1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Justification to buy another lens

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by aznmochamike, Feb 4, 2011.

  1. aznmochamike

    aznmochamike Mu-43 Regular

    42
    Jan 4, 2011
    California
    Hi everyone... I have had the GF1 with 20mm 1.7 and recently bought the MC Rokkor 58mm 1.2 and Rokkor 50mm 1.7... I love to use the 2 lens but then they have such a narrow field of view that I was looking to use a more wide angle one... I was really looking to get the Rokkor 24mm 2.8 because I heard of the superb quality of pictures it produces and it is also a wide angle... on the gf1 with a crop factor of 2 it wont be such a wide angle anymore but at least wider then the other 2 rokkors I have... I don't know if I should buy it because of the 20mm lens and am afraid it would produce about the same quality pictures at roughly the same field of view... can someone tell me the difference that might push me over the edge to buy it? hahaha thanks:2thumbs:
     
  2. bogolisk

    bogolisk Mu-43 Rookie

    19
    Sep 30, 2010
    Personally I'd not do it. But it's just me. The real normal fl (1x sensor's diagonal) in 4/3 is 22mm. So the 20mm is a little bit wider than normal and 24mm would be a little longer. I'd get something close to 44mm (2x sensor's diagonal) for portraits.
     
  3. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    Yeah, I'll tell ya... if ya feel the need...then get the 14mm. That and the 20mm and your set....
     
  4. aznmochamike

    aznmochamike Mu-43 Regular

    42
    Jan 4, 2011
    California
    well the reason i was considering the 24mm is because that one i heard that one was similar in sharpness as the leica and my friend has a leica and i love his quality... why do people buy legacy lens then if the newer ones are so sharp as they are?
     
  5. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    Leica glass is the best not because of sharpness but because of contrast.
    For many years the Nikon 105 2.5 was rated the sharpest lens for a 35mm camera.
    It truly was a great lens but it had soft contrast.
    The new digital glass has very nice contrast. I don't use my legacy stuff anymore.
    My 20 & 14 do better than the legacy because they are designed for the camera.
    I don't use my Leica lenses anymore.

    So, I would really try the dedicated glass. You get the advantages built in like AF etc.
    Many like legacy glass. I like it on my M4's etc but not on the GF1.

    You look at the images from the 20mm. Geeze, it's a $350.00 lens that blows away almost all legacy glass. What's to think about?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. aznmochamike

    aznmochamike Mu-43 Regular

    42
    Jan 4, 2011
    California
    hmm well i might consider the 14 then since i have the 20 already... thanks for giving me that extra push streetshooter =)
     
  7. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    If you get the 14 and don't like it, not likely, you could sell it in a second.

    ps...all the legacy shooters will be on my butt shortly....
    Gotta go hide...
     
    • Like Like x 3
  8. Why does anyone use vintage items?

    To be reminded of the past or...
    To experience a product of a time they never knew
    To use equipment devoid of electronics
    To see something possibly older than you are work as well as it did on the day it was built
    To see if they really don't build things like they used to
    etc.
    etc.

    If you want the best tech specifically designed for your camera, listen to Shooter's advice and stick with native lenses. If any of the above reasons float your boat, try some more legacy lenses.

    I don't use old lenses on the basis that they might be better than newer ones, I just find the new lenses (as good as they are) sterile to use in comparison. I don't mean the images they produce but the way they operate and feel...but that's just me. Good luck with your decision
     
  9. Alanroseman

    Alanroseman Super Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 21, 2010
    New England
    I'm with Shooter. I tried legacy glass "just because I could" and it's so novel.

    While it is fun, on occasion, I really love the 20mm as well as any lens I've owned over the past 40 years.

    The standard 14-45 kit lens is pretty darn good too, the results from that lens really surprised me, pleasantly.

    Today I received the 45-200, if there's a better more cost efficient purchase on very suitable native glass than this I's be surprised.

    Listen to Shooter me thinks... get the 14mm and don't look back, the legacy glass will always be around if you want to dabble.
     
  10. bogolisk

    bogolisk Mu-43 Rookie

    19
    Sep 30, 2010
    rumours have it was called the worst Leica ever. :biggrin:
     
  11. travisennis

    travisennis Mu-43 Regular

    63
    Dec 27, 2010
    Indiana
    I have two lenses that I use on my GF-1: I have the 20mm and a Zeiss Contax 50mm 1.4. The 20mm is an excellent lens, small, sharp and it's native so I get all of the advantages of the system: AF, EXIF data, etc. The Contax 50mm is just so damn nice; it's sharp, the build is amazing, it's controls are dampened so nicely that it's just amazing to touch and use in contrast to the plastic, focus-by-wire lenses that are native to the system. So I completely understand those who prefer native versus those who really like legacy lenses because I like both of my lenses for their different qualities. I have an arbitrary but unbreakable rule for myself when it comes to my GF-1 and that is I have promised myself, and my wife :), that I wouldn't spend a bunch of money on lenses so I've limited myself to three lenses. I don't want to give up my 20mm or my 50mm so choosing what to buy next has been difficult for me. I think you have to make your decisions on what will give you the most satisfaction while shooting and figuring that out is not an easy task. Based on what I already have I could use a wide-angle and Shooter almost has me convinced on the 14mm but I admit I also have my eye on the Zeiss Contax 28mm 2.8 (for it's quality even though it would be an effective normal lens on my GF-1) and the Voigtlander 15mm. I'm going to give it time and think about what I really want and need from my lens collection and that decision, I'm sure, is different for each of us. Perhaps my own thought process on this decision will be helpful for you.
     
  12. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    DON'T DO IT!!!

    Legacy lenses are a slippery slope. I succumbed to the temptation of "just one more lens" and now I have a box full of nice glass that I almost never use. Now they just sit there...staring at me...with their eerie unblinking cyclopian eyes. :eek:

    Okay, all kidding aside it is true that I rarely use most of the lenses I have. My most used are my Olympus 17/2.8, My Pen-F 40/1.4 and my Olympus 24/2.8. That said, I think all the justification I ever needed was "I want it". :biggrin:
     
  13. andyw

    andyw Mu-43 Veteran

    410
    Jan 27, 2010
    Surrey. UK
    I am in a kind of similar situation. I have an Olympus E-P1 and a new E-PL2. I have the 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6 MkII plus a Panasonic 20mm. I also have a 28mm Vivitar, 29mm Pentacon, 35mm Zeiss Flektogon (Nice!) 50mm f/1.8 Pentacon (very sharp), 2x Helios 44/2, 55mm f/2 Jupiter 2 and a Industar 55mm f/2.

    I do like the feel of the images from the old lenses but do get a it fed up with the manual focusing. I put up with it as the end result is the most important thing. I only got the 20mm Pany recently and kinda feel that it's all i actually need. The 14-42 is a superb lens and will cover me at the landscape end.

    Thing is i have hankered after a Carl Zeiss Bioter lens for a fair while as the image quality and sharpness are just superb. I was thinking 25mm as this will cover the hole between 20mm and 28mm. Do i need it..no It's about £800 which is a HUGE amount of money just for a lens i would use every once in a while. There is a Voigtlander 24mm on ebay which is a good lens so i may just get that and be done...no more......hmmm
     
  14. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Ad
    I must agree here. Recently I've been dabbling in legacy lenses, but when I go out shooting the 14-45mm mostly is on my camera and I use the 45-200mm a lot also.

    The most useful category for legacy lenses is probably around 50mm, they are (mostly) cheap and relatively fast. Longer becomes unwieldy and hard to hold still, and shorter often doesn't offer a lot extra: most shorter lenses have to be stopped down to f/5.6 to get really good, offering nothing extra on the Panny 14-45mm and missing out on convenient stuff like AF, data in your EXIF and image stablilization. Remember that legacy lenses in the range below 35mm were designed as wide-angle lenses for 35mm film cameras and that the much higher resolution of an MFT sensor mercilessly reveals all kinds of optical shortcomings which are most prevalent in wide-angle lenses. A year ago I sold almost all of my 20-odd Nikon MF lenses because they simply weren't up to the task of delivering adequate image quality on the G1; I only kept a few 50mm lenses and the Micro-Nikkors which perform very well on MFT cameras.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Alanroseman

    Alanroseman Super Moderator Emeritus

    Dec 21, 2010
    New England
    I'm in agreement with just about everything you've written here..

    I wasn't in any way, shape, or form "dissing" those who enjoy the platform for its ability to shoot the legacy or even classic glass.

    In fact we all know photography, as a hobby, has many many sub headers.
    People collect, rangefinders, view cameras, box cameras, lenses...name it really just about everything to do with the medium is a collectable for someone.

    In that regard alone, the m43 format has reinvigorated those who have collected, or just hung onto their lenses from the past... some real classics have found new life letting light pass through to a "sensor" instead of "film".

    It's sort of like "Jurassic Park"... but in a good way. A breath of new life for fabulous glass that in most, not all, cases has been sitting on shelfs for years now...

    Not to mention, the ability to shoot legacy glass may help solidify the m43 platform for exactly the reason I stated above. In can be used as a "platform" to reincarnate some of those classic Leica, Nikon etc. lenses. I know it sent me on a family history hunt to recover one or two lenses just for the sake of sentimentality. I thought it would be nice to shoot my grandchildren with a lens I bought in 1968. Just for the feeling of tying my past to the present.

    I just don't want a steady diet! I want new fast lenses to appear. I embrace the new technology and things that will advance this platforms viability, I do not want to think I bought a "Beta Max".

    Cheers, Alan
     
  16. pdh

    pdh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    598
    May 6, 2010
    hmmm ... I was out for a walk and a little light snapping just now, thinking about this very subject and come back to find this thread ... nice synchronicity ...

    if you have any sort of an addictive personality, lens buying will be like anything else ... you'll start and not stop, it'll cause all sorts of problems, and only the "next" lens will be any good compared to the ones you already have ... "it's never enough" ...

    it is perfectly true, the native lenses (primes and zooms) are all amazingly sharp compared to relatively inexpensive (say, less than 100 or 200 USD on eBay) "legacy" lenses (would it be better to call them "non-native" lenses ? - not every "legacy" lens is very old) ... even the often meh-ed 17mm Olympus pancake is a very sharp lens ... I've got the 17/2.8, the 20/1.7 and the Panasonic 14-45mm zoom; they're all excellent. I hardly use the zoom but that's not because I think it's poor quality.

    I too have gathered a number of older lenses, (a few bought, others I've been given gratis) ... some are really nice to use, and beautifully sharp and contrasty (the 50/1.7 & 57/1.4 Hexanons) despite costing less than 50USD .. On the other hand, I have one "legacy" lens that cost a lot, is not easy to use on my E-P2, and is a bit smeary at the edges on :43: (at 1:1 :smile: ) ... it also can produce images (even in my hands) that are qualitatively in a different and superior league to all the other lenses I own ...

    ... all of which proves nothing beyond that some people like some lenses better than some other people like some other lenses ... in the OP's case, the images he likes so much from the 24mm lens are produced in a Leica body and not a :43: body and that just makes the whole issue so much more tangled ...

    Also remember in Jurassic Park the dinos ate the people. This doesn't often happen with "legacy" glass. Except in the metaphorical way of course.

    oh dear, i think i've drivelled on enough for the time being ...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Pelao

    Pelao Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Feb 3, 2010
    Ontario, Canada
    Great thread to read through.

    I confess that the two legacy lenses I have our a real pleasure for me. I do enjoy their construction and feel, but also very much the challenges of manual focus. I have relearned the art of careful composition. It's where I put most effort, but this glass has given me some pause and I have taken that across to my most used glass, which is native the M4/3.

    This does not always mean slowing down, but it does mean pulling everything to gather in a swift, considered way.

    Now I am rambling. Back to the original point. My native lenses are then Pan 20 and original 14-45 . The 20 is what I use most.

    If M4/3 continues on a development path that suits me (availability of GF1 size cameras, but with manual controls) then I would add the 14 and the 45. I really would not need anything else for most of my photography, apart from my serious landscape stuff where I prefer my 5D.

    The other day I printed a photograph taken with my GF1/20 at ISO 1600 f3.5. It had a tiny bit of noise and since I printed B&W I was fine with that. These are fine cameras and lenses.

    This is the one I printed. I have no complaints.
    Distillery_Truck-1020798.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. dsteady

    dsteady Mu-43 Regular

    71
    Nov 8, 2010
    Chicago
    Get the Panny 14mm if you need a wide angle lens. Trying to force a legacy lens to give you wide angle performance isn't really worth it when you can buy a perfectly good high performing native lens at such a good price.

    If you really want something Leica, I would suggest the PanaLeica 25mm/1.4 for 4/3. It's fast and fully adaptable to the m4/3 platform - you'll need the Panny adapter which is $100. You get AF, EXIF and, what I think is a bonus, an aperture control ring on the lens itself. It's a bit front heavy, but I kind of like that. You have to actually find one though, but they do come up from time to time.
     
  19. travisennis

    travisennis Mu-43 Regular

    63
    Dec 27, 2010
    Indiana
    I think the only reason I haven't acquired the Panny 14mm is that I really think it would be satisfying to use the aperture control ring and the tabbed focus ring on the Voigtlander 15mm.
     
  20. Streetshooter

    Streetshooter Administrator Emeritus

    Dec 15, 2009
    Phila, Pa USA
    Travis,
    I used to like adjusting aperture and focus on my Leica glass...
    Then I woke up and started making photos again....