Recent G1 and u4/3 lens adapter web discussion.

<p>There is a lot of enthusiam out on the web for this u4/3 thing. Here I give you some sights to look at you will see why.<br /> <a rel="nofollow" href=" target="_blank">

<a rel="nofollow" href="http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fphotofan.jp%2Fcamera%2Fhtml%2Fmodules%2Fnewbb%2Fviewtopic.php%3Ftopic_id%3D5605%26forum%3D2%26post_id%3D50572%23forumpost50572" target="_blank">(link)</a> <br /> <a rel="nofollow" href="../leica-rangefinders-forum/00RsHW">http://www.photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00RsHW</a> <br /> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=947913" target="_blank">http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=947913</a><br>

The point is that their are a lot of great Canon FD, Pentax K, Konica, Minolta lenses out there and then there is us less wealthy Leica owners who can't afford an M8. We want to put our lenses to use. This camera has a small enough registration distance to accomodate our old lenses.<br /> Best For Last get a look at this a F0.95 25mm c mount lens including adapter for the Panasonic G1.<br /> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220324672488" target="_blank">http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220324672488</a><br>

Now if someone comes out with a fast 12mm lens we can a whole system of primes for the camera.</p>

<p>Harvey, if you are wealthy enough, you can buy some very very fast cinema lenses. While the C mount is a little further back than the M4/3 mount, it is also drastically narrower.</p>

<p>M4/3 is 20mm deep and 44mm wide.</p>

<p>C-mount is 17.5mm deep and 25mm wide.</p>

<p>It is a simple screw mount, so an adapter should be very easy for someone to make. Since 4/3's format is 13mm x 17.3mm, C-mount 16mm camera lenses may have troubles covering that completely. Doing a search for C-mount lens coverage, I found this article:<br>

<a href="http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=104501">http://forum.manualfocus.org/viewtopic.php?pid=104501</a></p>

<p>If you can live with the black corners, you can get yourself a 10mm f/1.2 C-mount lens and rock the party.</p>

<p>There are also VERY cheap CCTV lenses in C-mount out there, but I think the format is drastically smaller than 4/3's so they probably don't cover at all, and these are usually non-focusing lenses I think.</p>

<p>A thought... even if they don't cover, you could always crop the images square or set the camera to 16:9 and it might crop the black corners out.... which would look rather smart with a nice 10mm wide angle in panoramic!</p>

<p>It just show how much could be adapted to the micro 4/3 format. I have Leica M and Nikon F mount. I like the fact that with a few adapters I can cobble FF 35 mm format fast lenses like 50mm f1.2; 85mm f1.4 and 28mm F2, add a 11-16mm f2.8 DX lens. That alone will cover 22-32mm; 56mm; 100mm and 170mm. Then I still have Summicron 35mm Biogon 25mm for special high detail work. All my older fast lenses useful on a camera that can rock up to iso800. And if they can improve the sensors low light detail at 1600 and give us in camera image stabilization we are all set for available light. All these lenses are excellent in the center portion sweet spot and the camera at iso 100 ran with the likes of the Nikon D300 for resolution in the recently published magazine test.</p>

<p><img src="http://homepage.mac.com/godders/184-livingarc.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br /> <em>Panasonic G1 + Olympus ZD 25mm f/2.8<br /> ISO 400 @ f/2.8 @ 1/30 sec</em><br /> <br /> You don't even need exotic lenses to make satisfying photos. This one was taken around dawn yesterday morning in nice, soft, misty light. The Oly 25/2.8 is a $230 lens. <br /><br /> Godfrey</p>

<p>Godfrey, thats good, I read the Popphoto test of the G1 very good IQ and resolution at low ISO but they need to work on ISO 1600.<br>

I am waiting to see what Olympus comes up with.<br>

I don't need to buy too many lenses since I own a lot of them already and need adapters to u4/3.<br>

Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 is a lens I would add for wide end coverage.</p>

<p>Hi, Harvey,<br /> Tokina makes 11-16 only for Nikon G and Canon EF. Neither of them has an aperture control ring and thus cannot be used with G1 even with an adaptor, sorry to say.<br /> FWIW, Rayqual IS planning to make micro 4/3 adaptors for Contax/Yashica and Nikon F lenses, and Panasonic is planning to release 7-14/4.0 zoom and very attractive (at least for me) 20/1.7. So, just wait and see. :)</p>

<p>I been looking up alot of the specs for C mount lense. Because the lenses are in abundance and seem so inexpensive (for a little while, now that the word is out) i was lookig into them, because use of them may sway me into waiting a while to purchas a μ 4/3 System instead of an Olympus 4/3 camera i been eyeing. Form loking a many diffrent lens brands and findimng their tchnecal speck sheets i learned that alot of C mounts have a max coverage of 12.8mm x 9.6mm ( Ø 16mm ). Remember the the C mount lens was for 16mm film cameras origonally and the frame size was smaller after sprocket holes on 16mm wide film. SO all film lenses wer designed with the need to cover an image 12.35 mm wide, 7.49 mm high. I asume by stoping them down more coverage can be gained, but that slows up a fast lens. However the size factor of the lens is still somthing to be gained if not the speed , but how good will be the image quality at the corners? Trying to get lenses to cover a sensor that is about 17.3mm X 13mm should be the ideal goal. My personal conclusion is, yea i would rather go for a lens that was designed to cover, at the smallest, a frame of 22 X 16; which is the 35mm film movie camera format. I have not heard talk about those adapters yet tho. just my 2¢</p>

<p><img src="http://homepage.mac.com/godders/185-daisyinchworm.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br /> <em>Panasonic G1 + Olympus ZD 25mm f/2.8<br /> ISO 800 @ f/5 @ 1/30 second</em><br /> <br /> Dan: <br /> Most C mount lenses won't cover a 13x17.3 mm format nor matter how much you stop them down. However, you could use them anyway: just consider the format to be the central square of the frame. <br /><br /> Harvey: <br /> While I am not particularly likely to use the G1 for color work in large prints at ISO 1600, it's really not particularly bad. I do tend to keep it down in the 100-400 range most of the time, but ISO 800 and 1600 have both returned good results. <br /><br /> May 2009 prove fortunate and healthy for all! <br /><br /> Godfrey</p>

<p>Akira, I just looked at the Tokina site and the photozone.de test of the lens on a Canon mount and it has an aperture ring so its not a G lens. Maybe you are thinking it has no af mf switch because it has a clutch that lets you manually focus on demand. Also it doesn't appearentlly work on the Nikon D40 since its not AFS it uses a micro motor.<br>

Dan, is the mount for the 35mm movie camera also C mount, I found your observation below most interesting. Sounds like it would be the smallest size that would cover the whole frame.<br>

My personal conclusion is, yea i would rather go for a lens that was designed to cover, at the smallest, a frame of 22 X 16; which is the 35mm film movie camera format. I have not heard talk about those adapters yet tho. just my 2¢</p>

<p>Harvey,<br /> I'm afraid you seem to have taken the zoom ring and its focal length scale markings for aperture ring and its markings.<br /> Canon EF lenses are designed as pure electronically coupled ones and all the Nikon "DX" lenses are of G-type.<br /> Tokina 11-16 is designed for APS-C (which equals Nikon DX) format digital cameras, so the lenses for both Nikon and Canon mounts don't have aperture rings to control apertures manually although manual focussing and zooming are possible.</p>

<p>Akira I looked again and your right the 16 I saw was not F16 its 16mm, It is in the spot where I expected the aperture ring. Too bad that lens is really a perfect one for this purpose, I will have to look at all the 12-24 lenses out there to see if any of the Nikon ones have standard aperture rings.<br>

This is the real reason manufacturers stopped making lenses with aperature rings so they can use the electronic interface to make it harder to adapt lenses for their cameras and therefore you will buy their OEM lenses.</p>

<p>Harvey,<br>

If the speed of f2.8 is not the absolute criterion for your need of wide zoom, Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm/f4-5.6 may work for you.<br>

According to the compatibility chart on the website of Panasonic (Japan), the lens can be used on G1 via 4/2-Micro4/3 adaptor (DMW-MA1). You can then use all the automatic exposure and single-mode AF function.<br>

Hope this would be of any help.</p>

<p>Akira<br>

Following on your point look at this Olympus lens tested on Pop Photo.<br>

http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/5033/lens-test-olympus-zuiko-digital-12-60mm-f28-4-swd-af-specifications-sqf-page2.html</p>

<p>Akira<br>

Here is another lens Olympus makes , Pop Photo shot some pictures and posted them<br>

Their test report is not done yet but this is the 7-14mm f/4.0 lens. This is equivalent of 14-28mm lens. Look at the slide show.<br>

http://www.popphoto.com/cameralenses/4985/going-ultrawide-with-the-olympus-e-3.html</p>

<p>Harvey,<br>

Thank you for the link. Yeah, they are excellent and attractive lenses. The only problem is that neither of them autofocus on G1 with DMW-MA1 adaptor. Currently, none of the Sigma 4/3 lenses autofocus on G1 (with DMW-MA1) either. I'm not sure if the firmware upgrade would solve the problem, as was the case with some of Olympus and Panasonic 4/3 lenses.</p>

<p>wow i wrote this whole long responce the other day and i know i clicked confirm and all that , but i dont see it now today.. this is strange.. OK well im feling lazy today so ill sum up what i wrote .. Umm</p>

<ul>

<li>croping the Vignets from a pic taken with a C-mount turns the Lumix into an 8.8mp Square shooter.. not bad tho, i still like it .. Especially cuz its square. I wish more Cameras wer.</li>

<li>Harvey.. Shhhhh! youll drive the prices of C-mounts up now.. That Auction site has enough inflated cost items alredy..lol. Actually most of my long dissapperaed post was to you about the 35mm movie lenses. So far no one has made and adapter for those, but they are not cheeper thain 35mm still film camera lenses and I have not seen any that are wider angle thain what a 35mm still camera offered.</li>

<li>Godfrey, I hate you. Your an awsom photographer i think, and i realy enjoy looking at what you shoot. Also your almost convincing me to go for a G-1. Although i can bearly afford an Olympus right now, so it means waiting a year. Maby even two if i have to wait till im finished with school. I still dont own a digital camera yet.</li>

</ul>

<p>Thanks Dan for your post, I sometimes forget that I have to click SUBMIT and then CONFIRM or nothing gets posted.<br>

So Olympus has 3 lenses that go wide enough to fill the gap in our 35mm film cameras<br>

7-14mm / / 9-18mm/ / 12-60mm. Personally I think for me the 12 to 60 would be fine since I rarely use wider than 24mm for standard 3:2 aspect ratio of 35mm and the 4:5 of the u4/3 format is more square. I don't know about you but I like wide pano shots of landscapes and hope to do some of that with other gear so for me an equivalent of 24mm is plenty wide enough.<br>

Olympus is going to come up with something like the G1 with I hope in camera image stabilization so lens interface issues would be no problem.</p>

<p>I saw this post on rangefinderforum, it shows some pictures of Leica mount rangefinder lenses mounted on a G1 using a brass metal adapted. Its very colorful, especially the red camera.<br>

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=68074</p>

<p>i am really looking forward to seeing what oly is going to do also, a range finder with super fast lenses would prolly outsell leica 10-1 or more. especially if the cost is 1/6th that of the m8/8.2's</p>

<p>Given the extremely positive reviews and owner feedback on how the HD lcd EVf is this is better than reflex and rangefinders in low light.</p>

<p>If we do some math we can figure out how much of the sensor is used for the other "formats" of the camera, or in square cropping.</p>

<p>4000 x 3000 @ 4:3 = 17.3 x 13mm. diag = 21.6mm<br>

4000 x 2672 @ 3:2 = 17.3 x 11.6mm. diag = 20.8mm<br>

4000 x 2248 @ 16:9 = 17.3 x 9.7mm. diag = 19.8mm<br>

3000 x 3000 @ 1:1 = 13mm x 13mm. diag = 18.4mm</p>

<p>So, a regular 16mm cine lens is designed to cover around 10 x 7mm and Super 16 lenses are designed to cover around 12 x 7mm. Both are somewhat smaller than even those crops of 4/3's.... but personally, I think black corners work well with super-wide lenses anyway.... which is one area that cine lenses dramatically out-run the 4/3's line-up. Maybe Olympus will offer a compact super-wide as part of their entry. An 11mm scaled-down version of the TINY 21mm f/3.5 OM would be really attractive for M-4/3 to many users I think.</p>

 

<p>Dan wrote<br>

My personal conclusion is, yea i would rather go for a lens that was designed to cover, at the smallest, a frame of 22 X 16; which is the 35mm film movie camera format. I have not heard talk about those adapters yet tho. just my 2¢<br>

Patrick what do you think of Dan's point, and do you know if there is a mount that would enable us to use these on a G1.</p>

<p>I posted a new info on another possibility of mount adaptor here:<br>

http://www.photo.net/olympus-camera-forum/00RzIJ<br>

Hope you enjoy it. :)</p>