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

Using full size lenses ?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by kanasgowatom, Jun 19, 2012.

  1. kanasgowatom

    kanasgowatom Mu-43 Regular

    73
    Nov 11, 2011
    Anyone that has read most of my posting's realize I am very new to this M 4/3 world. That being said, my main reason to move over from full size DSLR, is the compactness and light weight of these smaller systems. It just seems contradictordy, to add weight with adapters and large lenses. a what am I missing?


    Thank you,
    Kanasgowa Tom
     
  2. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    That some people like playing around with old glass? Some of it because it's simply very good quality and not easy to adapt to other digital camera systems (Canon is the king of adapted glass in DSLR land, but almost anything can be mounted to a mu43 body), and EVFs with zoom make manual focusing relatively easy.

    Also, there are a lot of pretty compact manual focus lenses, such as any of the rangefinder M39 or Leica M mount glass, as well as most olympus OM lenses. My Pentax 50s and Contax 50/1.4 and 35 2.8 are also pretty darn small compared to any autofocus equivalents. Heavier, but that's due to solid metal construction. I don't really see the attraction of large tele glass or slow glass on these cameras, but they play well with large aperture primes that can be had for a song.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    And quite a few people already have a large investment in legacy glass, and this is a way to take advantage of it. As one example, I have a MF macro lens. I don't shoot macro often enough to justify buying a native m43 macro lens, but a $20 adapter was an easy purchase.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  4. Neon

    Neon Mu-43 Regular

    132
    Mar 12, 2012
    North Wales,UK.
    I agree with kanasgowatom it really defeats the object,I love the take anywhere light weight of 4/3 and use the smallest stuff available. May as well have stayed DSLR otherwise.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. photoSmart42

    photoSmart42 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    628
    Feb 12, 2010
    San Diego, CA
    Not everyone bought into the system for the compactness of it. I've never warmed up to the GF or the ePEN series, nor to the smaller G bodies, nor the NEX series for that matter. They just don't fit well in my large hands. I think the original G and GH bodies are just about right, and I use my E-M5 with grips installed pretty much permanently.

    The other main advantage of mirrorless systems is the ability to adapt a huge variety of lenses to them, and that's why I bought into the system. I get similar IQ to an APS-C DSLR with my E-M5, but it has features not found on many DSLRs and it taps into a bunch of lenses - awesome!

    For the record, I still shoot large cameras like the Nikon F5, and have no issue with the bulk/weight of those systems. I plan on getting a FF DSLR (perhaps Nikon D600 when it comes out) as a companion to my E-M5.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. Justified_Sinner

    Justified_Sinner Mu-43 Regular

    193
    Feb 11, 2010
    Scotland, UK
    Dauvit Alexander
    Horses for courses, really. I think that the greatest thing about the MFT format is that it can be so many things to so many people. I like playing with different lenses, from hand-made pinholes to Holga to Voigtlander; others can use an EP or GF and have a glorified snapshot camera. Look at the galleries here and you can see that every photographic style you can imagine is covered.
    Find what suits you best and use that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. zettapixel

    zettapixel Mu-43 Veteran

    470
    Aug 12, 2010
    NY
    The short answer is, you're right, the long one - it's never black and white.

    Not all SLR lenses are that big and heavy. What they give you, however, are some features missing from what's available from :43: lenses, and some - for much much lower price. Also, for everyday use sometimes build matters more than AF and lightweight :43: lenses just not nearly as well built as old MF. Actually, most of the modern DSLR lenses are not nearly as well built as old MF either :smile:
    For trips I usually take native stuff, every day - mixed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. albert_ang

    albert_ang Mu-43 Regular

    26
    Jun 5, 2012
    Melbourne, Australia
    Nikon 70-200+ 2X TC on M43 = 280-800mm FOV of FF

    Here's my walkaround lens: 70-200 + 2X teleconverter on Olympus EM5 :tongue:
    At least the body is slightly lighter than the FF body


    (note: I just got the adapter yesterday, so I will do some crazy photoshoots this weekend with this setup)

    Joking aside, for me, it's just for fun. I was a Nikon user so I didn't buy the lens solely only for m43.
    Usually people buy adapter for fast prime lenses which m43 doesnt' have. Most of standard 50mm prime lenses only weigh around 300gram (probably the fat Sigma is the exception), so it's not terribly heavy.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. mowog6000

    mowog6000 Mu-43 Regular

    126
    Mar 2, 2012
    Oregon City Oregon
    Pat bailey
    Legacy glass is the reason I bought my EPL-1 and the cost I'm retired on a budget and being able to get a 75~200 Tamron zoom for $29 at my local Goodwill is great!
    It is still lighter and smaller than that same lens would have been on a 35mm camera and it gives me a relatively fast 400mm equivalent. I usually use a 28mm lens on the camera and I don't find it too heavy at all and I'm 67! I can still tote any of them around.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  10. Laurentiu Cristofor

    Laurentiu Cristofor Mu-43 Veteran

    200
    Mar 9, 2012
    There are several reasons for dropping a DSLR for a MILC, other than system size:

    • no more mirror - this can help lower shutter noise, as well as focusing errors arising from mirror calibration (which can affect MF too) and image blur due to mirror induced vibration
    • EVFs can provide more information than OVFs - they enable precise manual focusing (great for any fast legacy MF lenses) and they can display in real time the effect of the exposure settings selected
    • with shorter mount flange distance, it become possible to use rangefinder lenses, like my 50 year old Jupiter-8. It also becomes possible to design more compact wide-angle lenses because the rear element can sit closer to the sensor than on a DSLR
    The smaller size is a bonus and I applaud Olympus for adding the grips to the E-M5 - I think that is the best way to go around it - small size if you want it, but can be bulked up for more demanding work (like mounting the camera on the Rubinar 1000 :))
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. nueces snapper

    nueces snapper Mu-43 All-Pro

    I agree completely

    However until somebody makes a 400mm prime tele for m4/3 I am stuck with some form of legacy glass. I haven't bought one yet but I will. Wildlife photography is pretty much my fave activity. :smile:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Lawrence A.

    Lawrence A. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 14, 2012
    New Mexico
    Larry
    Different strokes for different folks, I guess. But also, as has been mentioned already, not all legacy glass is that big. My Industar 61 L/D 55mm is smaller than either the m. Zuiko 45mm or the OM Zuiko 50 f1.8 on the adapter, and the latter set is only about as big as the native m4/3 PL 25mm. My 1946 Elmar 90mm is smaller than anything else in that focal length that I've seen -- it's sharp enough, and (most importantly) is fun to shoot. An uncoated 1932 Elmar 50mm doesn't do that good a job on the m4/3 bodies, but putting it on an EP2 and shooting with it was a gas. And it looked great on the camera. Sometimes it's just playing with what you have around, and IMHO playing with the craft is essential.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. sparkin

    sparkin Mu-43 Regular

    173
    Nov 18, 2010
    Lexington, KY
    It's not just the legacy glass. Old bellows accessories etc. attached via adapters add a cheap extra dimension that is great fun to play with. m43 is also far better suited for attachment to microscopes (and presumably telescopes) than other systems. I think it is the versatility that many of us like.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    As long as you don't criticize with saying "big, heavy, DSLR users" in one breath and then in the other, slap on a huge legacy full frame or SLR lens....then you're fine! :wink: :smile:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. mr_botak

    mr_botak Mu-43 Veteran

    222
    Dec 4, 2011
    Reading, UK
    David
    It's mostly for the fun of it (and because I could). I do love having a manual aperture ring. As for the weight - sticking with the lighter lenses means it is not too bad. Although for travelling the native lenses are the way to go.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Justified_Sinner

    Justified_Sinner Mu-43 Regular

    193
    Feb 11, 2010
    Scotland, UK
    Dauvit Alexander
    Too right. No tiresome sniping at people who haven't made the same choices as you. One of the great things on this forum is that there is almost none of that. Some of the discussion groups on Flickr can get very nasty. There is no point. It is about what suits you and respecting other for what suits them.

    What ever choice you make with MFT or otherwise, enjoy it.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    836
    Feb 29, 2012
    I picked up my GF3 and the 20/1.7, 14/2.5 and 14-42pz for the small size and light weight. My GH's however, are mostly for video, and I'm still searching for a good legacy 600mm for my wildlife shooting. That's about as honking big as they get.
     
    • Like Like x 1