OK, What are the dis/advantages of having the OM lenses available for the new
E-4/3-Digitl SLR?
This doesn't consider the hassle of possible stop-down metering requirements.
We don't know how this mythical adapter works yet. Since Olympus removed it
from their PR picture, it's not real yet and could be vaporware. I.e., don't
get your hopes up too high....yet.
Dis
1. The fisheye lenses don't give you a full 180 degrees corner-to-corner, as
you only use the central portion of the frame, negating much of the effect. I
guess you could use the 8mm lens, but it seems a bit overkill.
2. The 21/2 would be your fast normal lens, converting to 42mm. Yea, a $6-800
normal lens, that's great? (Or if you're jonequinn, $1200!)
3. So that means that for photojouranlism-type stuff, you're stuck with the new
E-series wide-angle zoom. or using the $700 18mm Zuiko as a 35mm lens.
4. The two shift lenses are effectively useless for their intended subjects
with FL's now of 48mm and 100mm.
Hmmm......not so appealing for any wide-angle stuff.
Ad
1. The 50's become instant portriture lenses. Think of a 100/1.2 with it's
nice bokeh.
2. As someone pointed out, the fast teles like the 85/2, 90/2 or 100/2 become
170/2, 180/2 and 200/2's. that will be nice for basketball or flattend
perspective portraits, etc. Especially since you'd use them a f/2 or f/2.8; so
even in stop-down mode things would work great. If you do have to use
stop-down mode, it's only outside where you're shooting f/8 where the problem
will come in.
3. You only have to use the center of the frame, so lenses with CA like the
180/2.8 will be more useful. And think of the Tamron 80-200/2.8 at 160-400/2.8!
4. If you can get them focused, the shorter macros will work nicely, perhaps on
the Auto-Tube?
5. Let's not even talk about the big white glass or big Tamron glass. 700/2.8!?
Skip
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Please reply to [skipwilliams at pobox.com]
Direct responses to the email address on the header may get lost
----------------------------------------------------------------->
>Subject: Re: [OM] Is it an OM adapter?
> From: Mark Dapoz <md@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2003 09:06:37 -0500 (EST)
> To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Dizel wrote:
>
>> > Skip said: It HAS to be the OM-System adapter. At least it exists.
>> >
>> > So let's make 03/03/03 the date we celebrate as the first day of the rest
>> > of the life of OM!
>> > Zuikoholics rejoice!
>>
>> Why? It means less lenses for OM users - and new lenses will be done,
>> for economic reasons, to cover small sensor, not 24x36..
>
>Why would that be? Except for a few of the specialised lenses like the
>shift's and fisheye's, I can't see someone wanting to invest in manual focus
>OM lenses if all they have is a digital body. It's likely that an OM adapter
>will not provide automatic stopdown and will likely require the lens to be
>stopped down for metering. Very similar to what was done for the Pen F series.
>If you've ever used one of these adapters, you'll know how annoying they are
>to use. It's nice to have if you already have an investment in the lenses,
>but it sure isn't going to make you run out and buy more :-)
> -mark
>
>
>< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
>< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
>< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|