Your favorite adapted normal-equivalent?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Promit, Apr 13, 2012.

  1. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    I'm curious what you are all partial to in terms of lenses that are close to normal on the :43: format. Practically, I think that means physical focal lengths of 21-28mm, at least in terms of reasonably inexpensive 35mm lenses.

    I have some random Minolta mount off brand 28mm/2.8 that seems very soft, and a Vivitar/Kiron 28mm/2.5 that I haven't tried yet but seems promising.
     
  2. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    The Zuiko Shift 24mm f/3.5 Perspective Control (Tilt-Shift lens) is an amazingly fine piece of glass. :)
    A couple other favorites are the Zuiko Digital 25mm f/2.8 (Four-Thirds pancake) and the Zuiko 24mm f/2.8.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Sammyboy

    Sammyboy m43 Pro

    Oct 26, 2010
    Steeler Country
    :thumbup: Ned, :thumbup:
    That is truly an amazing lens, hard to find and very expensive, but it definitely stands head and shoulder above all the other 35mm format T/S lenses. Most people don't even know of it's existence.
     
  4. dixeyk

    dixeyk Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 9, 2010
    Probably the Hexanon 24/2.8...kinda big but wonderfully sharp, decent bokeh and just a little special something else. Not too spendy either. I'd say the OM24/2.8 is a close second (and much MUCH more compact).
     
  5. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    Most people are really missing out. ;) I guess there's also an older Zuiko Shift 35mm f/2.8, which doesn't look as impressive and only shifts (no tilt). I'd still like to try that one out if I could, though I wouldn't expect it to compare with the uber-fine Zuiko Shift 24mm f/3.5.
     
  6. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    I don't have one of these lenses (yet), but I have been wondering why there doesn't seem to be anything faster than f/2.8 in the legacy lenses when you get into these focal lengths?

    I assume there's some physics-based reason why it's not feasible (otherwise someone would have sold a bunch of 25mm f/1.4 lenses). Can someone enlighten me?
     
  7. LVL8hacker

    LVL8hacker Mu-43 Veteran

    322
    Jan 4, 2012
    Pinehurst, North Carolina
    Larry Anderson
    I love my OM 28mm f/3.5...I get great shots with it ...
     
  8. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    836
    Feb 29, 2012
    To cover 35mm and be wide and fast is quite difficult, and expensive to make. I have 24/2's and 28/2's by Kiron/Vivitar, but any native m43 lens will beat them for contrast, size and sharpness. That's why I got my 20/1.7.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Promit

    Promit Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 6, 2011
    Baltimore, MD
    Promit Roy
    I don't know the physics of it. All of the 28s and 24s designed for 35mm and faster than about 2.5 seem to be extremely soft wide open and tend to perform somewhat worse throughout the range -- at least until you get to the exotics:
    LEICA 24mm f/1.4 SUMMILUX-M ASPH (200:cool:
    Lens design strikes ms as a very interesting, very under-documented topic. Maybe a good graduate level optics textbook would shed some light on things (so to speak!) and bring things into focus (okay i'll stop now). I don't have the patience to work through that, though...
     
  10. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    Yeah, I love my 20mm f/1.7 and it's part of the reason I haven't really considered getting a 28mm f/2.8 -- there just doesn't seem to be much advantage to that combination of focal length and speed. As far as legacy lenses go I'm predisposed to the fast "nifty fifty"s (since the Oly 45 f/1.8 is not in my budget at the moment) and I'd like to try some of the longer primes 135mm f/3.5's, etc.

    I'm just starting to dip my toe into the adapted lens pool. Maybe there's something I'm missing with these legacy normal-equivalents, but at the moment I'm unconvinced. I'm sure once I get more comfortable shooting manual, I'll be in the market for one of these.
     
  11. pictor

    pictor Mu-43 Top Veteran

    636
    Jul 17, 2010
    I own a Canon FD 2.8/24mm, which I bought about twenty years ago, but I don't use it very often. Its quality seems to be fine, but my Canon FD 2/35mm seems to be better. Although I still have the romantic idea of having just one camera with a normal lens on it, I actually don't use the normal focal length very often. After analyzing my photographs in Lightroom I came to the insight, that I seem to prefer modest wide angle and modest telephoto lenses. I was very surprised how few photographs I took with normal focal lengths.
     
  12. mr_botak

    mr_botak Mu-43 Veteran

    222
    Dec 4, 2011
    Reading, UK
    David
    Interesting. How well does the PC work on MFT given that this becomes a 48mm equivalent? There is one available in my neck of the woods but it is ££££.

    In answer to the original topic - My OM Zuiko 2.8/28 is good as a slightly long standard, but I can't get excited about it. The adapter negates the size advantage, and actually I prefer either wider, or much longer so haven't used it much.

    Reasonable@f11
    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. tamrong

    tamrong Mu-43 Regular

    32
    Jul 17, 2010
    chiangmai, thailand
    computar 25mm f1.3 c-mount

    it's small and fast and it's pretty hard to find
     
  14. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Ad
    I have a bunch of Minolta lenses in this range because I collect Minolta 28mm lenses and can't resist other lenses as well :smile:. All my remarks here on the lenses relate to their use on my GH2.

    My favourite 28mm is this one. The earlier Rokkor 28/2 lenses are somewhat sharper in the center but way worse in the corners.

    http://www.smugmug.com/photos/i-xN5L8MB/1/L/i-xN5L8MB-L.jpg" border="1" />

    The Minolta 28/2.8 lenses are generally almost as good; the best samples seem to come from the Rokkor lenses with ø49mm filter thread.

    [img]http://www.smugmug.com/photos/i-GtJSrNw/1/L/i-GtJSrNw-L.jpg" border="1" />

    The [URL="http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/20264101_gz4T4S"]Minolta Rokkor MD 20/2.8[/URL] is a charming lens, sharp in the centre even wide-open and beautiful colours, but unsharp in the corners, it's no match for the Panny 20/1.7. I have 2 Minolta 24mm lenses, a [URL="http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/20264058_KQQxrs"]Rokkor 24/2.8[/URL] and an [URL="http://www.smugmug.com/gallery/21303022_NR2FRB"]MD 24/2.8[/URL]. The Rokkor 24/2.8's corner sharpness is not good enough for me, the MD 24/2.8 is a little bit better but still unimpressive. Anyway, I don't care for the 24mm focal length, just as I didn't like 50mm in the film days, I prefer the somewhat longish 28mm just as I preferred 55mm on my film cameras. These 24's may be up for sale at some point if and when I want to free up cash for other toys.

    In terms of sharpness the Zeiss 28/2.8 (Contax/Yashica mount) is the best I have, but I don't like its colour rendition as much, so in practice the Minolta MD 28/2.8 is in my bag more often.

    [img]http://www.smugmug.com/photos/1218576738_bunec-L-1.jpg" border="1" />
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Ad
    Thanks for sharing a full-size original, I always like to see what other lenses can do.
     
  16. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Bob
    I have a Sigma Super-Wide ll 24mm f2.8 Macro that I love. I use it mostly for macro shots and I have been very pleased with the results. I originally bought it to use with my 40D then began using it with :43: (It happened to be an Olympus mount). I didn't care for it with the Canon - too hard to use hand-held. With the E-P1 the ibis makes using it a pleasure.
    Because I had to get an adapter for using it with the E-P1 I ended up buying more Olympus legacy glass - I didn't want a bag full of adapters. It was a good choice, Only has some fine glass. :smile:
     
  17. wlewisiii

    wlewisiii Mu-43 Veteran

    239
    Dec 16, 2011
    Hayward, WI
    William Barnett-Lewis
    I have a Nikkor 35/2 that I use but I far prefer my Nikkor 24/2.8 for day to day shooting. All my Pre-AI lenses are delightful - good optics and cheap prices :) As for longer glass, I've not had too much need for it but you'd be hard pressed to beat my Nikkor-P 105/2.5. Seriously sweet lens.

    Now I had most of these already for my F2, but still I chose a E-PL1 as my first digital because I could get lots of good use out of the lenses I already own. Gotten me to buy more F mount lenses too :O
     
  18. Hikari

    Hikari Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 26, 2010
    I really liked the CV 21mm. Still, the Panasonic 20mm is better.
     
  19. harrysue

    harrysue Mu-43 Regular

    164
    Mar 12, 2011
    Konica made an AR 28mm f1.8 UC. There's always one for sale on ebay for $700, but who knows if that's a real market price or just fishing for a one time big sale.

    I have a Vivitar/Kiron 28mm f2, but mine disappoints if you want traditional sharpness in a lens. It gets sharp around f5.6 at which point I would be getting better images using my Oly 14-42. Have other 28mm f2.8's that work far better, but still prefer the kit lens. As a result, I have no favorite legacy lenses that have a "normal" field of view and would suggest saving money for the micro 43 offerings instead.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Lawrence A.

    Lawrence A. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 14, 2012
    New Mexico
    Larry
    That's what I've been using for something around 50mm (56 EFL). It works well, and you only use the sweet spot in the center, so some of the wide angle issues with distortion, etc. are pretty negligible. Here's a couple of shots: The 20mm pannie or PL 25mm will beat the pants off it, but it does pretty well, I think.

    AB185116. AB185118.