PDA

View Full Version : Is f2.8 enough?


Bromptonbloke
8th August 2010, 07:33 PM
Hi all,

I'm using the standard 14-42 kit zoom with and E-500, set to 25mm to mimic a 50mm prime.

I'm wondering whether the f2.8 of the 25mm pancake is going to improve the reduction in DOF and low-light performance significantly?

With the kit zoom the max aperture is around f5.6 I think.

I'm cost-conscious and read that the E-500 is difficult to use with a manual focus OM set-up.

Thanks

Richard

Howi
8th August 2010, 07:53 PM
I'm cost-conscious and read that the E-500 is difficult to use with a manual focus OM set-up.

Thanks

Richard

Nope! not difficult at all, but you won't find anything with the sort of aperture you really need (f1.8) at 25mm. There are plenty of OM 50mm F1.8's out there going for peanuts, if you can't hack it manually, stick it back on ebay.

There's nothing wrong with the E-500 (has the Kodak sensor), while it may have been superseded by lots of newer models, it's still quite capable.

There's a photo on another 4/3 forum that was taken on a camera phone, and as someone commented, it just goes to prove it's the photographer not the camera........

Bromptonbloke
8th August 2010, 08:00 PM
Excellent, sounds promising.

What should I look for in a 4/3 adaptor?

I presume I would be buying a 25mm OM lens with manual aperture ring.

Richard

Zuiko
8th August 2010, 08:08 PM
Hi all,

I'm using the standard 14-42 kit zoom with and E-500, set to 25mm to mimic a 50mm prime.

I'm wondering whether the f2.8 of the 25mm pancake is going to improve the reduction in DOF and low-light performance significantly?

With the kit zoom the max aperture is around f5.6 I think.

I'm cost-conscious and read that the E-500 is difficult to use with a manual focus OM set-up.

Thanks

Richard

Hi Richard, and welcome.

One of the disadvantages of Four Thirds is that it is more difficult to achieve a shallow DOF. Conversely, of course, it has an inherant advantage if you want a large DOF. The f2.8 pancake will certainly give a more shallow DOF than the kit zoom but f2 with the 50m macro would be better still, although I appreciate that is currently beyond your budget. I can only dream about that lens too!

Regarding the E500, manual focus is not helped by the rather small viewfinder. This is compounded by the fact that OM lenses on 4/3 work with stopped down apertures only, so if you are working with a smaller aperture than the maximum the view will also darken, making focus even more difficult.

However, if you are after minimum DOF you will be using the lens pretty much wide open anyway so that's not really an issue. Also, reasonably priced 3rd party OM to 4/3 adapters that are chipped for focus confirmation are available on ebay. I have no direct experience of these but I understand they do work rather well.

I would imagine that you are thinking of an OM 50mm f1.8. I use one occasionally and it is a very good lens with effective differential focus. I have a friend who keeps a 50mm f1.8 almost permanently mounted on his e-500 and he loves it. :)

Bromptonbloke
8th August 2010, 08:28 PM
Thanks for the warm welcome and forthcoming advice!

I presume though that the 50mm OM lens will be 100mm equivalent with 4/3?

100mm is a bit long for my emerging interest in street photography, even though they seem to be cheap and plentiful on ebay.

So is it correct to assume that the f2.8 of the pancake is not worth the expenditure?

Zuiko
8th August 2010, 09:04 PM
Thanks for the warm welcome and forthcoming advice!

I presume though that the 50mm OM lens will be 100mm equivalent with 4/3?

100mm is a bit long for my emerging interest in street photography, even though they seem to be cheap and plentiful on ebay.

So is it correct to assume that the f2.8 of the pancake is not worth the expenditure?

The f2.8 of the pancake is about a stop better. Whether that is worth it in terms of DOF I really need someone with direct experience of the lens to answer. In the OM range at around this focal length you are looking at a 24mm f2'8 which is going to cost a fair bit more than a 50mm. The 24mm f2 is quite rare and probably too expensive to consider. Also, fast aperture legacy wides often do not perform well on a digital sensor. Unfortunately the choices do seem quite limited for you.

Why not use the forum lens hire service to try out the 25mm pancake before you buy and then look for a second hand one if it suits you? Hire would cost you 8.68 for 3 days and this would be refundable if you then bought a new lens.

David M
8th August 2010, 11:19 PM
Nope! not difficult at all, but you won't find anything with the sort of aperture you really need (f1.8) at 25mm. There are plenty of OM 50mm F1.8's out there going for peanuts, if you can't hack it manually, stick it back on ebay.

There's nothing wrong with the E-500 (has the Kodak sensor), while it may have been superseded by lots of newer models, it's still quite capable.

There's a photo on another 4/3 forum that was taken on a camera phone, and as someone commented, it just goes to prove it's the photographer not the camera........

Well I can think of the OM 24mm f2, 28mm f2 and Vivitar 28mm f1.9 off the top of my head but I'm sure there are others I've forgotten.

Alan Clogwyn
9th August 2010, 08:30 AM
I reccomend the Vivitar 24mm f2.8, should fit the bill nicely. Until I can get hold of a Zuiko 21mm at a non stupid price it will remain my main lens.

I assume that from your shallow DOF requirements you're going to be shooting pretty close up, in which case focussing is a breeze. It's really not as much effort as people seem to think, plus when you do set it to F22 you are getting the DOF of F22 in the viewfinder, not F2.8 so theres so little out of focus even if you can't see what you're focusing on chances are it'll be fine!

Here's a sample, and if you want more then have a look in my Holes in Walls thread, and on fiur thirds user look at my Granite Quarry thread, all taken with this lens.

*chr

http://i364.photobucket.com/albums/oo86/alanandlexie/garden508e.jpg

Ian
9th August 2010, 09:22 AM
25mm @ f/2 the dof is 0.46 feet with the subject at 4 feet from the camera.
25mm @ f/2.8 the dof is 0.65 feet with the subject at 4 feet from the camera.
25mm @f/3.5 the dof is 0.8 feet with the subject at 4 feet from the camera.
50mm @f/1.8 the dof is 0.41 feet with the subject at 8 feet from the camera.

Ian

snaarman
9th August 2010, 09:33 AM
There is a very tasty Vivitar 28mm f2.0 close focus lens. They are quite rare, made by Komine and make ever such nice pictures. I had one in Konica AR bayonet converted for 4/3 and can I recommend it if you can find one, and don't mind the manual focus hassle.

http://www.snaar.co.uk/lenses/viv28a.jpg

Pete

Howi
9th August 2010, 11:23 AM
Well I can think of the OM 24mm f2, 28mm f2 and Vivitar 28mm f1.9 off the top of my head but I'm sure there are others I've forgotten.

Yes! but at what price???

Also I would have thought that for street photography 50mm (100mm) would be better than 25mm (50mm standard) especially when wanting to control depth of field or perhaps I am thinking of a different form of street photography....:)

David M
10th August 2010, 12:50 AM
Yes! but at what price???

Also I would have thought that for street photography 50mm (100mm) would be better than 25mm (50mm standard) especially when wanting to control depth of field or perhaps I am thinking of a different form of street photography....:)

I think I paid 29 for my Vivitar 35mm f1.9 so it paid for itself the first time I licensed a photo from it.

I got it because I needed a disposable fastish wide angle I could afford to lose.

Howi
10th August 2010, 10:48 AM
[QUOTE=David M;81612]I think I paid 29 for my Vivitar 35mm f1.9 so it paid for itself the first time I licensed a photo from it.

QUOTE]

Yes! but 35mm is not the 24/25mm FL he was looking at!!!:rolleyes:

skyman1
10th August 2010, 03:20 PM
Ah but 35m(70mm) is closer to the 25mm(50mm) than the 50mm (100mm) so if at a good price may be more suitable :)

Bromptonbloke
10th August 2010, 07:22 PM
As ever, these innocent questions become much more complex.

I hadn't considered the distance to the DOF area, but even though I can try shooting at 84mm (42 on the kit zoom), the aperture is f4.2 maximum.

So I'm concluding so far that it's probably worth trying the 50mm OM solution first (I've seen an f1.4 on ebay), and get used to composing photos at 100mm.

Bromptonbloke
10th August 2010, 10:10 PM
Just taken the plunge and bought a multi-coated 50mm f1.8 for 22 off ebay. Another 27 for an adaptor on top.
Can't wait to experiment further!:)

David M
10th August 2010, 11:07 PM
[QUOTE=David M;81612]I think I paid 29 for my Vivitar 35mm f1.9 so it paid for itself the first time I licensed a photo from it.

QUOTE]

Yes! but 35mm is not the 24/25mm FL he was looking at!!!:rolleyes:

But it's closer than the 50mm you were talking about.

Alan Clogwyn
11th August 2010, 09:11 AM
You won't be disappointed with the 50mm/1.8, it's a joy to use. Not a bad price - mine was 21 but was from a non tog who didnt know much about it, and hadnt realised it was attached to a Tamron 2x teleconverter, which usually sell for more than that on their own!

snaarman
11th August 2010, 09:20 AM
You won't be disappointed with the 50mm/1.8, it's a joy to use. Not a bad price - mine was 21 but was from a non tog who didnt know much about it, and hadnt realised it was attached to a Tamron 2x teleconverter, which usually sell for more than that on their own!


Nice deal: I once bought a very clean Tamron zoom with Nikon mount for 15, sold the mount for 13. *chr

Back to the original question: You might try a 28mm f2 or f2.8 to mimic an old style standard lens, and in fact I did the same a couple of years ago with my E400, but I found it very difficult to focus accurately.

These days I restrict myself to 50mm and longer for legacy lenses, but that may just be an eyesight thing. A 50 f1.8 will certainly give you nice tight DoF and should be a cheap solution.

Pete

pepper
11th August 2010, 10:35 AM
I use a few lagacy lenses in my Panasonic DMC-L1, the main advantage being is it already has focus asssit in the camera so no need to buy the expensive adapters to achieve focus.

I've just tried the same on my E3 and its far harder to get the focus just right although having the much bigger viewfinder does go some way towards getting it right.

Bromptonbloke
12th August 2010, 08:05 PM
50mm f1.8 arrived today, as did OM-4/3 adapter.

I was initially disappointed when the OM adapter wouldn't attach to the OM lens. After 30 minutes trying, and looking at the bayonet fastening from every angle possible, I decided that it was the AF chip that was fouling the back of the OM lens. I broke it off and the adapter now works.

So, is it worth glueing it back on, bearing in mind that the adapter will be then permanently affixed to the lens?:confused:

Shooting-wise I'm already impressed. I can now photograph indoors without flash, and I'm getting the shallow DOF I was craving ...

I sense an addiction for legacy lenses starting.

jamie allan
12th August 2010, 09:18 PM
50mm f1.8 arrived today, as did OM-4/3 adapter.

I was initially disappointed when the OM adapter wouldn't attach to the OM lens. After 30 minutes trying, and looking at the bayonet fastening from every angle possible, I decided that it was the AF chip that was fouling the back of the OM lens. I broke it off and the adapter now works.

So, is it worth glueing it back on, bearing in mind that the adapter will be then permanently affixed to the lens?:confused:



Can I ask what eBay supplier you bought it off. I was thinking of buying an OM to 4/3rds converter with AF confirmation from Roxsen in Hong Kong. As well as this I was planning to buy a 55mm reversing adapter.

Bromptonbloke
12th August 2010, 10:05 PM
Pixmania:(

Bromptonbloke
14th August 2010, 08:17 PM
I've spent a little time with the legacy 50mm OM set up and here are my first impressions:

1) I now understand what 'pin-sharp' means, but I also produce more duff images;
2) From (1) I'm learning to adjust the aperture to suit the photo, rather than leaving it wide-open and letting the AF work its magic;
3) Manual focus can be tricky when stopping down so focus, then stop down afterwards (if the scene is static);
4) I'm thinking about the composition more to try and get the most out of a shot.

Thanks to everyone for the help so far. I think I'll come back!

Richard

Alan Clogwyn
15th August 2010, 07:40 PM
I've spent a little time with the legacy 50mm OM set up and here are my first impressions:

1) I now understand what 'pin-sharp' means, but I also produce more duff images;
2) From (1) I'm learning to adjust the aperture to suit the photo, rather than leaving it wide-open and letting the AF work its magic;
3) Manual focus can be tricky when stopping down so focus, then stop down afterwards (if the scene is static);
4) I'm thinking about the composition more to try and get the most out of a shot.

Thanks to everyone for the help so far. I think I'll come back!

Richard

I don't bother focusing at wider aperures with any of my OM lenses it just wastes time, if I'm shooting at F4 I focus at F4. If you've a steady hand you could always use the live view if you need a bright display. Leave it at F11 for a while and you soon forget about the low light, until you change to 1.8 and go all squinty! :p

Bromptonbloke
15th August 2010, 08:14 PM
No live view with my E-500. DOes live view make much of a difference?

Alan Clogwyn
16th August 2010, 08:42 AM
No live view with my E-500. DOes live view make much of a difference?

Only if you have a tripo, it's too jerky to be used like the screen of a digital compact, but it doesnt darken when changing apertures. Ironically I opted for the 520 to get Live view but I find it useless.

If I could get a viewfinder like the OM10 that would be great!