Fun, fast manual portrait lens for OM-D?

You can try a number of 45-55mm manual lenses via adaptor. If you do a search in the forum you can find a lot of photos taken with such lenses and a variety of :43: bodies.

Just to get you started (it's what I would look at first, so not an objective list):

• OM Zuiko 50mm f/1.4
• Contax G 45mm f/2.0
• Minolta MD 50mm f/1.4
• Helios 44 55mm f/2.0 (the cheapest but very capable)

 

The adapted 50mm-ish f/1.4 lenses (your classic nifty fifty) make great portrait lenses on :43:. Which brand you choose (Canon, Nikon, Konica, Olympus, Pentax, etc.) is almost irrelevant, because they're all pretty good. The quality of the output is going to have more to do with the condition of the particular example than the brand.

I have a [thread=3092]Konica 57mm[/thread] that performs quite well. Others swear by the old [thread=1516]Takumar 50mm[/thread] (caution: radioactive), the [thread=1520]Olympus 50mm[/thread] or the [thread=3576]Minolta MD 50mm[/thread]. The [thread=3297]Canon 50mm[/thread] is a good performer as well and may be the easiest to find and among the least expensive.

In short, it's tough to go wrong with any of these f/1.4s, or even with the less expensive and lighter f/1.7s, f/1.8s or even f/2.0s. However, be warned that once you pick up your first adapted lens you may find yourself spending way too much time prowling thrift stores, pawn shops and eBay looking for your next one.

 

Yes, that is correct.

 

Yes the FOV equivalent of a 50mm lens will be 100mm. If you appreciate build quality and aren't troubled too much by weight, I would recommend an Asahi Pentax Super-Multicoated-Takumar 50mm f1.4 in M42 mount. They are extremely well built, have a buttery smooth focus ring, and are quite sharp. You should be able to get one for less than $100. Of all my lenses (Canon, OM Zuiko, etc.), the Tak is head and shoulders above the rest in terms of tactile feel and build quality. It has been reported that Pentax was actually selling them at a loss when they made them back in the 70s

Here is a photo of mine mounted to my E-PL1:

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/ericarthur/5420344390/" title="New Addition by ericarthur, on Flickr"> "640" height="427" alt="New Addition"></a>

 

Yes.

I really enjoy using my Minoltas for portraits, but I have a feeling I would get similar results with any other brand. Just pick one and go have fun. Fair Warning: once you get one you will be scouring ebay everyday for the next!

Minolta MD 50mm f1.4
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/vftsai/6894505389/" title="JennaLeigh by Vincent-F-Tsai (Spatulaboy), on Flickr"> "640" height="478" alt="JennaLeigh"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/vftsai/6887477728/" title="Vintage Laura by Vincent-F-Tsai (Spatulaboy), on Flickr"> "600" height="800" alt="Vintage Laura"></a>

Minolta MD Rokkor 45mm f2
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/vftsai/7062879765/" title="Jason by Vincent-F-Tsai (Spatulaboy), on Flickr"> "600" height="800" alt="Jason"></a>

Minolta MC Rokkor 58mm f1.4
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/vftsai/7043803101/" title="All the cool kids are doing it. by Vincent-F-Tsai (Spatulaboy), on Flickr"> "800" height="600" alt="All the cool kids are doing it."></a>

 

Personally my favourite lens would be the 45mm Rokkor because it's just that little bit shorter (90mm instead of 100mm) And another plus it that it snaps to focus easily compared to some others which take some turning to get it right.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/50527022@N02/6902107249/" title="P1160634-2 by iconindustries, on Flickr"> View attachment 215054 "1024" height="684" alt="P1160634-2"></a>

 

Is she trying to take a closeup of her fingertips.

 

Yeah, some old lenses including the Takuamar 50/1.4 contained Thorium, which is a radioactive element. There is much debate as to the potential risk in using these lenses, though I tend to come down on the side that thinks the risk is minimal. You may notice that the radiation can cause of yellowing of the lens over time, which can be remedied by exposing the lens to UV light (e.g. sunlight).

You can find more discussion about this lens and the radioactivity in [thread=21140]this thread[/thread].

 

she's mainly just cuteness:smile:

 

There a nice Takumar on ebay, ending in 22 hours, only up to $54 right now. May be a bargain.

LINK

was that wrong of me? that's my lens.... 

 

Here are some other threads that might be of interest:

• [thread=23123]Nifty Fiftys do battle with m4/3 native lenses[/thread]
• [thread=25347]What's your favorite 50 something.[/thread]
• [thread=27473]32 Normal Lenses Test - 1977[/thread]
• [thread=26126]Which lens have better optics, Canon FD, Minolta MD, Olympus OM?[/thread]

 

In that case, she's doing great.

 

That's pretty intensely long for a portrait lens mate. You might have to be too far away from your subject that you wont have eye contact with them. If you don't really know the person you are shooting, eye contact is very crucial imho.

 

You really can't go wrong with any of the major brand nifty fifties, but if you appreciate build quality in addition to the lens IQ, the Super-Multi-Coated Takumar is a thing of beauty. It has got a solidness to it that balances fairly well on the PEN bodies, should be great on the OM-D.

 

That is actually not a joke, be warned!