 400mm F4 + 1.4x TC


Nikon AI 600mm f/5.6


Nikon AI-S 300mm f/2.8


Nikon 500mm f/4p


Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II + Viltrox 0.71x Adapter

I know, what were they thinking !!

Stunning shots, nice sharp and clear shots. Love it. There's some excellent tele lenses out there for sure. Great to see the Nikkor 600 F/5.6.

All the best.

Danny.

--
------------
https://www.flickr.com/photos/194823742@N03/
-----------------
Theorists. Looks good on paper, just not photographic printing paper.

HicHic said:

Messier Object said:

I use a Metabones to adapt my 300mm f/2.8 Olympus Fourthirds and Canon EF tele primes to my E-M1II and E-M1III.

The Olympus because I think it has the best overall (sharpness + bokeh rendering) of any Olympus/OM lens) plus I wanted to keep using it beyond the now defunct Olympus DSLR era.

The Canon because I wanted to get extra reach with it beyond what my Canon system could do. However since getting the R7 (which has the same pixel pitch as a 20M 4/3 sensor) I don’t do that much now other than for deep sky Astrophotography using OM Capture

peter

Click to expand...

Do you know how the Olympus 300/2.8 compares to the Canon EF 300/2.8ii?

Click to expand...

Olympus:
a lot heavier
no Manual Focus override (only focus by wire). A paper weight if the AF motor dies.
a little Less sharp
not stabilised - jerky view in EVF with IBIS
better bokeh.
front filter thread - I use a protector which has saved the lens coating from being scratched and I don’t hesitate to use it on a windy day at the beach

better tripod foot (longer and with two tripod sockets)
one set of front fn buttons - only for AF stop
slowish AF and limited fps due to Aperture mechanism speed
superb with EC-14, good with EC-20.
If I ‘lost’ it I’d be sad as it was a surprise present from my wife, but I wouldn’t get another

Canon:
excellent OS gives a much steadier view in the EVF
no front protection filter thread means I need to be much more careful in the bush/beach
programable fn buttons + power/preset focus - Canon standard you know
s h a r p (sharpest EF or RF white as far as I know)
superb with EF1.4x III. Excellent with EF2xIII. I don’t hesitate to use either extender
If I lost it I’d buy another immediately

Peter

[No message]

Messier Object said:

HicHic said:

Messier Object said:

I use a Metabones to adapt my 300mm f/2.8 Olympus Fourthirds and Canon EF tele primes to my E-M1II and E-M1III.

The Olympus because I think it has the best overall (sharpness + bokeh rendering) of any Olympus/OM lens) plus I wanted to keep using it beyond the now defunct Olympus DSLR era.

The Canon because I wanted to get extra reach with it beyond what my Canon system could do. However since getting the R7 (which has the same pixel pitch as a 20M 4/3 sensor) I don’t do that much now other than for deep sky Astrophotography using OM Capture

peter

Click to expand...

Do you know how the Olympus 300/2.8 compares to the Canon EF 300/2.8ii?

Click to expand...

Olympus:
a lot heavier
no Manual Focus override (only focus by wire). A paper weight if the AF motor dies.
a little Less sharp
not stabilised - jerky view in EVF with IBIS
better bokeh.
front filter thread - I use a protector which has saved the lens coating from being scratched and I don’t hesitate to use it on a windy day at the beach
better tripod foot (longer and with two tripod sockets)
one set of front fn buttons - only for AF stop
slowish AF and limited fps due to Aperture mechanism speed
superb with EC-14, good with EC-20.
If I ‘lost’ it I’d be sad as it was a surprise present from my wife, but I wouldn’t get another

Canon:
excellent OS gives a much steadier view in the EVF
no front protection filter thread means I need to be much more careful in the bush/beach
programable fn buttons + power/preset focus - Canon standard you know
s h a r p (sharpest EF or RF white as far as I know)
superb with EF1.4x III. Excellent with EF2xIII. I don’t hesitate to use either extender
If I lost it I’d buy another immediately

Peter

Click to expand...

Thanks for the detailed notes. I had considered the Olympus 300/2.8 before, but the weight is just ridiculous. I wondered what advantage it had over the Canon. I'm aware the 300/2.8ii is one of the sharpest teles ever. I think it's supposed to be better than my 500/4ii (which I have a hard time wrapping my head around as I know how good it is).

I guess the bokeh is the main advantage of the Olympus - maybe that's where all the weight goes to. Can you describe how the bokeh is different/better? How much softer is the Olympus compared to the Canon? How would you rate the Olympus 300/2.8's sharpness against the 300/4 Pro?

Thanks for sharing your experience!

HicHic said:

Messier Object said:

HicHic said:

Messier Object said:

I use a Metabones to adapt my 300mm f/2.8 Olympus Fourthirds and Canon EF tele primes to my E-M1II and E-M1III.

The Olympus because I think it has the best overall (sharpness + bokeh rendering) of any Olympus/OM lens) plus I wanted to keep using it beyond the now defunct Olympus DSLR era.

The Canon because I wanted to get extra reach with it beyond what my Canon system could do. However since getting the R7 (which has the same pixel pitch as a 20M 4/3 sensor) I don’t do that much now other than for deep sky Astrophotography using OM Capture

peter

Click to expand...

Do you know how the Olympus 300/2.8 compares to the Canon EF 300/2.8ii?

Click to expand...

Olympus:
a lot heavier
no Manual Focus override (only focus by wire). A paper weight if the AF motor dies.
a little Less sharp
not stabilised - jerky view in EVF with IBIS
better bokeh.
front filter thread - I use a protector which has saved the lens coating from being scratched and I don’t hesitate to use it on a windy day at the beach
better tripod foot (longer and with two tripod sockets)
one set of front fn buttons - only for AF stop
slowish AF and limited fps due to Aperture mechanism speed
superb with EC-14, good with EC-20.
If I ‘lost’ it I’d be sad as it was a surprise present from my wife, but I wouldn’t get another

Canon:
excellent OS gives a much steadier view in the EVF
no front protection filter thread means I need to be much more careful in the bush/beach
programable fn buttons + power/preset focus - Canon standard you know
s h a r p (sharpest EF or RF white as far as I know)
superb with EF1.4x III. Excellent with EF2xIII. I don’t hesitate to use either extender
If I lost it I’d buy another immediately

Peter

Click to expand...

Thanks for the detailed notes. I had considered the Olympus 300/2.8 before, but the weight is just ridiculous. I wondered what advantage it had over the Canon. I'm aware the 300/2.8ii is one of the sharpest teles ever. I think it's supposed to be better than my 500/4ii (which I have a hard time wrapping my head around as I know how good it is).

I guess the bokeh is the main advantage of the Olympus - maybe that's where all the weight goes to. Can you describe how the bokeh is different/better?

Click to expand...

With the O300/2.8: smoother rendering of background and foreground grass, leaves branches etc. Very rarely do I see even a hint of the nervous bokeh I often see in samples from other lenses like the OM 300/4 and 150-400/4.5

The EF300 is good but sometimes I do see some bokeh harshness with near background foliage - easily ‘fixed’ in post.

HicHic said:

How much softer is the Olympus compared to the Canon?

Click to expand...

enough that I can see when pixel peeping but often it’s more a matter of the AF missing, and the EF seems to give slightly better contrast.

The front projection filter I keep on the O lens probably accounts for some of the differences. That filter BTW has a couple of small scrapes on its coating caused by branches and grasses which have hit the glass despite the hood.

HicHic said:

How would you rate the Olympus 300/2.8's sharpness against the 300/4 Pro?

Click to expand...

The OM300/4 wide open is (judging by the samples I’ve seen on par with or a touch sharper than the O300/2.8 wide open. But at f/4 I think the older lens takes the lead.

HicHic said:

Thanks for sharing your experience!

Click to expand...

Peter

The last couple of years Canon nFD lenses have been the only gear I've bought. To be used with both my Sony and Oly bodies. Small primes on the Sony and the longer lenses on the Oly. Inspired by a couple of stalwarts on this forum I thought I'd have a crack at bringing an element of difficulty back to my photography. I must say I am enjoying the challenge. I have a couple of zooms - 75-200mm f4.5 and 100-300 f5.6L and a couple of telephoto primes - 200mm f4 and 400mm f4.5

Here's a mixed bag with the primes




200




200




200




200




400




400




400




400




400




nFD 400 f4.5 with MC-14 teleconverter



Lots of fun to be had with old adapted lenses.

Regards Ian Colley

Messier Object said:

HicHic said:

Messier Object said:

HicHic said:

Messier Object said:

I use a Metabones to adapt my 300mm f/2.8 Olympus Fourthirds and Canon EF tele primes to my E-M1II and E-M1III.

The Olympus because I think it has the best overall (sharpness + bokeh rendering) of any Olympus/OM lens) plus I wanted to keep using it beyond the now defunct Olympus DSLR era.

The Canon because I wanted to get extra reach with it beyond what my Canon system could do. However since getting the R7 (which has the same pixel pitch as a 20M 4/3 sensor) I don’t do that much now other than for deep sky Astrophotography using OM Capture

peter

Click to expand...

Do you know how the Olympus 300/2.8 compares to the Canon EF 300/2.8ii?

Click to expand...

Olympus:
a lot heavier
no Manual Focus override (only focus by wire). A paper weight if the AF motor dies.
a little Less sharp
not stabilised - jerky view in EVF with IBIS
better bokeh.
front filter thread - I use a protector which has saved the lens coating from being scratched and I don’t hesitate to use it on a windy day at the beach
better tripod foot (longer and with two tripod sockets)
one set of front fn buttons - only for AF stop
slowish AF and limited fps due to Aperture mechanism speed
superb with EC-14, good with EC-20.
If I ‘lost’ it I’d be sad as it was a surprise present from my wife, but I wouldn’t get another

Canon:
excellent OS gives a much steadier view in the EVF
no front protection filter thread means I need to be much more careful in the bush/beach
programable fn buttons + power/preset focus - Canon standard you know
s h a r p (sharpest EF or RF white as far as I know)
superb with EF1.4x III. Excellent with EF2xIII. I don’t hesitate to use either extender
If I lost it I’d buy another immediately

Peter

Click to expand...

Thanks for the detailed notes. I had considered the Olympus 300/2.8 before, but the weight is just ridiculous. I wondered what advantage it had over the Canon. I'm aware the 300/2.8ii is one of the sharpest teles ever. I think it's supposed to be better than my 500/4ii (which I have a hard time wrapping my head around as I know how good it is).

I guess the bokeh is the main advantage of the Olympus - maybe that's where all the weight goes to. Can you describe how the bokeh is different/better?

Click to expand...

With the O300/2.8: smoother rendering of background and foreground grass, leaves branches etc. Very rarely do I see even a hint of the nervous bokeh I often see in samples from other lenses like the OM 300/4 and 150-400/4.5

The EF300 is good but sometimes I do see some bokeh harshness with near background foliage - easily ‘fixed’ in post.

Messier Object said:

How much softer is the Olympus compared to the Canon?

Click to expand...

enough that I can see when pixel peeping but often it’s more a matter of the AF missing, and the EF seems to give slightly better contrast.
The front projection filter I keep on the O lens probably accounts for some of the differences. That filter BTW has a couple of small scrapes on its coating caused by branches and grasses which have hit the glass despite the hood.

Messier Object said:

How would you rate the Olympus 300/2.8's sharpness against the 300/4 Pro?

Click to expand...

The OM300/4 wide open is (judging by the samples I’ve seen on par with or a touch sharper than the O300/2.8 wide open. But at f/4 I think the older lens takes the lead.

Messier Object said:

Thanks for sharing your experience!

Click to expand...

Peter

Click to expand...

Ray had the 90-250 F/2.8 (touchy bugga he was) but who was it that had the old MF Oly 350 F/2.8. Do you remember who that was mate ?? That was one lens I would love to get my hands on. Last I looked it was still darn expensive!

Beautiful shots Ian. Nice work there.

All the best Ian.

Danny.