Nikon Lens to Olympus 4/3 camera

[Mary Doo]

<p>Never thought I would ask this question, but here I am ...</p>

<p>I have thought about this for a while and have finally bought an Olympus OM-D E-M1 EM1 camera. I had a dual system in mind: Use Olympus (with its lighter non-obtrusive body) for travels/landscapes, reserving the clunky Nikon with its longer lenses for wildlife.</p>

<p>Now I am thinking perhaps it won't be bad to be able to attach some Nikon lenses on this camera every once in a while, such as the 80-400 afs.</p>

<p>There are indeed some adapter(s) but I don't see many details about them. I do understand there will be compromises.</p>

<p>If you know something about this, would you please share your knowledge? I welcome any comment, caution, and recommendation. For example, is there any adapter that retains automatic focus on the Nikon lens?</p>

<p>Thanks in advance.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>There is no adapter that retains AF. I don't believe there is one that controls the aperture either. Mine is fully manual and does allow you to control the aperture manually even with G lenses.</p>

<p>Olympus and Panasonic/Lumix lenses offer exceptional sharpness, are light in weight and pair perfectly with the m43 system. Although I originally intended to use some of my Nikon lenses on my EM1, I never do. There is no reason to. I get better IQ with Olympus lenses on my Olympus body that I do using the Nikon equivalents on an Olympus body. Additionally, since I shoot RAW and process my images with software that offers lens specific corrections which are not available with Nikon lenses on the Olympus body, it makes a lot more sense to shoot with lenses supported by the software I use. As with Nikon, Olympus does have limited in-camera lens corrections of supported lenses which is of course, not available when using a Nikon lens with an adapter.<br>

<br /> The commonly used Olympus/Panasonic lenses are reasonably priced, especially used and are worth investing in for your new camera in order to get the most out of your new system.</p>

[Mary Doo]

<p>Elliot, I do intend to use Olympus/Panasonic lenses on this camera. Hwvr, Olympus currently does not have the range with the quality equivalent to Nikon 70-200 or 80-400. Hence my question.<br /> <br /> By the way, which adapter do you use, or recommend?</p>

[elliot1]

<p>This is the lens you want, the new Olympus 40-150 2.8 (FOV 80-300mm). There is a matching TC which will give you 420mm FOV. You won't be disappointed! </p>

<p>The adapter I bought is just a cheepie one out of China that I picked up about 5 years ago when I bought my first Olympus digital body, the EPL1. Adapters sell for well under $50.</p>

 

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I use one of those adaptors to use my Nikon 55mm f3.5 micro (only Nikon lens I kept) with my Oly EM-5.</p>

<p>I wouldn't dream of trying to use that on something that was moving, though, in MF, with the adaptor. That setup will disappoint every time.</p>

[johnfarrar]

<p>Mary, I've gone the same route, with a D800 as main camera but a EM5 for lightweight carrying in mountains etc. Never regretted it! All the above advice is sound; I bought the expensive Novoflex adapter for putting Nikon lenses on the EM5, now hardly use it (probably the most-used combination is the Nikon-fit Sigma 150/2.8 macro, with built-in tripod foot - balances easily on a b+s head). Some of the Olympus lenses are superb - the 45/1.8 and 75/1.8 especially so. Haven't used the new 40-150 Elliot mentions. And of course for wide angles, you have to go M43 because of the crop factor. So: why not buy a cheap, G-lens compatible adapter, see how much you use the Nikon lenses, and keep a bit of money back until you crack and buy M43 lenses.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I bought this adapter to use with my 55mm micro.</p>

<p>It works terrific, but it would be a pain in the neck with a G lens. Yes, you can control the aperture, but no, you have no idea exactly what aperture you're set to.</p>

<p>http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003Y2XN9G/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o06_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1</p>

[Mary Doo]

<p>Elliot, Re Olympus 40-150 f2.8, it seems a logical extension from the 12-40mm f2.8, but for now I am not sure what to think of it because it's too bulky for the idea of the 4/3 micro system. Alternately I have ordered the tiny and inexpensive f4 version - Lesser quality for sure, but perhaps it would suffice as a walk-around casual.</p>

<p>John, I like the 75mm f1.8 a lot. Will consider it after experimenting with this new system a bit. <br /><br />Re adapter: Will try it out. </p>

<p>I am so looking forward to these new compact equipment. I expect to not feel much of their presence inside my pocket book in weight and bulk (?) 0:)</p>

<p>Thank you so much for sharing your experiences!</p>

[elliot1]

<p>The Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 is much smaller and lighter than Nikon's equivalent. Compared to the size and weight of the 80-400mm, the 40-150mm is small. But for m43, it is a bit on the large size. But it delivers where it counts!</p>

<p>The consumer version you ordered is very light in weight (amazingly light) and quite sharp. I have this lens. Needless to say you will not be disappointed with it! But it is a variable aperture lens and starts at f4 so it is not good for low light shooting. I am sure you will enjoy it.</p>

<p> </p>

[Mary Doo]

<p>Elliott, glad you like the F4 version as well. I look forward to trying it. The F2.8 version looks and weighs closer to a Nikon lens at 31.04 oz, almost the exact weight as the Nikon 24-70mm, which is 31.07 oz.</p>

<p>Here are some weight stats for comparison. - Did it for myself but think it may be of interest to others as well:<br>

Olympus EM1 Camera (17.44oz) + <br />Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 (13.47oz) + <br />Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 (31.04 oz) = 61.95oz = 3.87 lbs --> almost 4 lbs.</p>

<p>The consumer 40-150mm f4(weighing at 6.7oz) takes 24.34oz off the 12-150mm package range, bringing the total down to 37.61oz = 1.98 lbs.</p>

<p>The difference is quite dramatic!</p>

[elliot1]

<p>You are correct about the weight of the lens, but you are not comparing apples to apples.</p>

<p>The Nikon 70-200mm VRII weighs in at almost 3 1/2 lbs. As does the Nikon 80-400mm (which is also a variable/slower aperture lens).</p>

<p>So the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 is quite a bit lighter in the same zoom range by comparison, and yes, a bit heavy by m43 standards, BUT it is after all a pro lens with a fast aperture with many advantages to the photographer for low light shooting. As with Nikon lenses, when it comes to IQ, the Olympus consumer versions of their pro lenses tend to offer excellent IQ.<br /> <br /> So the bottom lines is that the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 (FOV 80-300) weighing in at the same weight as the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 is fantastic for someone that needs the advantages of fast pro glass on a long zoom lens for a small camera body.</p>

<p>So given the choice of a 2 lb lens Olympus lens with AF Vs a 3 1/2 lb Nikon having to be used fully manually on an Olympus body, well, to me the choice is obvious. And if you don't need a fast aperture lens, the choice is even more obvious, as it appears it was for you. Good luck and enjoy your new lens and body!</p>

<p> </p>

[Mary Doo]

<p>Elliot, thanks for your analogy. For me (at least at this time) the very idea of using the 4/3 system is the convenience of lightweight and compactness. Therefore any 4/3 lens that's over one lb. is reason for elimination.<br /> <br /> The Nikon system is a different mindset - and I don't have a problem of carrying these heavy equipment.</p>

<p>Also, don't forget, the 2 lb. Olympus 40-150 in dicussion only goes up to 150mm (not Nikon's 70-200 or 80-400), which was the reason why I asked about the adapter. Anyhow, I may never use Nikon on the 4/3 system anyway. It's just good to know the possibilities.</p>

<p>Curious: Are you mostly using the Olympus now, or are you still using Nikon a lot?</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>A bit belatedly, I thought I'd report that I did get a (non-G, couldn't find a cheap one at the time) F-to-micro4/3 adaptor a while back. My GF2 doesn't get used much - strictly, it was bought for my wife as a camera that was less of a faff to carry around than my DSLRs. She wanted to take advantage of the fact that I was carrying a load of lenses around anyway. I've occasionally used it with my 50mm f/1.8 AF-D, my 135 f/2.8 AI-S and an F-to-T adaptor for my Dobsonian. Anything bigger than the 135 f/2.8 doesn't really make much sense on a tiny body, though it gives a little more pixel density for the Dobsonian than my D800.<br />

<br />

The GF2 mostly lives with its 14-42 PZ pancake zoom, with the occasional appearance from a pancake prime. It's a bit more pocketable than my V1 because the lenses are thinner - I should get the CX-to-F adaptor some day, too. I may have different uses if I had a more SLR-like micro 4/3 body. Unless I'm actually trying to get it in a pocket (and I have a cell phone with a camera, ta) I don't really have a problem with putting a small lens on a DSLR, mostly. And it's amazing what a 500/4 - or Dobsonian - will train you to define as "small". The GF2 is barely coat-pocketable, but if I want a decent small camera I'd be looking at an RX100-III (which I would, if they were cheaper), not interchangeable lenses.</p>

[michael_chuang1]

<p>Hello Mary,<br /> I bought an EM1 with 12-40 about a year ago, and also intended to use my Nikon-mount telephotos via adapter. I used some no-name, made-in-China thing from Ebay. That worked okay, mostly. Setting exposure (semi)manually did not seem to hinder me appreciably, but I did miss AF for critter purposes. I don't yet own the 40-150/2.8, but have played with one at a local show (where the Olympus dealer brought his wares) and it is well balanced on the EM1 body. It is indeed largish for m43, but my thinking is that it is much smaller and lighter than the nominally equivalent DX/FX lens (to my mind the Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VR or the Sigma 100-300 straight f/4 -- I appreciate the DOF "equivalence" arguments, but frankly I like having a little extra DOF with telephoto, for the most part).</p>

<p>Over the last year I went from Nikon DX to nearly 100% shooting with m43 and have been satisfied. I initially thought of m43 as the "second string, compact, travel" kit, and DX as my "real photography" kit, but that's changed with the EM1 and its "kit zoom" whereas before I was using a Panasonic GF2 for m43. (Bear in mind that I'm a bitter clinger to the D300 body, however.) Presently for m43 telephoto purposes I use the (non micro) 4/3rds 50-200/2.8-3.5 zoom with the MMF3 adapter. This combination gives decent phase-detect AF on the EM1. The 50-200 is bigger than the 40-150/2.8, yet I find packing the EM1 with 12-40 and 50-200+MMF3 still much more convenient than say D300 with 16-50/2.8 and 100-300/4 or AF Nikkor 300/4. So the kit is large for m43, but small compared to my old DX kit.</p>

<p>The old 4/3rds lenses AF adequately with the MMF3 on the EM1, but AF is hopelessly poor with the MMF3 on Panasonic bodies, so those are not great backup/alternate bodies if you use 4/3rds lenses. I'm looking forward to the 40-150/2.8 which also has a matched 1.4x converter, as you know. When the m43-mount 300/4 arrives I will be very happy. Poorer, but happy.</p>

<p>The current "real photography" set up is EM1, 12-40/2.8 native m43, and with the MMF3 adapter the old 4/3rds Zuiko 50/2 macro and the 50-200/2.8-3.5. A more compact 2-lens travel kit (where I might take pictures, but photography is not the reason for travel) is the EM1, 12-40 and Panasonic 45-200/4-5.6 zoom.</p>

[Mary Doo]

<p>Thanks for all the info Michael. I will look at each piece and try to have a better understanding. By the way, John Farrar, I couldn't help buying the 75mm f/1.8 after reading more reviews and seeing more images. The optical quality is top-notch! Now I am anxiously awaiting the arrival of each item. :)</p>

[User_2000406]

<p>Mary, you may want to consider this issue: http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014/07/sensor-stack-thickness-part-iii-the-summary . The linked article explains why putting an SLR lens on a M43 camera will cause some degradation of the image due to the thicker sensor glass on these cameras. </p>

<p>One way around that is to use a Speed Booster http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/995465-REG/metabones_mb_spnfg_m43_bm1_nikon_g_to_micro.html, which among other things adjusts for this difference. Also, you will lose some telephoto reach (but still have more reach than with the Nikon) while gaining a stop. I used the 80-400 AFS on the E-M1 with the Speed Booster one time and got good* results but I have not tested the combination under diverse conditions.</p>

<p>I've also used the 75/1.8 on the E-M1 and gotten great results. The bokeh is wonderful for portraits.</p>

<p>*I don't mean to suggest that this is not an exciting combo, it's just the the subject matter was far away, low-contrast, and not made to be a strong image.</p>

[john_narsuitus]

<blockquote>

<p>"If you know something about this, would you please share your knowledge? I welcome any comment, caution, and recommendation."</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />A few years ago, I purchased an inexpensive adapter that allowed me to mount my Nikon lenses on my micro 4/3 Olympus camera bodies. After I used it the first time, I was unable to remove the adapter from the lens. I ended up damaging the adapter beyond repair because I had to use screw driver and pliers to remove it.</p>

<p>I ordered a higher priced Nikon to m4/3 adapter from a different provider (Fotodiox). The adapter from Fotodiox worked perfectly.</p>

<p>In this photo, I have mounted my E-p1 to a tripod mounted Nikon 1000mm mirror lens with a 2X teleconverter. This combination gives me an angle-of-view that is equivalent to a 4000mm lens on a 35mm camera. This focal length is something that I cannot easily duplicate on the 35mm and DX Nikon systems that I still use.</p>

<p> </div>

[john_narsuitus]

<p>At one time, I did most of my shooting with a 35mm SLR and a 35mm rangefinder. Since the lenses were not interchangeable, I had two separate systems.</p>

<p>I now do most of my shooting with a digital SLR and a digital compact. At first, I tried using my Nikon lenses on my digital compact but discovered that the micro 4/3 lenses worked better on the micro 4/3 bodies. I am now, once again, using two separate lens systems.</p>

<p> </div>

[Mary Doo]

<p>Hi folks, this is such an interesting discussion. I have learned quite a bit in the last few days. Today (last night?) on my photo-club meet, a friend let me use his EM1 + 75mm f/1.8 lens and I tested it (using the safe-and-sure "P" mode) on the speaker and his slideshow. Just about every shot came out well, even in the dark.</p>

<p>Oh, do you know that you can use the IPhone to control the EM1 remotely? Think it just about works like the CamRanger without the extra cost. See: "<a href="http://blog.william-porter.net/2013/12/wireless-control-of-olympus-om-d-e-m1.html">Wireless control of Olympus OM-D E-M1 with OI.Share app</a>". This photographer (William Porter) helps to clarify the tethering process. My friend demonstrated it but I have yet to try it.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone!</p>

[Mary Doo]

<p>I kept saying "4/3 system" in my previous posts. What I really meant was "micro 4/3 system". I was not clearly aware of the differences until a few days ago.</p>

<p>Thanks for all your comments.</p>