Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Cameras, lenses and system accessories > Lens focus > Legacy Lenses

Legacy Lenses Discuss the use of older lenses, using adapters, from the Olympus OM system, Leica M and R-series, and the millions of others too.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 19th September 2012
Phil Angel Phil Angel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Hatfield Peveral. essex
Posts: 223
Thanks: 114
Thanked 29 Times in 26 Posts
Likes: 14
Liked 35 Times in 18 Posts
Re: 2x or 1.8x

Now i am confused too
If i was to fit an old om system lens.... say a 75-150 onto an E520, would that give the same field of view as a 150-300 4/3 mount lens ? approximately x2 when i looked through the viewfinder ?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 19th September 2012
gphemy gphemy is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: 57 38' N by 4 08' W
Posts: 350
Thanks: 28
Thanked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Likes: 4
Liked 12 Times in 11 Posts
Re: 2x or 1.8x

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Angel View Post
Now i am confused too
If i was to fit an old om system lens.... say a 75-150 onto an E520, would that give the same field of view as a 150-300 4/3 mount lens ? approximately x2 when i looked through the viewfinder ?
NO. It would give the same (roughly) field of view as a 150-300mm lens on a 35mm film camera. And it would give the same field of view (exactly) as a 75-150mm lens on a 4/3 camera.

The distinction between "roughly" and "exactly" is simply because the 35mm film frame is proportioned 3:2 (width:height) while the 4/3 is 4:3, so the comparison cannot be exact.

Piers
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to gphemy For This Useful Post:
Phil Angel (19th September 2012)
  #18  
Old 19th September 2012
Stewart G's Avatar
Stewart G Stewart G is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: California
Posts: 792
Thanks: 34
Thanked 95 Times in 89 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 38 Times in 24 Posts
Phil, I'm fairly sure the answer to that is no. It's a focal length to sensor size relationship, and unless one or the other changes, the FOV remains the same.
__________________
http://technopeasant.org
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Stewart G For This Useful Post:
Phil Angel (19th September 2012)
  #19  
Old 19th September 2012
Macca1980 Macca1980 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Scotland
Posts: 54
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm really confused now.
My brain has defaulted to simply doubling it.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 19th September 2012
gphemy gphemy is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: 57 38' N by 4 08' W
Posts: 350
Thanks: 28
Thanked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Likes: 4
Liked 12 Times in 11 Posts
Re: 2x or 1.8x

Quote:
Originally Posted by Macca1980 View Post
I'm really confused now.
My brain has defaulted to simply doubling it.
Yes, this is confusing, and I blame Phil because he has interjected with what sounds like the same question, ut is in fact the converse of the question you were asking. So ignore Phil's question in this thread, and the responses to it (yes, mine too) and I hope the confusion will resolve itself.

On the other hand, if you want to know why Phil's was the converse...

...

...

...

He was comparing to a lens on a 4/3 body, while you were comparing to a lens on a 35mm body.

...

...

...

But I can't exclude the possibility that Phil's head was spinning when he asked the question, never mind read the answers!

Piers

PS Sorry Phil!
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 20th September 2012
Phil Angel Phil Angel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Hatfield Peveral. essex
Posts: 223
Thanks: 114
Thanked 29 Times in 26 Posts
Likes: 14
Liked 35 Times in 18 Posts
Re: 2x or 1.8x

Quote:
Originally Posted by gphemy View Post
Yes, this is confusing, and I blame Phil because he has interjected with what sounds like the same question, ut is in fact the converse of the question you were asking. So ignore Phil's question in this thread, and the responses to it (yes, mine too) and I hope the confusion will resolve itself.

On the other hand, if you want to know why Phil's was the converse...

...

...

...

He was comparing to a lens on a 4/3 body, while you were comparing to a lens on a 35mm body.

...

...

...

But I can't exclude the possibility that Phil's head was spinning when he asked the question, never mind read the answers!

Piers

PS Sorry Phil!
LOL my head was getting itself into a mucking fuddle LOL

I was under the impression that if, for example, you fitted a lens of 50mm designed for a 35mm camera, to a body with a 4/3 sensor, it would then be equivalent to a 100mm lens.
Or have i simply been misinterpreting the things i have been reading??? which is quite possible as at my age confusion is just a blink away lol

Sorry if i have spread any confusion to others on this thread.......although
it's contagious it will clear up if you lie down in a dark room for sevral days lol
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 20th September 2012
Howi Howi is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 180
Thanks: 6
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 4
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Re: 2x or 1.8x

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil Angel View Post
LOL my head was getting itself into a mucking fuddle LOL

I was under the impression that if, for example, you fitted a lens of 50mm designed for a 35mm camera, to a body with a 4/3 sensor, it would then be equivalent to a 100mm lens.
Or have i simply been misinterpreting the things i have been reading??? which is quite possible as at my age confusion is just a blink away lol

Sorry if i have spread any confusion to others on this thread.......although
it's contagious it will clear up if you lie down in a dark room for sevral days lol
You are correct THIS time, a 50mm lens (in 35mm terms) is a 50mm lens no matter what camera body you fit it to, therefore the lens characteristics do NOT change. What changes, is the area on the focal plane occupied by the sensor. Fo a sensor smaller than the 35mm standard, a smaller part of the image will be seen by the smaller sensor, giving the EFECT of a change in focal length. With 4/3 we have it easy, our 50mm (35mm camera lens) willnow act like a 100mm (35mm camera lens) on a 4/3 body.
It is much easier to understand if you do a simple drawing at the sensor (film) plane for a change in sensor size.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Howi For This Useful Post:
Phil Angel (20th September 2012)
  #23  
Old 20th September 2012
gphemy gphemy is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: 57 38' N by 4 08' W
Posts: 350
Thanks: 28
Thanked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Likes: 4
Liked 12 Times in 11 Posts
Re: 2x or 1.8x

I agree with Howi, you (Phil) are right this time.

Piers
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to gphemy For This Useful Post:
Phil Angel (20th September 2012)
  #24  
Old 20th September 2012
Phil Angel Phil Angel is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Hatfield Peveral. essex
Posts: 223
Thanks: 114
Thanked 29 Times in 26 Posts
Likes: 14
Liked 35 Times in 18 Posts
Re: 2x or 1.8x

Thankyou for clearing that up i knew i wasn't "completely" MAD ! lol
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:21 AM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger