SteveNunez

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2010
Messages
561
Location
South Florida
Real Name
Steve Nunez
Thank you for the reply- so does the typical 2X crop apply to adapted 4/3 lenses? I just bought a 50-500 Sigma and am thinking there's a 2X multiplier- is this correct? (100mm-1000mm)
 

PakkyT

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
4,460
Location
Massachusetts, USA
Compared to a 135mm film camera or "full frame" digital, that is correct, the "Bigma" is equivalent to a 100-1000mm field of view on those larger sensor cameras.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2017
Messages
1,983
Location
Salt Spring Island, British Columbia, Canada
Real Name
Jan Steinman
… does the typical 2X crop apply to adapted 4/3 lenses? I just bought a 50-500 Sigma and am thinking there's a 2X multiplier- is this correct? (100mm-1000mm)
Sort of.

The perspective, or relationship between near and far things, won't be 2x, but the angle of view will be exactly the same as if you cropped the middle 50% out of the original 24mm x 36mm frame.

Bottom line: focal length is still focal length. The lens does not get "longer" when you put it on a smaller sensor. It is best to try to re-calibrate your head for the actual millimetres, rather than to always multiply things by two. For example, a 25mm lens has a "normal" angle-of-view on either 4/3rds or µ4/3rds, like a 50mm lens has on 24x36.
 

Lee Perrins

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 23, 2018
Messages
56
I've been happily using my 50-200 SWD with an after-market adapter for a couple of months now. It works well on my E-M1.1 - it's a super-budget set up really but the results are much better than any other camera / lens combo I've used before.

As mentioned in the thread, 43 lenses are relatively affordable compared to m43 lenses, and I'm not that fussed that they are larger or that then need an adapter, so I'm looking at the standard zooms (12-60 and 14-35) now too because my only other lens is the Panasonic 20mm (I bought an E-M10 new, body only, with the 20mm, and replaced it with a second hand E-M1 body when the wi-fi packed up)

My question is about adapters. My third party one is a tiny bit loose - it fits the lens perfectly, but there is a bit of play between the lens and the body. Not loads, but there is definitely movement, and once or twice there has been enough that I've had to turn the camera off and on again for it to be happy about the lens. It's a 'Commlite' adapter. The first one I bought was entirely unbranded (it's the one you see on eBay etc with the tripod mount) but the locating pin stuck on its the lens wouldn't lock into place at all.

I bought third party partly because there were no Olympus ones available at the time and when they are available they seem very expensive for what they are. However, if they eliminate play altogether then that, along with the water resistance of the mmf-3, might persuade me they are worth it.

Can any MMF owners comment on how well it fits - is there any play or is it snug as a bug?
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2017
Messages
1,983
Location
Salt Spring Island, British Columbia, Canada
Real Name
Jan Steinman
Can any MMF owners comment on how well it fits - is there any play or is it snug as a bug?
Mine fit rather well, not necessarily better than third-party ones, though.

Many of the third-party ones can be "tuned up."

There are two basic designs: ones with little springy bits of metal in them (like the MMF-3), and cheaper ones that have a radial slot in several locations around the circumference.

The latter are actually a bit easier to tune; simply insert a fine tip screwdriver in the slot and twist gently to make the slot a tiny bit wider.

On the ones with springs, you can do the same thing, but the springy metal is more resistant to being bent.

On either, do a little bit at a time, trying the fit in-between. With some patience, pretty soon you'll have a tight fit.
 
Last edited:

PakkyT

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 20, 2015
Messages
4,460
Location
Massachusetts, USA
I've been happily using my 50-200 SWD with an after-market adapter for a couple of months now. It works well on my E-M1.1
My 50-200mm (I have the earlier non-SWD version) is still my "long" lens for my E-M1.1. It migrated over with me from my 4/3rds days and until it actually stops working I will never give it up or replace it with a m43 lens as I doubt I would gain anything "upgrading" to a m43 lens of roughly the same focal length. In fact, if it does break I will probably just buy another one (or the SWD version) as I already have the MMF-3 and so picking up another ZD 50-200mm is one of the biggest bargains and bang-4-ur-buck purchases you can get for this system.

Can any MMF owners comment on how well it fits - is there any play or is it snug as a bug?
Mine fits tightly pretty much identically to a native m43 lens. I just now compared my 50-200+MMF-3 with my 12-100 PRO and mostly identical although the MMF-3 has an ever so slightly more play rotating it back in forth but only because I am directly comparing do I notice it and I chalk it up more to normal tolerance differences rather than the MMF-3 being any more "loose" than normal lenses. After all the mount end of the MMF-3 is identical to the mount end of lenses and made by the same company so there should be no differences other than copy to copy variations.

I don't have a 3rd party version of the adapter so I can not compare to those with any first hand experiences. But one thing that has been discussed here in the past is with the 3rd party ones, sometimes they can be off very slightly with the mounts not being exactly parallel which on something like the 50-200 you will never notice, but on ultra wide lenses such as the 9-18, etc. the wide end shots can show a bit of softness on one side or top/bottom where the slight out of parallel-ness makes one side a tiny bit out of focus. If you ever decide to try any wide angle 4/3rds lenses (about 12mm or wider) then you may really want to hunt down a real MMF-3 (or the Panasonic version whose model number I don't remember).
 
Joined
Aug 13, 2014
Messages
4,187
Location
Honolulu, HI
Real Name
Walter

Lee Perrins

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 23, 2018
Messages
56
.


Mine fits tightly pretty much identically to a native m43 lens. I just now compared my 50-200+MMF-3 with my 12-100 PRO and mostly identical although the MMF-3 has an ever so slightly more play rotating it back in forth but only because I am directly comparing do I notice it and I chalk it up more to normal tolerance differences rather than the MMF-3 being any more "loose" than normal lenses. After all the mount end of the MMF-3 is identical to the mount end of lenses and made by the same company so there should be no differences other than copy to copy variations.

... with the 3rd party ones, sometimes they can be off very slightly with the mounts not being exactly parallel which on something like the 50-200 you will never notice, but on ultra wide lenses such as the 9-18, etc. the wide end shots can show a bit of softness on one side or top/bottom where the slight out of parallel-ness makes one side a tiny bit out of focus. ...
I had read about the lack of 'true' in the 3rd party ones and I agree, if I buy a wider lens I might have to cough up for an MMF-3.

I've compared mine to the 20mm and I hadn't realised that the 20mm moves a bit too - I guess there will always be some play. I'm happy that that the adapter only moves a little more, it's just more obvious because the lens is so much heaver and longer I think. And because I'm looking for it, I suspect!

I'd like an MMF-3 anyway for the weather seal - it seems a bit daft to have a weather sealed camera and lens with a non-sealed adapter on. However I've just spent my 'fun money' for the month on a EC-14 so it will have to wait :)
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,904
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
I had read about the lack of 'true' in the 3rd party ones and I agree, if I buy a wider lens I might have to cough up for an MMF-3.
I had VERY poor results with an el-cheapo adapter and the 4/3 9-18. There's a long thread about it; I start talking about it here:

https://www.mu-43.com/threads/zuiko-9-18-vs-m-zuiko-9-18.84959/#post-899440

and there are horrific sample shots here:

https://www.mu-43.com/threads/zuiko-9-18-vs-m-zuiko-9-18.84959/post-899745

If you continue till the end of that thread, you'll see that most people agreed that it was the adapter that was at fault. Scared me away from such animals!
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2013
Messages
425
Location
Western North Carolina
I've been happily using my 50-200 SWD with an after-market adapter for a couple of months now. It works well on my E-M1.1 - it's a super-budget set up really but the results are much better than any other camera / lens combo I've used before.

As mentioned in the thread, 43 lenses are relatively affordable compared to m43 lenses, and I'm not that fussed that they are larger or that then need an adapter, so I'm looking at the standard zooms (12-60 and 14-35) now too because my only other lens is the Panasonic 20mm (I bought an E-M10 new, body only, with the 20mm, and replaced it with a second hand E-M1 body when the wi-fi packed up)

My question is about adapters. My third party one is a tiny bit loose - it fits the lens perfectly, but there is a bit of play between the lens and the body. Not loads, but there is definitely movement, and once or twice there has been enough that I've had to turn the camera off and on again for it to be happy about the lens. It's a 'Commlite' adapter. The first one I bought was entirely unbranded (it's the one you see on eBay etc with the tripod mount) but the locating pin stuck on its the lens wouldn't lock into place at all.

I bought third party partly because there were no Olympus ones available at the time and when they are available they seem very expensive for what they are. However, if they eliminate play altogether then that, along with the water resistance of the mmf-3, might persuade me they are worth it.

Can any MMF owners comment on how well it fits - is there any play or is it snug as a bug?
I tried two different cheap adapters with my 50-200 non-swd. The one that came with the lens from the prior owner had gouges in the contacts and a poor fit. The second one I bought was better fitting, but still had an issue of intermittent connectivity failure. I then went with an MMF2 and it works exactly like it should. It fits well and functions flawlessly.
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2017
Messages
1,983
Location
Salt Spring Island, British Columbia, Canada
Real Name
Jan Steinman
Last edited:

Lee Perrins

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Jan 23, 2018
Messages
56
Having spent the money, you probably don't want to hear this, but…

The MC-14 and MC-20 work with adapters, sort of, with a little work. Use a quarter-round file to shave down the "hump" above the contacts, so the extruding portion of the MC-14/20 will fit, and Bob's Your Uncle!
Thanks for the info, but the EC-14 was only £100 / $140 and I only have the 50-200 to use with a tele-converter anyway, so I'm happy (for now!)
 

BW79ST

New to Mu-43
Joined
Jan 13, 2014
Messages
5
Location
New York City
Real Name
Brian Wickham
I use a 4/3 Lumix Leica 14-150mm 3.5 - 5.6 on my EM1 Mk3 and get beautiful results. It also takes a nice photo on my E-30, but will not focus on my Pen-F.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom