Nic
1 I should have been more specific - Nathan was speaking of using OM lenses
on a micro 4/3 digital body, in which case the handicapping applies. I
agree with you wholeheartedly that OM lenses remain sought-after by Canon FF
DSLR users.
2 Yes, you are reading correctly, but you are reading more into it than I
wrote. Fitting OM lenses to a Leica M rangefinder is not difficult at all.
As mentioned in a later repsonse to Wayne Harridge, I used an OM-LTM adaptor
custom-made by SRB-Griturn, in turn mounted on a Leitz-made LTM-M adaptor.
But note what lenses I was using - 18/3.5 and 28/3.5. No rangefinder
coupling needed! Thus no rocket science :-)
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: Nicholas Herndon [mailto:nherndon@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 12 April 2010 16:25
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [OM] Olympus OM Series adapters
--snip
>You might persuade me to wax lyrical about some other lenses, and less
>than lyrical about some highly prized (and priced) Olympus lenses -
>except that in using them on a digital body, you are automatically
>handicapping the lenses, because you are not getting to see (for
>instance) the edge-to-edge performance of the wide angles, and focusing
>them will be somewhat harder than on a film SLR body.
Not entirely true, the OMZ 21/3.5 has remained a sought after lens by full
frame Canon DSLR users due to its ability to outperform Canon lenses of the
same focal length. Plus, it costs less than $500.
--snip
>PS But that might change when you get your M9. The Kodachrome I just
>mentioned in another message was exposed in M and LTM bodies, with OM
>18 and
>28 glass :-)
Piers, am I reading this correctly? You adapted OMZ glass to a Leica M
rangefinder? How did you do this, and manage accurate rangefinder coupling?
I'm really curious.
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|