Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR

In article <eumqum0flu.TakeThisOut@news2.newsguy.com>, jclarke.usenet.TakeThisOut@cox.net
says...

> I notice you Olympus zealots being real bit on insulting anyone who

"zealots" - now who is insulting who?

For your information the OP joined the myolympus forum, posted the
question there and got five useful and detailed replies. Instead here,
this thread became a pissing contest as soon as Canon users jumped in.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E300, E330, E400 and E500 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

In article <c7OdnSLwANUvTpPbnZ2dnUVZ_uOmnZ2d RemoveThis @comcast.com>, Guy
<guy.jordan RemoveThis @comcast.net> writes
>
>Sorry, but no; Canon is not the right answer. The OP asked about
>experience using OM lenses on new Olympus DSLRs

No he didn't - I suggest YOU and the others complaining about non-Oly
focusses responses read the original post again, carefully this time!

"I have a range of Olympus OM 1 &2 gear, including 24mm, 35-70mm
75-150mm lens bellows etc. Finally considering getting a DSLR, (E-1?)
and am tempted to go on a path that will allow me to utilise the old
equipment, rather than to scrap it or virtually give it away."

He is quite generally considering "a DSLR" and merely questions where an
E1 would be suitable to meet his needs.

Responses suggesting ANY dSLR camera, whether Canon, Pentax, Nikon, or
SuperHabadashi for that matter, are just as relevant responses to what
the OP asked as those suggesting Olympus cameras.

Sadly, as an Olympus OM user of over 33 years standing, when faced with
exactly the same question as the OP, Olympus was NOT the answer.

After decades of using well loved OM glass, I was not about to let
Olympus Corporate's 4/3 detour down a blind alley restrict me to using a
QUARTER of my lenses field areas and specifically throw away the very
areas (edges and corners) where they excelled over other glass. A Canon
30D, Pentax K10 or Nikon D200 isn't the answer to that either.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

J. Clarke wrote:
<SNIP>
>> Me. You post publicly, I responded publicly. The Internet is amazing,
>> just ask Al Gore. -Guy
>
> I see. So you think you're the moderator on an unmoderated newsgroup.
>
> <plonk>
>

A sense of humor like a rock. Remember, all things in moderation. -Guy
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

I'm not certain that I found the actual answer to the question of using OM
lenses on current Olympus DSLR's in any of the responses posted, but hey,
there were many responses and it's late at night.

I recently purchased an Evolt 500 <my first DSLR> and I still have my old
Zuiko 50mm 1.8 and 28mm 2.8 lenses from my old OM-1 and OM-2n days.

Is is worthwhile to go ahead and buy the Olympus MF-1 OM adapter to use my 2
old lenses? Would I lose/gain anything in terms of image quality, etc.? I
don't mind spending the $100.00 for the adapter if the pluses outweigh the
minuses. Any help on the matter would be greatly appreciated by this DSLR
newbie.


"Peter Stacey" <lps_softw.RemoveThis@westnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:460a05a4$1@quokka.wn.com.au...
>I have a range of Olympus OM 1 &2 gear, including 24mm, 35-70mm 75-150mm
> lens bellows etc. Finally considering getting a DSLR, (E-1?) and am
> tempted
> to go on a path that will allow me to utilise the old equipment, rather
> than
> to scrap it or virtually give it away. Presuming that there is negligible
> need/value in the old film gear. An adapter is available to use the old
> lens
> with the 4/3 camera fitting.
>
> Being used to manual focus etc. I thought that I would not feel too
> disadvantaged by not having everything automated as is the case nowadays.
> However I did think that getting a good 'standard' lens with the new
> camera/body would be a good idea.
>
> Has anyone done this and how did it work out? I realise that one can
> become
> emotionally attached to our gear, when from a practical or financial view
> the decision is a no brainer.
>
> TIA
> Cheers Peter S.
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

In article <lX%Ph.6030$ya1.1960@news02.roc.ny>, willx34
<willx34.TakeThisOut@frontiernet.net> wrote:

> I'm not certain that I found the actual answer to the question of using OM
> lenses on current Olympus DSLR's in any of the responses posted, but hey,
> there were many responses and it's late at night.
>
> I recently purchased an Evolt 500 <my first DSLR> and I still have my old
> Zuiko 50mm 1.8 and 28mm 2.8 lenses from my old OM-1 and OM-2n days.
>
> Is is worthwhile to go ahead and buy the Olympus MF-1 OM adapter to use my 2
> old lenses? Would I lose/gain anything in terms of image quality, etc.? I
> don't mind spending the $100.00 for the adapter if the pluses outweigh the
> minuses. Any help on the matter would be greatly appreciated by this DSLR
> newbie.

image quality? not really.
field of view? yes.

the 50mm will have an equivalent field of view as a 100mm f/1.8 and the
28mm will be equivalent to a 56mm f/2.8.

depending on what you shoot, that might be good or bad. a 100mm f/1.8
could be quite useful, for instance, but if you enjoy wide angle, the
28mm won't be wide at all.
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

In article <MPG.207abb3c4be40f0098b3c9.TakeThisOut@news.supernews.com>, Alfred Molon
<alfred_molonCANCEL.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com> writes
>In article <hCJmp3E3p$DGFwuw@kennedym.demon.co.uk>,
>rkm@nospam.demon.co.uk says...
>
>> No he didn't - I suggest YOU and the others complaining about non-Oly
>> focusses responses read the original post again, carefully this time!
>>
>> "I have a range of Olympus OM 1 &2 gear, including 24mm, 35-70mm
>> 75-150mm lens bellows etc. Finally considering getting a DSLR, (E-1?)
>> and am tempted to go on a path that will allow me to utilise the old
>> equipment, rather than to scrap it or virtually give it away."
>>
>> He is quite generally considering "a DSLR" and merely questions where an
>> E1 would be suitable to meet his needs.
>
>Title of this thread: "Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR" not "Olympus
>OM lens with a DSLR"

But that isn't the question asked!
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 04:49:21 GMT, "willx34"
<willx34 DeleteThis @frontiernet.net> wrote:

>Is is worthwhile to go ahead and buy the Olympus MF-1 OM adapter to use my 2
>old lenses?


One option is to buy one of the similar cheap adaptors from
ebay. They are not as well made as the Olympus one but they
do the job at a fraction of the cost, usually less than $20
shipped. If you find yourself using them a lot you could
then buy the better engineered MF-1, and if not you haven't
wasted $100.

>Would I lose/gain anything in terms of image quality, etc.?

The OM lenses have better character than many of the digital
versions, certainly not sharper, but generally smoother
"bokeh". They also have lower contrast but that isn't really
an issue with digital. In short the give a different "look"
to the images. Try it


--
John Bean
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

John Bean wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 04:49:21 GMT, "willx34"
> <willx34 DeleteThis @frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
>> Is is worthwhile to go ahead and buy the Olympus MF-1 OM adapter to
>> use my 2 old lenses?
>
>
> One option is to buy one of the similar cheap adaptors from
> ebay. They are not as well made as the Olympus one but they
> do the job at a fraction of the cost, usually less than $20
> shipped. If you find yourself using them a lot you could
> then buy the better engineered MF-1, and if not you haven't
> wasted $100.

Danger Will Robinson (that's a TV reference if you're too young to get
it).

I found out the hard way that the cheap adapters aren't precise fits and
may shed crud as they wear in, which crud gets all over the inside of
the camera. Some of the crud is metal filings which can scratch
whatever they land on (DAMHIKT) and may result in repair costs exceeding
the cost of the adapter. If somebody had _told_ me that I'd be about
400 bucks richer now--fortunately I tried to clean the focusing screen
first and when it got scratched up I paid a pro shop to clean the rest
(and replace the screen), telling them up front that there were metal
filings in the camera. If I'd gone after the sensor first I'd be out a
camera.

With some systems you can get easily find an older or dead body with the
same mount and use it to wear in the adapters. 4/3 are new enough on
the market that that's pretty much not an option, but who knows, you may
luck into one sombody dropped off a cliff or something. Another way to
do it is to get an extension tube and use it to wear in the adapters,
but unless you want an extension tube anyway that route will cost you as
much as an Olympus adapter will.

>> Would I lose/gain anything in terms of image quality, etc.?
>
> The OM lenses have better character than many of the digital
> versions, certainly not sharper, but generally smoother
> "bokeh". They also have lower contrast but that isn't really
> an issue with digital. In short the give a different "look"
> to the images. Try it

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

In article <hCJmp3E3p$DGFwuw@kennedym.demon.co.uk>,
rkm.DeleteThis@nospam.demon.co.uk says...

> No he didn't - I suggest YOU and the others complaining about non-Oly
> focusses responses read the original post again, carefully this time!
>
> "I have a range of Olympus OM 1 &2 gear, including 24mm, 35-70mm
> 75-150mm lens bellows etc. Finally considering getting a DSLR, (E-1?)
> and am tempted to go on a path that will allow me to utilise the old
> equipment, rather than to scrap it or virtually give it away."
>
> He is quite generally considering "a DSLR" and merely questions where an
> E1 would be suitable to meet his needs.

Title of this thread: "Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR" not "Olympus
OM lens with a DSLR"
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 7070, 8080, E300, E330, E400 and E500 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

In article <lX%Ph.6030$ya1.1960@news02.roc.ny>,
"willx34" <willx34.DeleteThis@frontiernet.net> wrote:

> I recently purchased an Evolt 500 <my first DSLR> and I still have my old
> Zuiko 50mm 1.8 and 28mm 2.8 lenses from my old OM-1 and OM-2n days.
>
> Is is worthwhile to go ahead and buy the Olympus MF-1 OM adapter to use my 2
> old lenses?

Will-

Perhaps it depends on the model you purchase, but I read somewhere that
Olympus would send you a free adapter if you asked. If that is true,
you have nothing to lose. Even if you have to pay, it would probably be
handy to have the adapter anyway.

What would you gain? Two lenses.

What would you lose? Field of view. Loss of sharpness due to
additional 2X enlargement required to produce the same final image.
(Compared to use on the OM body.)

This loss of sharpness isn't all bad, since lenses specifically designed
for the 4/3 sensor face the same amount of enlargement. Additionally,
the fixed-focal length lenses are probably noticeably sharper than a
zoom lens such as the kit lens that may have come with the Evolt 500.

Fred
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 07:29:15 -0400, "J. Clarke"
<jclarke.usenet DeleteThis @cox.net> wrote:

>I found out the hard way that the cheap adapters aren't precise fits and
>may shed crud as they wear in, which crud gets all over the inside of
>the camera. Some of the crud is metal filings which can scratch
>whatever they land on (DAMHIKT) and may result in repair costs exceeding
>the cost of the adapter. If somebody had _told_ me that I'd be about
>400 bucks richer now--fortunately I tried to clean the focusing screen
>first and when it got scratched up I paid a pro shop to clean the rest
>(and replace the screen), telling them up front that there were metal
>filings in the camera. If I'd gone after the sensor first I'd be out a
>camera.

You have a 4/3 camera? Which cheap adaptor caused the
problem?

I have several, I have no problem with any of them.

--
John Bean
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR 

John Bean wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2007 07:29:15 -0400, "J. Clarke"
> <jclarke.usenet DeleteThis @cox.net> wrote:
>
>> I found out the hard way that the cheap adapters aren't precise fits
>> and may shed crud as they wear in, which crud gets all over the
>> inside of the camera. Some of the crud is metal filings which can
>> scratch whatever they land on (DAMHIKT) and may result in repair
>> costs exceeding the cost of the adapter. If somebody had _told_ me
>> that I'd be about 400 bucks richer now--fortunately I tried to clean
>> the focusing screen first and when it got scratched up I paid a pro
>> shop to clean the rest (and replace the screen), telling them up
>> front that there were metal filings in the camera. If I'd gone
>> after the sensor first I'd be out a camera.
>
> You have a 4/3 camera? Which cheap adaptor caused the
> problem?
>
> I have several, I have no problem with any of them.

The adapter was one of the ones sold on ebay. If you have had no
problem that is nice, but it's better that someone be aware that it can
happen than be surprised with a camera full of crud that has to be
professionally removed.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
 >> Stay informed about: Olympus OM lens with a Olympus DSLR