If Fotodiox is a reputable supplier why is it that their two part mount
design tends to come apart? :-)
Chuck Norcutt
On 3/9/2011 9:59 PM, Jim Nichols wrote:
> Hi Moose,
>
> I don't think this applies to the OM to EF adapters, but I found it in
> Pentax to 4/3 and Leica-R to 4/3, so, just a word of advice. These adapters
> are made in two parts, one that attaches to a 4/3 body, and another that
> provides the thickness and attachment for the specified lens system. My
> Pentax to 4/3 adapter came from Fotodiox, a reputable US supplier. The two
> parts are held together by pointed setscrews in the outer rim. I made sure
> these were tight, but, when used with heavier lenses, I found that they
> loosened up. Fearing that I would drop a lens, I marked the two halves,
> placed a few drops of Superglue on the mating surfaces, and carefully
> realigned and clamped the parts, tightening the rim screws. In 2+ years of
> use, it has never showed signs of loosening up again.
>
> My two Leica-R to 4/3 adapters are assembled with Phillips screws in the
> face surfaces. I checked to be sure the screws were tight, and have never
> had a problem with the two parts attempting to separate. This seems to be a
> more secure arrangement, and is the one that I trust to hold the E-1 body to
> the Leica Telyt-R 250/4, where the whole assembly weighs about five pounds.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Jim Nichols
> Tullahoma, TN USA
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Moose"<olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Olympus Camera Discussion"<olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 7:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [OM] OM to EOS adapter
>
>
>> 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/
|