Using old OM lenses

[miked2372]

Hi,

You may have seen this question before on the mft forum but thought I would ask here also as I have an E500

My father had an OM1 and accessories sitting in a cupboard for ages and he has since given it to me to see if I can use or ebay it. It has a few lenses with it and from reading the forum I remember a lot of talk about using the older lenses with an adapter and wondered if any of you could give me some advise on which of these (if any) could be used and what I need to do to use them. I currently have an E500 and an EP2 and the lenses are as follows,

Zuiko 50mm f1.8
Zuiko 24mm f2.8
Tamron 70-210 (possibly scratched on front, not sure)

What should I look out for and should I pay full whack for an olympus adapter or would any cheapo work ok?

Any hints and tips would be much appreciated.

Cheers

Mike

 

[Messier Object]

Mike,

in short, all of the OM-fit lenses are physically compatible with m4/3 and 4/3 bodies.
You just have to use the appropriate adapter for m4/3, or the adaptor for 4/3

the long answer . . .

Most cheap generic adapters do the job, but some are not well made and might not allow the lens to focus to infinity, or might be a bit loose fitting. The genuine Olympus adaptors are expensive but IMO are best.

You can also find various AF confirm chips for around $20 which can be glued into the adaptor - not too difficult if you are OK with DIY jobs. You can also buy adaptors pre-fitted with a chip. IMO the best AF confirm chip is the Russian designed one - google "Peleng 8". I've got 3 of them & working well

Regardless of which adaptor and whether or not you use an AF confirm chip, the lens will be MF and manual aperture operation. If you are OK with manual lenses then you will do OK with the OM on your E-500 provided your viewfinder is bright and large enough to see well enough to focus. I don't have an E-500 but have had no real problems with OM lenses on my E-300 and E-330. But the bigger viewfinders of the E-30 and E-5 are definitely better. I guess the EVF of the m4/3 will do OK as well.

As for your lenses,

The 50mm/1.8 is a pretty good performer on the E-system. Nowhere near as sharp as a ZD50mm/2, but useful especially if you want something light and compact.

I don't own an OM 24mm, but general comments indicate that the wide OMs are easily out-performed by the ZD 14-42mm kit lens. I have an OM 28mm but never use it (it's a relic of my film days)

As for the zooms, once again I have not seen any good reviews of OM zooms or sigma/tamron etc. The ZD kit lenses 14-42mm and 50-150mm put them to shame.

The OM primes however ( I have 9 of them up to the 300mm/4.5) are indeed good performers and fun to use. The OM dedicated macro primes, especially the bellows lenses, are excellent and my first choice for macro work these days.

If you are Ok with manual lens operation then I suggest getting a cheap generic OM-4/3 adaptor for under $20 and giving it a try.

there are some interesting reference sites such as http://www.biofos.com/cornucop/omz_e330.html which review OM lenses on E-system

Peter

 

[LaMesa]

I have owned 7 different Olympus DSLRs and tried hard to put a few old OM lenses to work with an OM/Fourthirds adapter. My best lenses, if properly focused, were the Zuiko Auto-S 1.8/50mm "made in Japan" and the Zuiko MC Auto-T 2.8/135mm.

Manually focusing is no fun with any of the DSLRs, namely the smaller viefinder E-XXX models. I got the maximum yield with the larger and correctly aligned Viewfinder of the E-1. Furthermore, the E-1 does have only very little exposure offset at wide open apertures, which does plague the E-XXX models.

Generally spoken, focusing manually with any of the DSLRs is a stressful and unreliable business. To make it even more unreliable, Olympus does not precisely align the viewer screens of the cheaper E-XXX models for correct focusing. With my E-330 I was able to adjust the viewfinder by thoroughly stepwise turning the excentric mirror stopper with pliers. Precise manual focus is indeed possible by using the magnified liveview of some newer SLR models, which is derived directly from the sensor, but a pain to use.

After the acquisition of an E-PL1 Pen camera, the situation has completely changed for me. Focusing manually is pure fun with this camera, prompt and precise. All the sudden I own a system camera and a bag full of excellent, usable prime lenses. No wonder that prices of legacy lenses have gone up since the advent of Pen cameras and the appropriate system adapters. On Ebay these lenses are now being offered as "Olympus Pen Portrait Lens" etc.

Herbert
--
http://www.pbase.com/herbRD
Olympus E-1, E-330, Vario-Elmar 14-150mm

 

[goblin]

What you want is an adapter which:

• Doesn't wobble

• Has a decent AF confirm chip.

Ebay seller Big_is is one of many sellers who sells those. I've tried them in the past, they work, they don't wobble.

 

[ROC124]

I've been using Fotodiox adapters which are well made for the price. I still use some of the OM lenses for fun and non-critical applications.

Of the three OM mount lenses mentioned, the 24/2.8 has been superior for me, giving sharp, contrasty images even wide open.

My experience with other OM lenses:

The 28/3.5 is so-so. Not as crisp as the 24/2.8 so it gets little use.

Have two 50/1.8 lenses including the late Made in Japan variant, and the 50/1.4. Not too impressed with any of them. All quite soft in the corners until f5.6 or smaller. Still useful for some circumstances and allow easy focus before stopping down. Metering with the 1.4 is problematic except in spot mode, and I've seen some odd color rendering from it

The 50/3.5 Macro is terrific but a tad slow for easiest focusing. Good ones can be a bit pricey, so I would rather have a used ZD 35/3.5 Macro.

The 85/2 was my favorite lens on the OM-1 and OM-4, but is a bit soft wide open. This is compounded on the E-3 so it usually must be used at f5.6 or smaller with strong sharpening in PP for excellent results.

A "must have" for me is the 135/2.8. It outstanding when stopped down a little yet fully usable wide open.

The 300/4.5 can give outstanding results at f5.6 to f11, but requires a sturdy tripod, sandbag on top to damp vibrations and careful focus with live view. My copy might be more prone to vibration than some, but careful technique is always required at this focal length.

Most of the OM zooms weren't highly regarded in their day. The inexpensive 35-70/3.5 - 4.5 has surprisingly good optical quality used on the E-3, but my copy has some mechanical slop which combined with slow aperture makes it frustrating to focus. Plenty of better and inexpensive ZD options.

The OM 75-150/4 is really quite decent optically, but too slow for reliable focus. The ZD 50-150 (both versions) are so good and so inexpensive with autofocus to boot there shouldn't be any reason to use the OM zoom except for nostalgia.

Hope this helps. Note this is my experience only, and any individual copy of such old lenses can have slight internal problems compromising performance.
--
Bob Cole
http://www.robertcolephotography.com

 

[Domagoj Batinic]

i'm using almost exclusively manual focus lenses, 18 of them are OM Zuikos , before with E-520 now with E-M5. all my adapters are cheap ones without AF confirmation chips

here you have links to pages with samples i made with all my manual focus lenses, some only with E-520 , some with both E-520 and E-M5

http://forum.mflenses.com/wolverinex-testing-my-lenses-series-link-list-t39524.html

--
my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20
and good amount of legacy lenses (list in profile)

 

[jrfmef]

Why has getting the EP camera made focussing manually so much better?

Thanks

john

 

[Domagoj Batinic]

Why has getting the EP camera made focussing manually so much better?

Thanks

john

because of magnify option when focusing, it helps me focus more precisely

--
my gear:
E-M5+45mm/1.8
E-520+12-60+14-42+70-300+Sigma 105 + FL-50R+EC20
and good amount of legacy lenses (list in profile)

 

[Seamus Warren]

Hello,

I came upon a ZIUKO 65-200 Auto Zoom 1:4 and it appears to need an adaptor for the OM-D E-M1 mount.

I’m uncertain it’s worth adapting the lens as my interest is on life support.

Is the 65-200 a lens of note or just another Op-Shop lens from a deceased estate?

 

[Messier Object]

Hello,

I came upon a ZIUKO 65-200 Auto Zoom 1:4 and it appears to need an adaptor for the OM-D E-M1 mount.

yes, an OM to Micro Fourthirds adapter is required

I’m uncertain it’s worth adapting the lens as my interest is on life support.

Is the 65-200 a lens of note or just another Op-Shop lens from a deceased estate?

I haven’t ever used one on a film or digital camera.

Most reviews suggest that, apart from one exceptional (and now very expensive) lens, the OM zooms are not good performers with digital cameras. I doubt that the 65-200mm will be any different, ie not worth the effort

Peter

 

[paul_kew]

I've got one , not used it on a digital camera, mainly because I'd have to turn IS off. Unless I wanted to change the setting manually every time I zoomed that is.

If I get time I'll upload something from the garden. It's a bit cloudy and wet outside at the moment.

 

[Henry Stamm]

When I had the E-1, I started off with several of the OM lenses. The 50mm f1.8 "made in Japan" is quite a nice lens, although a bit soft at f1.8 and f2.8. It sharpened quite nicely when stopped down. That said, the only reason I used it was for lower light at f1.8 and f2.8. My original Zuiko digital 14-54mm f2.8-3.5 was simply easier to use for me and perhaps a tad sharper at the longer end for a given f-stop.

On the other hand, I also had the OM 135mm f2.8, 200mm f4 and 300mm f4.5. The 135 and 200mm lenses are very nice and quite good. But when I acquired my 50-200mm f2.8-f4 swd digital lens, I sold my three telephoto primes. It simply proved far more useful in the field. The 200mm and 300mm lenses also were sharpest from f5.6-f8, so the digital zoom simply outperformed them in terms of IQ and ease of use. The 1.4TC combined with the long end of my 50-200mm gives me 280mm at f5.6, with virtually no fall off in terms of IQ, and with the 2.0TC, I have a 400mm combo that is good enough for my uses.