Photos of EP1/2 with Konica glass?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by crashwins, Dec 11, 2011.

  1. crashwins

    crashwins Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 13, 2010
    Northampton, MA
    I'm just curious how the whole kit looks (in terms of size) with Konica adapted to the EP1 or EP2..I'm not concerned with fashion, just whether is pocketable enough for street use..Say, the 40mm Konica Pancake with the EP1 would be great! Anyone have this setup? I would be psyched to see it. Thanks
  2. DiskMan101

    DiskMan101 Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 30, 2011
    Kansas City
    I have the Konica Hexanon 50mm F1.4 AR and Vivitar 28mm F2.8 AR, neither are really "pocketable". With the adapter ring, they're a little bit on the hefty side. My Pany 20mm F1.4 pancake is much better but you better have some big pockets.
  3. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada

    The photo doesn't really show it, but this lens is not what I would consider pocketable with the adapter, as Diskman says. Although the lens itself is as small as any pancake, with the adapter it's a little bigger than the 14-42mm zoom lens collapsed. It can be put into a cargo pocket if you want, but everybody will be asking if you're happy to see them. ;)
  4. phigmov

    phigmov Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 4, 2010
    Konica did make some M mount range-finder lenses too. That would probably make the Pen pocketable (-ish). Ditto the Pen F lenses and of course the usual Leica M & LTM mount lenses).

    I have yet to see anyone here with a Pen F 38mm f2.8 Pancake . . . they seem to be very rare and expensive.
  5. crashwins

    crashwins Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 13, 2010
    Northampton, MA
    Thanks folks. Very helpful..Lol, "happy to see them." I'm debating on getting rid of my Lumix 20mm Pancake and just using my Konica glass, but it seems I'd really lose that compact form factor that's so great. I wonder if the quality would be that great too. I use modified Konica lenses on my Lumix L1 and the quality is just great, but it's more fun with that camera because I am able to manually control everything right on top. It's so fun
  6. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    Ned, I just purchased a new AR to m43 adapter (Fotosay) and I swear it's a lot shallower than my old one was.

  7. RnR

    RnR Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2011
    Brisbane, Australia
    Real Name:
    Should be around 20mm deep dixeyk.
  8. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    It does look shallower than mine when I first looked at your photo, but when I scrutinized it further I notice that yours tapers out sooner but has a longer barrel. The quick taper I think is giving the optical illusion of being shallower...
  9. harrysue

    harrysue Mu-43 Regular

    Mar 12, 2011
    I also got a Fotasy adapter last week. The body is indeed 18 mm thick, but the metal flange that holds the lens extends above the adapter body to maintain the proper lens-to-sensor distance. You can see that in your photo. Adapter makers can't mess around much with the lens-sensor distance or they lose infinity focus. Well, most of them lose it anyway. Only the expensive guys get it right.

    I also have a Pixco Konica adapter with a 19.9 mm thick body. Their flange is flush with the top of the adapter body. So you will see a 2mm gap between the lens and adapter with the newer Fotasy.

    Here is a picture of a Pixco adapter with the 50mm 1.8 on my EPL1.

    Konica has one of the smallest lens-film distances.

    Attached Files: