Many thanks to all for comprehensive answers. It really seems like the
one I bought is not functioning well and should be returned.
You all wrote that all adapters should firmly attach to the lens. Am I
right if I assume that when you attach the lens to the adapter, you
should hear and feel a click when it is locked? And then you can
remove the adapter by pressing the release button on the lens?
There was atleast one vote for the Fotodiox adapter. That was the one
I was looking for next. From the marketing photos it seems better
built than the 10$ adapters but is not as expensive as for example
Cameraquest ones. Are there more votes for Fotodiox?
Do you consider that focusing with OM lenses on Canon body is easier
by using the viewfinder or the live view LCD?
I read a lot from several forums about the AF confirm chips. Some
people say that it works like a charm. Some say that it is always a
little out of focus. So I am wondering if it really is worth paying
extra for a that feature. Well, 10$ here or there. Apparently at least
there should not be any risk of electronically harming the body...?
Sad to hear that the exposure is not absolutely accurate with OM
lenses. I too shoot only raw so it helps a little. If live view LCD
focusing is easy, then I would assume it to be easy to check the
exposure before the shoot from the live histogram. I guess...
Simple questions, but I want to know what I am going into :-)
For your information, I really do not need infinity focus. I will
attach my 90/2.0 and 50/3.5 with and without extension tubes or even
bellows to the body. I can't remember a single shot with my E-1 with
OM lens at infinity focus :-)
Best regards,
Olli
2011/3/10 Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On 3/9/2011 11:57 AM, O. H. wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> If you decided to continue reading, I am most probably buying a Canon.
>> I would rather go for Nikon but I assume that there are no adapters
>> for OM to Nikon available. If there are, please let me know!
>
> The simple answer is that adapters that you want to use, i.e. simple and
> without additional lenses in them, are only
> available for 4/3, micro 4/3 and Canon EOS (And perhaps other, more recent,
> mirror less cameras?) (The actual name of
> the lens mount on EOS cameras is 'EF'.)
>
> The reason is that the distance from lens mount to film/sensor of all other
> the mounts is to long to leave room for the
> adapter body between lens and camera body.
>
>> I would appreciate if you could help me with the following questions:
>>
>> 1) Is there any OM to EOS adapter that allows the lens to firmly
>> attach to the adapter? I already bought a very cheap adapter (to test
>> lenses with camera shop's body) and noticed that the lens does not
>> lock into the adapter. So when I am rotating the focus ring, the lens
>> might fall off! I am seeking an adapter that has a locking mechanism
>> with a relief button for the lens. So are there such at all?
>
> As others have pointed out, your experience is not common. Most adapters lock
> properly in both ways, adapter to body and
> lens to adapter. The one you bought is faulty, and should be returned.
>
> Mike and Nathan have pointed out expensive and really expensive models. I've
> been completely happy with the cheap one I
> bought from China.These are really simple, two piece devices, with one being
> the stop down tab screw. There's not a lot
> to go wrong.
>
> Especially as you are just trying this out, I would buy an inexpensive one to
> start with. Rather than the cheapest one,
> from a 25 feedback seller in China Chuck linked to, I'd spend 9¢ more and buy
> from Big-IS, still in China, but with
> excellent feedback on over 20,000 transactions.
>
> I think if you polled the list, you would find the vast majority of those who
> have bought inexpensive ones off the 'Bay
> have found them fine. I can't imagine in what way mine could be better.
>
>> 2) Is there any OM to EOS adapter that would NOT allow focus to
>> infinity? Such a adapter would be thicker and would allow mostly
>> macrophotography (that would be OK with me). Such an adaptor could
>> much easily have good locking mechanism.
>
> Never heard of such a thing. There are at least three reasons:
>
> 1. Not necessary. Even very inexpensive adapters that focus to infinity lock
> properly. If you look at how the locks
> work, it is quite simple to implement.
>
> 2. No one would intentionally buy into such trouble. No matter how you warn
> them, some folks would buy them, then
> complain that they didn't "focus right".
>
> 3. A proper adapter and extension tubes is much more flexible.
>
>> 3) Is there any OM to EOS adapter that would change the aperture as I
>> turn the aperture ring? I mean similarly as in Olympus OM to 4/3
>> adapter. The cheap OM to EOS adapter I bought, I have to manually
>> press the depth of field preview button so that the aperture sets to
>> correct. Well, this is good for focusing, but for macrophotography
>> aspects I would rather have similar action as with OM to 4/3 adapter.
>
> As someone else has pointed out, the way you want it to work is the way the
> vast majority of adapters work. Again, you
> bought a bad model/design.
>
>> 4) Do you find the OM to EOS adapters basically OK for use? With this
>> I mostly mean that are the Canon bodies really good at measuring the
>> exposure?
>
> No, the simple ones can't be relied on for correct exposure with all lenses
> at all apertures. It appears the camera
> needs to know the focal length and/or aperture to correctly interpret the
> light falling on it.
>
> This is true of Oly 4/3 camera bodies, as well. When they first, reluctantly,
> brought out an OM=>4/3 adapter, they only
> approved it for a limited set of OM mount Zuikos. Later, they came out with a
> table showing EV adjustments necessary for
> many others, aperture by aperture.
>
> When I got my first DSLR, a Canon 300D, and a hand machined adapter (unlike
> anything you will see today!), I did some
> simple testing with a 50/1.4 Zuiko. Auto exposure was uneven, tending to
> overexposure as the lens opened up. Manual
> exposure was much better, only slightly brighter at f1.4.
>
> With Sigma 600/8, for a more extreme case, my 5D needs something like two
> stops less exposure than the meter says. For
> slow work like much landscape, macro, etc. it's not a big deal, as one
> shoots. looks at the LCD, adjusts, shoots again .
> . . And for repeated setups, maybe take notes. Remember, test shots later
> deleted have almost no cost at all.
>
> There are adapters with chips that connect to the AF system to confirm
> correct focus. The fancier ones allow you to
> program them using the camera so they report the correct focal length when
> you shoot. I've heard it claimed that they
> make auto exposure more accurate. I don't know myself.
>
>> 5) Once again: are there any adapters (without changing parts of the lens)
>> to fit OM lens to Nikon? I don't really need focus to infinity.
>
> No there aren't, other than the mount replacements Mike referenced. And yes
> you do need infinity focus. Unless you are
> one in many million. You are going to want it sooner, rather than later.
>
> I started with Zuikos on my Canon DSLRs and one basic Canon auto lens for
> casual use. I now I almost never use OM mount
> lenses on it except for specialty uses, like the super teles, the macro
> lenses with tube or bellows, etc. BTW, the
> Tamron 90/2.8 is a really excellent and reasonably priced auto macro lens
> available in EOS mount.
>
> Moose
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|