Another question, relating to this link:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/olympus-trip-35-camera-1-28-f-40mm-lense_W0QQitemZ220166924034QQihZ012QQcategoryZ15239QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Anyone know if the lens that is on this olympus trip 35 would be OM
compatible??
matt
On 09/11/2007, Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> You need to differentiate strongly between Olympus OM mount film cameras
> (manual focus, mostly mechanical and first released in 1973) and the
> more modern Olympus 4/3 mount digital cameras announced starting with
> the E-1 in 2003... some 30 years later.
>
> Only independent lens makers such as Tamron, Tokina, Vivitar, Soligor
> and a host of others made OM mount lenses besides Olympus. The Olympus
> OM mount was considered proprietary and no other manufacturers ever made
> OM mount camera bodies. The 4/3 mount, on the other hand, is considered
> an "open" standard. Not free but you can get the specs and build your
> own if you like. Leica and Panasonic also build 4/3 mount cameras and
> lenses and since the 4/3 mount is a standard their 4/3 mount lenses will
> also fit Olympus 4/3 bodies and vice-versa.
>
> All camera mounts have what's called a "registration distance". This is
> the distance where the lens comes to infinity focus behind the base of
> the lens flange or the distance from the camera's lens flange to the
> surface of the film or sensor. In the case of 4/3 bodies this distance
> is rather short compared to an OM body or 1/2 dozen other contemporary
> film camera bodies such as Nikon. Since the OM registration distance is
> longer than the 4/3 body it's possible to build a mechanical adapter to
> join the disparate bayonet mounts while still having enough room to
> spare that the OM lens can still reach infinity focus on the 4/3 body.
> The same goes for Nikon mount lenses and some others.
>
> But this most definitely does not work in reverse. You can't put a 4/3
> lens on an OM body since its registration distance is not long enough
> for the lens to focus on the film at infinity. And even if you could
> the lens isn't designed to provide an image circle large enough to cover
> 35mm film.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
>
> Matthew Granger wrote:
> > So the correct term for the OM style mount is bayonet mount M-1?
> >
> > Also, I heard that other brands (maybe Leica?) make lenses that fit onto
> OM
> > or Olympus digital. Can anyone tell me where to get info on this?
> >
> > matt
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
--
Matt
-----------------------------------
There are 3 secrets to success:
- always keep your eyes and ears open,
- never share all that you know.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|