1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Four Thirds lenses on Micro Four Thirds cameras.

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by L0n3Gr3yW0lf, Jun 29, 2016.

  1. L0n3Gr3yW0lf

    L0n3Gr3yW0lf Mu-43 Regular

    56
    Jul 31, 2013
    Romania
    Ovidiu
    Hi, I am becoming more and more interested in trying Four Thirds lenses on my Panasonic GX7. Mainly because of price at the given image quality, I found, up for sale, an Olympus Zuiko Digital 35mm f 3.5 Macro for 60 Euros and an Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm f 2.8-3.5 I at 100 Euros,

    I found, up for sale, an Olympus Zuiko Digital 35mm f 3.5 Macro for 60 Euros and an Olympus Zuiko Digital 14-54mm f 2.8-3.5 I at 100 Euros, and from what I have read they offer very good image quality. Also, an Olympus MMF-2 at 50 Euros (alternatively, if it's sold off before I can buy it, there's a Chinese made Four Thirds to Micro Four Thirds for 60 Euros) is up for sale.

    I know it's going to focus slow (very slow in low light) and it's going to be noisy too and I think I can live with that, for now, since I shoot mostly landscape at wider than 100mm and I will keep my Sigma 60mm f 2.8. I wonder, in terms if image quality, if Panasonic 12-32mm f 3.5-5.6 does offer better image quality (or the like of Panasonic 14-42mm f 3.5-5.6 II / Panasonic X 14-42mm f 3.5-5.6 PZ / Olympus 12-50mm f 3.5-5.6, though these are more expensive).

    Oh, and should I try to go to a legacy 50/100mm f 3.5 macro lenses instead of the Olympus Zuiko Digital 35mm f 3.5 Macro ? From what I understand the wider angle gives more DOF and it would make it a bit easier to get the subject in focus, though the small working distance will make it hard for sensitive subjects not to be scared and fly away. And if a lens is 1:2 macro (when used in FF) shouldn't the magnification double when mounted on a Micro Four Thirds camera because of the 2x crop factor, making pseudo macro lenses into half macro and half macro lenses in full macro lenses and, subsequently, full macro lenses in 2:1 (like the Olympus Zuiko Digital 35mm f 3.5 ?
     
  2. steve16823

    steve16823 Mu-43 Regular

    181
    Sep 26, 2011
    Brookfield, IL
    At a fixed magnification, depth of field is independent of focal length. In other words, if the subject is the same size in each image, the depth of field will be the same for a 35mm, 50mm, or 90mm lens (with the same f-number). If it were me, and I were manually focusing anyhow, I would spend my money on a 'legacy' macro lens in the 50-100mm ranges as you suggest. Plus, the adapters are cheaper. (my macro lens is a Nikkor 55mm f2.8 that I paid < 100USD for)

    The 14-54mm lens is a great all-purpose lens, but the greatest advantage it will have over the slower lenses you mention (although I have not used them) is probably the larger aperture and the associated DOF control. So, the question would be is whether or not this has any impact on your style of photography. 100 Euros seems like a good price though, so you might not have much to lose if you decide to sell it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    1:2 macro is still 1:2 on a crop sensor.

    You can find matching 1:1 converters for some of the old 50mm & 90mm macro lenses, including certain Vivitar, Tokina, and Minolta Rokkor models.

    Or the Oly 60mm is native and 1:1, and you could sell the Sigma.

    Barry
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. L0n3Gr3yW0lf

    L0n3Gr3yW0lf Mu-43 Regular

    56
    Jul 31, 2013
    Romania
    Ovidiu
    But wouldn't the crop factor affect the FoV of the macro lens, if a 50mm 1:2 gives you a specific FoV at the minimum focus distance, but with the 2x crop factor you get 100mm FoV at the same minimum focus so the image should be 1:1 because of the bigger magnification.
     
  5. fredlong

    fredlong Just this guy...

    Apr 18, 2011
    Massachusetts USA
    Fred
    No. The magnification ratio is the size of the image projected onto the sensor. It has nothing to do with how much the captured image is enlarged later for viewing. Crop factor is only about field of view. The fact that the projected image is the same size at the same distance is why there is a crop factor in the first place.

    In practice however you can fill the frame with the bug of your choice at a lower magnification on a smaller sensor. This makes it seem like you have higher magnification, but you'll have to "enlarge" it more to get the same size image on a screen or print.

    Fred
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  6. steve16823

    steve16823 Mu-43 Regular

    181
    Sep 26, 2011
    Brookfield, IL
    Fred is right. I suppose one way to put it would be to use the term "equivalent" magnification ratio in much the same way we discuss "equivalent" focal length and f-number, even though focal length and f-number are also, like magnification, properties of the lens that are completely independent of the size of the sensor.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. JohnF

    JohnF Mu-43 Regular

    183
    Apr 1, 2010
    Oberursel, Germany
    Some of the 4/3 lenses work fine on m4/3: 12-60, 50 macro, even the 35 macro works well. The 70-300 is almost useless, though, especially trying to capture anything moving.
     
  8. kenez

    kenez Mu-43 Regular

    125
    Apr 18, 2012
    I have quite a number of legacy 4/3 lenses that I use on my EM-1 with excellent results. However, when I had an EM-5, AF speed and accuracy varied widely by lens. As far as the 14-54mm goes, it's a great lens and a little faster at some apertures than the 12-60mm. I have both the 14-54 and the 14-54 mk II. They are the same optically except the mk II is optimized for contrast detection AF so it might performs a little better on your camera. However, since the price is right on the original mk I you could take the plunge or hold out for a Mk II.
     
  9. svenkarma

    svenkarma Mu-43 Top Veteran

    566
    Feb 5, 2013
    mark evans
    I don't know how similar optically the 4/3 Oly 40-150 f4-f5.6 is to its m43 equivalent, but I recently got one in a camera shop sale for £30 and it balances very nicely on a GX7.
     
  10. PakkyT

    PakkyT Mu-43 Top Veteran

    764
    Jun 20, 2015
    New England
    Not sure if you can find them where you are or what the going used prices are for them now, but the legacy 4/3rds mount versions of the Sigma 105mm and 150mm macro lenses were very popular with 4/3rds macro shooters. Both offered f2.8, true 1:1 macro shooting, and image quality for both was excellent (although the 150 was the better lens and as such cost more than the 105). Both will give you nice distance from your subject which is very helpful if you are shooting subjects that spook easily and especially if that spooking comes with an attack (wasps!).
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. L0n3Gr3yW0lf

    L0n3Gr3yW0lf Mu-43 Regular

    56
    Jul 31, 2013
    Romania
    Ovidiu
    In the end I chose to buy a Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm f 3.5-5.6 ASPH. II because of the reputation of sharpness, small size (of wich I was awestruck when I received it) and AF performance. Also because it was on sale for only 135 Euros/150 bucks brand new from a Panasonic Lumix DMC G7 kit (plastic mount). I didn't get to test it since I got it 5 days ago but I will tomorrow and I can't wait.