Siddiq wrote:
>I know there are a few OM/Zuiko users who've mounted their glass on Canon
>EOS bodies since the latter's film to flange distance is more than the
>former's--mechanically coupled. I'd like to get some user info, looking to
>get a D30, maybe.
>
I personally wouldn't go as far back as the D30. So many things beyond
megapixels have improved since then. I first tried the idea out with a
borrowed D60. I was pretty pleased overall with the results
<http://www.geocities.com/dreammoose/D60/index.htm>, but the camera is
pretty big and heavy. I ended up with a 300D and find it an excellent
camera that works well with OM mount lenses and the adapter. On the
other hand, the E300 is now out and getting cheaper and comes with a
free OM adapter, which is about a $200 (with tax and shipping) advantage
over buying an adapter for Can*n. Certainly it is a better camera than
the old D30.
To quote myself from an answer to an earlier question on the same subject:
________________________________________________________________________________
1) Will any of my glass be of practical use with the 10D (I have about 20
lenses from 21 to 500) with an adapter?
Yes, all of them will work on the 10D with an adapter, which is $175
last time I looked. The field of view (FOV) multiplier is 1.6 because
the digital sensor is smaller than 35mm film. So the 21mm becomes the
equivalent of 35mm and 500mm becomes 800mm eq. For people who like
normal and tele lenses, this is great. For those who like side and super
wide, it is a problem with existing lenses, although wider lenses for
these camera are available and more are coming.
The big loss in using OM lenses on the 10D is auto diaphram operation.
The adapter can be set up 2 ways. 1st. it simply pushes the diaphram
stop down tab on the lens as the lens is mounted on the adapter. Then
moving the aperture ring opens and closes the aperture as you do it,
rather than when you press the shutter release. This means you have to
open the lens up to focus, then move it to shooting aperture before
pressing the release. One learns to count clicks. 2nd. because the OM
DOF preview button is on the lens, not the body like most makes, the
other mode leaves the diaphram stop pin untouched, so the aperture only
closes down when the DOF preview button on the lesn is pressed. So you
frame and focus wide open, but have to press the DOF button to see what
shutter speed will be selected and when actually taking the picture.
I think the 1st method is what most people end up settling on. Shutter
speed can be either auto in AE mode or manually set. Obviously, all the
other modes that depend on the camera body seting the aperture, won't
work with MF lenses.
For relatively slow/fixed work MF lenses work very well. Really no
problem at all for macro and landscape or posed portraits For taking
pics of active kids, sports, etc. it's not a great solution unless you
are shooting wide open, where it makes no difference. I have a 300D and
have used my OM mount lenses to good effect. I also bought a used
24-85/3.5-4.5 USM AF lens for snapshots and other casual shooting where
AF and auto diaphram are really the way to go. It's really quite a good
lens as it turns out.
The other issue is focusing. The viewfinder is smaller and possibly a
bit less bright (depends on who you listen to) than on a 35mm SLR and
the viewing screen is not designed to assist manual focusing. Some
people find it hard to focus normal and wide angle lenses. I find
moderate WA through tele lenses pretty easy to focus. For super wides,
the distance ring on the lens and good DOF may have to be your friends.
> 2) Since people on this list shoot both, what are the relative merits of the
> 10D versus the E1? Is there any real advantage to staying with Olympus?
>
>
C.H. bought a 10D and used it a lot with his OM lenses. He later sold it
and bought an E-1. I'm not sure if anybody else on the list has real
experience with both. His oddessy, with valuable comments and sample
pics, is in the archives. Some of his resons centered on the Can*n AF
lenses, others on the body/sensor system. In broad perspective, both are
excellent cameras.
________________________________________________________________________________
When the question of exposure accuracy with manual lenses came up later,
I posted:
________________________________________________________________________________
OK, so I did a test on the 300D with a 50/1.4
<http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/300Dexp.jpg>.
Should be pretty self-explanatory.
Top row were taken in Auto Mode, starting with f1.4. I just took a shot,
moved the aperture one notch and took another, etc. Bottom row the same
except I adjusted the little arrow to set "match needle" exposure by
changing the shutter speed. All the speeds are those in the EXIF data
from the camera.
Subject is a poster of a Van Gogh painting, in case you were wondering
what would look so odd in the small size.
Looking at the histograms, best exposure is about f2.8@1/80 and
f2@1/160, iso 800, equivalent exposures found in #3, top row and #2,
bottom row. Looks like 300D weirdness is in the opposite direction from
E-1 weirdness, getting darker with smaller apertures. Obviously it is
not linear, settling at about f2.8-f4 with this lens and light level,
then staying pretty much the same. Getting an idea of what is going on
requires a whole set of exposures, particularly at large apertures. The
first 2 Auto shots are definitely overexposed with some blown out
highlights.
While Auto uses evaluative exposure on the 300D, Manual Mode uses center
weighted, with much more stable results. I could just add 1/3 stop plus
exposure compensation and be good an any aperture.
________________________________________________________________________________
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
