Anybody prefer their adapted 50mm over the Native 45mm 1.8?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Jonathan F/2, Mar 14, 2012.

  1. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    Lately I've been having a lot of success shooting with my MF glass, so I decided to order a Nikon 50mm 1.8 AIS mark 3 and see how I'll like it in comparison to the 45mm. I've been using the Nikon 28mm 2.8 AIS, and I actually prefer it to the PL 25 1.4 I replaced it with and it's much cheaper as well!

    So does anyone prefer the 50mm as their portrait lens over the 45mm 1.8?
  2. mister_roboto

    mister_roboto Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jun 14, 2011
    Seattle, WA, USA
    Real Name:
    I use a 50mm adapted lens instead of the 45mm. Mainly it's because I don't have the 45mm :wink: I generally have good results from it- so decided to cancel my preorder way back when. Although I do consider going to it- as it's one of the must have lenses, but I am more comfortable with MF than AF.

    It's a 50mm Nikkor f1.4, one of the uncoated old amber ones.
  3. aria

    aria Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 9, 2010
    Rome, Italy
  4. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin .

    Oct 9, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Real Name:
    The more I use native lenses, the less inclined I am to use adapted lenses.
    • Like Like x 11
  5. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    I was a huge adapted lens fan when I got into m43 but I too find myself preferring native lenses. Ab out the only adapted lenses I still use (and I don't use it a lot) are my Konica 24/2.8 and my Super Takumar 50/1.4 and I think that is even more out of nostalgia than anything else.
  6. foto2021

    foto2021 Mu-43 Veteran

    Nov 5, 2011
    SE England

    Before I bought my Olympus M.Zuiko 45mm f/1.8 I used a Canon 50mm f/1.4 rangefinder lens (L39 screw mount) with an adapter. I bought the Oly lens because of the AF. I was getting good results with the Canon lens but the time I was taken to focus meant that my candid portraits were not as spontaneous as I would like.

    Optically, the Oly 45mm f/1.8 is superior. It is sharper and has particularly smooth bokeh which is invaluable for portraiture.

    The 50mm f/1.8 AIS Nikkors are all very sharp but they tend to have very harsh 'bright line' bokeh, where specular highlights are rendered as circles with sharp, bright edges. This also tends to make them less suitable for portraiture. But their sharpness means that, on m4/3, they make excellent general purpose 100mm (equivalent) telephoto lenses.

    So it depends what you shoot. For classic portraiture with the lens used wide open and a defocused background, the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 is king. But for all other uses, the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 AIS should be fine, and its sharpness will be difficult to improve on.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. okinana

    okinana Mu-43 Veteran

    Sep 21, 2011
    Philadelphia, PA
  8. Qwerty

    Qwerty Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 15, 2012
    I love manual focus primes and loved using my OM 50mm f1.8 MC and Tak 55mm f1.8 Super-Multi-Coated which were my two current favourites but I was blown away by the Olympus 45mm f1.8. Just amazing performance.

    Hence got rid of my manual primes in that range, they will be missed though.
    • Like Like x 1
  9. ZephyrZ33

    ZephyrZ33 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 18, 2010
    Southern California
    My OM 50mm f1.8 MC was great when I had it, but picked up the native 45 and never looked back.

    The 50 was a little too much on the long end to spot then zoom focus. I would miss 4 out of 5 shots I could have had with the native.

    I wouldn't mind trying out a manual 25mm (50mm equivalent) or the 28 like you mentioned, but that would be my limit as far as reach goes with the things I like to shoot.
  10. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    Jonathan, what do you like about your Nikon 28mm more than the Panasonic 25mm? I am the opposite. While I love my Nikon 24mm f/2.8, I am only using it because I'm unwilling to shell out $600 for the 25mm. My experience with the 25mm was nothing but love. I agree with the above posters that the 50mm f/1.8 lenses, up until the new 50mm f/1.8G, all had sub-par bokeh, so you may want to consider another portrait lens for now. If you want to stick with Nikon, consider either a 50mm f/1.4 or a 55mm f/2.8 micro. If you're really feeling generous to yourself, consider the 50mm f/1.2 or 55mm f/1.2.
  11. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    I'll keep this thread updated. I previously had a Nikon 50mm 1.4 Ai'd that I didn't like (it was too big and heavy). This time around though I've been careful to select smaller/lighter lenses. My 45mm is great, so if the 50mm doesn't pan out, I'll probably just sell it for what I bought it for! :wink:
  12. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    Real Name:
    Can't say I do.

    Tried both the Nikon 55/1.2SC and the 50/1.8 AI-S, and neither fared well against the 45. The 45 has better bokeh and much better sharpness at wide apertures than my samples. The 55/1.2 did have a certain dreamy charm, but on the whole, the 45/1.8 had better IQ and was a heck of a lot easier to use.

    Haven't used an adapted lens in 4 months, I haven't missed 'em at all.

  13. mnhoj

    mnhoj There and back again

    Dec 3, 2011
    Los Angeles
    Real Name:
    John M
    I just can't. :smile:
  14. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    If you want smaller and lighter lenses, might I suggest a rangefinder 45-50mm?
  15. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    I considered it, but I have a Nikon kit and I want to keep cross compatibility with my MF glass.
  16. duke

    duke Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 4, 2010
    Tulsa, moving to Houston
    Real Name:
    Honestly, I don't understand the appeal of using adapted lenses on m43. The NEX system is much better at using adapted lenses because of peaking, lack of native lenses ;), larger sensor, and better screen/evf. That said, I've moved back to m43 because of the native lenses. Using a lot of big heavy lenses without any automation just didn't make sense to me anymore, but to each his own.
  17. ZephyrZ33

    ZephyrZ33 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 18, 2010
    Southern California
    ^ and I forgot to mention.

    All metal legacy 50mm w/ a metal adapter = some serious weight and bulk compared to the dimunitive mzuiko 45. I can only imagine how nose heavy that will be on your E-PM1.
  18. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Real Name:
    It depends very much on what I want to do. If I'm doing macro or landscape I use Minolta glass and the native lenses for which there's no real alternative such as the Panny 7-14mm. If I do moving subjects or don't have a lot of time to take pictures I go native all the way.
    • Like Like x 1
  19. tanngrisnir3

    tanngrisnir3 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 18, 2011
    I have to agree, esp in terms of contrast, color reproduction and east of use, but there are some real advantages to, say, a 200mm 2.8 giving the reach/results of a 400mm.

    Other than that, though, native.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Mellow

    Mellow Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2010
    Florida or Idaho
    Real Name:
    The only adapted lenses I use anymore are ones that offer something that native lenses don't. Now that the 45mm f/1.8 exists just being "50 mm" isn't good enough to justify a legacy lens anymore.

    These are the ones I still use:

    Sigma Super-Wide II 24mm f/2.8: super semi-macro lens for <$50;
    Cooke-Hobson Kinic 25mm f/1.5: swirly bokeh, distinctive look

    I'm looking to add a couple of old Russian lenses: Jupiter-9 (for great bokeh at longer focal lengths) and the Helios 44M (more distinctive bokeh at 58mm).