EP1 + Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 help

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by SpnkyMcGee, May 7, 2010.

  1. SpnkyMcGee

    SpnkyMcGee New to Mu-43

    9
    May 7, 2010
    Hello everyone! Newbie here with some questions.

    I'm a long time shooter that just switched over to the Oly EP1 (and love it). I have the kit 14-42 + the Pany 20mm, both of which I enjoy, especially the 20mm.

    I just purchased and recieved the Voightlander 35mm 1.4 and I cannot seem to get any shots that are sharp. I'm using the Voigtlander adapter with this lens.

    I've shot wide open. I've shot closed down. I've done everything I know to get some part of the image sharp and there is a softness to every image I get. I have used the focus assist feature as well. It just seems like there might be an issue with this particular lens? :frown:

    Has anyone else had any issues with this?

    Thanks in advance for your input!


    Tim
     
  2. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus Subscribing Member Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    It's a million to one chance that the lens is bad....but a very good chance the adapter is bad.....
    Maybe you should post some images to help others to help you...
    shooter

    ps...hmm, did you set the IS to the focal length of the lens?
     
  3. SpnkyMcGee

    SpnkyMcGee New to Mu-43

    9
    May 7, 2010
    Reference images

    Thanks for the quick feedback! Here (I hope) are some samples. All are straight jpegs from the camera with no post.

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  4. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus Subscribing Member Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    It seems to me that you shot at 1/500 and at ISO 100..you were probably wide open.
    It just looks like MISSED FOCUS and not a lens issue.
    I would boost the ISO to maybe 400 and try to stop down...
    Try the lens at 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8 and see how the sharpness improves....I really think you missed focus...I can see sharp areas but the Holly looks like some movement in there which is strange but it's there....

    Make sure you set the IS to the ACTUAL focal length of the lens and have it on IS-1

    shooter
     
  5. kahren

    kahren Mu-43 Regular

    141
    Mar 21, 2010
    that looks weird to me, almost looks like the lens is a dud
    from the samples i've seen online this lens is capable of much better results even wide open. it almost looks like a cheap/bad cctv lens that is not meant to cover the whole image circle. check the IS setting on the camera like shooter has mentioned, maybe try turning it off all together and see if it makes any difference. if the results don't improve try another lens.
     
  6. chefkenny

    chefkenny Mu-43 Regular

    61
    Mar 10, 2010
    Florida
    Streetshooter, can u see the CA on that last picture? I think it is kind of strong, he might got a bad copy?
     
  7. SpnkyMcGee

    SpnkyMcGee New to Mu-43

    9
    May 7, 2010
    I have a couple more samples shot today...

    ...with the ISO set higher + better light. Unfortunately it won't let me upload anything today. No idea why?
     
  8. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus Subscribing Member Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    It, who what?
    You should be able to upload to your gallery.
     
  9. SpnkyMcGee

    SpnkyMcGee New to Mu-43

    9
    May 7, 2010
    Gallery

    I've tried 7 times now with no success. Not sure why. I didn't have any issues yesterday and I still have room according to the bar graph and information. No idea.
     
  10. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus Subscribing Member Charter Member

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    What are you seeing that tells you, you can't upload?
     
  11. Jonas B

    Jonas B Guest

    91
    Apr 23, 2010
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Looking at the third image (the tree) I see motion blur. Did you have IS turned on or off, and if turned on, what focal length was it set to?

    /Jonas
     
  12. Vidar

    Vidar Mu-43 Top Veteran Charter Member

    545
    Dec 31, 2009
    Bergen, Norway
    Hmm. I have this lens, no problem getting sharp images with my E-P1...

    Think that Shooter may be on to something, maybe missed focus?

    Good luck. I am real happy with my Nokton.
     
  13. SpnkyMcGee

    SpnkyMcGee New to Mu-43

    9
    May 7, 2010
    On the upload page I complete the fields just like I did yesterday for the others. The "processing" wheel spins when I hit "submit" for a short while and then it takes me to the same "Upload" page that I started on without the image having been uploaded.
     
  14. SpnkyMcGee

    SpnkyMcGee New to Mu-43

    9
    May 7, 2010
    **UPDATE**

    Ok, so I reduced the file size to get it to upload but the difference won't be as apparent.

    So here are two images. This one is with the Voightlander 35mm 1.4 lens shot at f16.
    [​IMG]

    Here is the same shot with the Olympus kit 14-42 lens also shot at f16.
    [​IMG]

    The Oly lens is actually sharper at hi-res than the Voightlander. If this is the best I can expect I will return this lens for sure. Maybe I am still doing something wrong?
     
  15. kahren

    kahren Mu-43 Regular

    141
    Mar 21, 2010
    try both at f8 at f16 sharpness is goign to decline especially on the voigtlander since it has a bigger max aperture. at f16 you will get diffraction on these cams, so its not the best for sharpness.
     
  16. Ulfric M Douglas

    Ulfric M Douglas Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 6, 2010
    Northumberland
    Maybe you might be expecting too much : I haven't the experience to say.
    My own 4/3rds Oly kit 14-42 is sharper (only just) than my SLR Cosina f1.8 ... which is the sharpest of my three cheapo 50mm-ish primes used on my m4/3rds G1.
    Personally I'm not using them to get more sharpness than my kit lenses, rather looking for acceptable sharpness with wider apertures than the kit lenses.
    If I could find a "cheap" 39mm-fit wide prime as sharp as my Lumix 14-45 kit I'd be a little bit surprised. Happy though!
     
  17. SpnkyMcGee

    SpnkyMcGee New to Mu-43

    9
    May 7, 2010
    I hope I'm not expecting too much. The lens was more $$ than the camera. I have the Pany 20mm 1.7 and it's amazingly sharp and flexible for a "cheap" lens. I do expect more from the Voightlander. I hope to post more if the sun ever decides to shine in Oregon again. :mad:
     
  18. Jonas B

    Jonas B Guest

    91
    Apr 23, 2010
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    While waiting for the sun you can turn off the IS and use a tripod and try something indoor. (Or, did you see my question about your IS settings up-thread?)

    /Jonas
     
  19. SpnkyMcGee

    SpnkyMcGee New to Mu-43

    9
    May 7, 2010
    **UPDATE** 05.10.10

    Here are three more images for your review. All three were shot on a tripod and were subject to NO image processing. These a jpeg files straight from the E-P1 and the Voightlander 35mm f1.4. Focus point is on the front leaves in the center of the image.

    Voightlander 35mm 1.4
    Tripod shot
    ISO 400 – 1/13 sec – f8
    Olympus E-P1 jpeg LF file
    [​IMG]

    Voightlander 35mm 1.4
    Tripod shot
    ISO 400 – 1/50 sec – f4
    Olympus E-P1 jpeg LF file
    [​IMG]

    Voightlander 35mm 1.4
    Tripod shot
    ISO 400 – 1/200 sec – f2
    Olympus E-P1 jpeg LF file
    [​IMG]

    Any thoughts on these?

    Thanks again everyone! This helps a lot! :2thumbs:
     
  20. BillN

    BillN Mu-43 All-Pro Charter Member

    Jan 19, 2010
    SW France
    Hi

    I have a few "rangefinder" lenses, CV, Canon, Leica and quite a few SLR MF lenses - Canon, Nikkor, Konica, etc.

    Generally what I have found is:

    1). MF glass is very difficult to focus "wide open" on M43, because of the lack of the conventional "spit screen" or matching focus assist that you have on SLRs and RFs and because the M43 LCDs just do not give an accurate image, (even in magnification mode).......I said wide open .....before you all jump in and say that the LCD is good enough

    2). Generally SLR MF glass seems to be more suited to M43 than "RF" lenses

    3). M43 are very good at the short end .......... but when it comes to anything over 100mm, (35mm equivalent), they are less good even with dedicated AF lenses, versus a conventional DSLR. i.e. I find the AF 45 - 200mm Pany lens generally (very) soft, I find my Canon FDn 200mm f2.8 - very good but difficult to use at f2.8 on my G1, (never mind the EP-1 which is more difficult to focus with MF lenses).......it is also very fiddly to use anything other than AF glass on M43 .......... almost to the extent of "not being really worth the effort" with some lenses

    In short - On M43, I now stick with the Pany 20mm, (which seems impossible to beat), and 14 45 with the occasional use of 50mm or 55mm MF glass, I now seldom use my Ultron 35mm f1.7 or my Leica 50mm lens.

    If I want longer shots, I use my D300 with Nikon AF VR glass or old Nikkor MF stuff which is a lot easier to use on the D300 versus the EP-1 and also it is possible to record some EXIF data on the D300 when using MF glass.

    IMHO - M43 is great for what it is and the use of MF glass was/is heralded as a great plus, but in reality, for me, it can be fiddly, time consuming and disappointing.

    With one exception, that of tripod work, the use of MF glass although initially a "novel" experience, has worn off and by the time you have loaded yourself up with adapters you may as well buy the dedicated "wide" lenses, albeit they are expensive, that are now available.

    Keep trying, but you may get annoyed!

    Just my opinion