OM , OM1 , OM2 , OM2N , OM3 , OM4 photo-sharing and possible meetups

[Ben Ang]

What are these 2 lenses?

hi,

its the tokina 20-35 f/2.8 AT-X pro, and tokina AT-X 35-70 f/2.8. latter is only manual focus, but both are solid performers.

i ve used the olympus 35 f2.0m converted it to nikon mount and it had outstanding bokeh.. i replaced it with the nikon version cos i din like stop down aperture. but it does lack some of the 'feel'..

 

[ManWearPants]

actually i have a 350d with fatique as he is doing IR conversion for me . he was saying that i should be able to find it at bicycle shop . but the bicycle shops around my place don't have such small ball bearings yea .. that size is quite difficult to get . thank you both

OT abit. What do you need to do to the camera to take IR? I always thoughtjust put a IR filter in front will do?

hi,

its the tokina 20-35 f/2.8 AT-X pro, and tokina AT-X 35-70 f/2.8. latter is only manual focus, but both are solid performers.

ok. noted that it is AT-X.

 

[Ben Ang]

I did post one earlier but it was from a distance shot wide open. Will get down to Chinatown one morning to shoot those 'ah Peks' playing chinese chess and put it up soon. Actually you should try the OM 135f2.8 as it's a better FL for portraits. I have a Pentax K 135f2.5 which is excellent, otherwise I would have bought our friend's OM 135f2.8 which has a late version s/no.

i ve converted an OM 135 f/2.8 to nikon for use on my d200, honestly, its not a special lens. its more contrasty and has nicer colours than the nikkor, but looses out to the minolta MC series (the only once i still have).

BUT, if size is what matters to you, i think you ll be hard pressed to find a smaller 135mm anywhere. that was its real strong point where it was noticable smaller and lighter than the rest i ve tried.. this has always been the strong point of the OM system.

ok. noted that it is AT-X.

abit off point, but u can also look out for RMC lenses, the 80-200 f4 is really good as is the 17 f3.5 & 28-85 f4

 

[magicdragon]

Yes, they are alright on 5D2. I guess I am just being particular about infinity not stopping exactly where it should. I have used this Tagotech in other mounts - L/R, AIS and M42. They are by far the most consistent ones. I may just order one Kindai to try out.



I thot Anthony is looking to sell his. Make him a good offer and a beer. He may sell you his.

Is Anthony really selling his 5D?

 

[Anthony Lee]

Is Anthony really selling his 5D?

My 5D is in such excellent condition, shutter about 7k, so much so that when I wanted to sell it, it actually tells me not to. Currently, I am considering a couple of alternatives as a smaller set-up for daily use and keeping my 5D until it dies on me. What do you guys think of the Samsung NX10 or the Soney Nex5, both aps-c and can take the range of lenses I have.

 

[Anthony Lee]

hi,

its the tokina 20-35 f/2.8 AT-X pro, and tokina AT-X 35-70 f/2.8. latter is only manual focus, but both are solid performers.

i ve used the olympus 35 f2.0m converted it to nikon mount and it had outstanding bokeh.. i replaced it with the nikon version cos i din like stop down aperture. but it does lack some of the 'feel'..

Hi Ben, nice of you to chip in. You used to have the FD50f1.2, how is it compared to the Nikon 50f1.2. I am still hunting for a really good f1.2 and apart from the OM and Nikon 50f1.2 the FD appears sometimes. Can the FD, when converted to EOS mount focus to infinity? The reason I ask is that I like shooting my OM 50f1.4 either at wide open or at infinity.

 

[kenji87]

OT abit. What do you need to do to the camera to take IR? I always thoughtjust put a IR filter in front will do?


im doing a semi-permanent IR conversion. with this conversion,i'll be able to shoot IR at handheld speed and i will still be able to see through the viewfinder compare to the usual case where you have to compose and put on the filter den take the photos

 

[Ben Ang]

Hi Ben, nice of you to chip in. You used to have the FD50f1.2, how is it compared to the Nikon 50f1.2. I am still hunting for a really good f1.2 and apart from the OM and Nikon 50f1.2 the FD appears sometimes. Can the FD, when converted to EOS mount focus to infinity? The reason I ask is that I like shooting my OM 50f1.4 either at wide open or at infinity.

to the best of my knowledge, none of the NFD(new fd) 50 1.2s will focus to infinity on fullframe EOS unless you shave the mirror. the conversion is also very very tricky due to the aperture mechanism and last element. same goes for the 85 f/1.2. cant speak for their performance as have never tried them.

but i have converted the FL 58 1.2 and FD SSC 55 1.2. the first was pretty good, the second one has one of the richest colours i ve seen from any lens. punchy yet natural. this one is def better than the older nipon kogaku 55 f/1.2, but still looses in sharpness to the newer 50 f/1.2 AIS. both the canons will focus to infinity even on full frame EOS bodies. but not on fullframe nikon bodies.

however, between the SSC and the AIS, its really up to the output you like. both are very good but differ in colour rendition. the AIS is famed for very beautiful skin tone rendition while the SSC just struck me for its very warm yet natural rendition and very good definition for black and white pics.

another one to look out for is the MD 50mm f/1.2 which is supposedly very good (i ve never tried it). and the noct nikkor but that one abit out of reach. haha!.

though i loved the canons, i sold them in favour of the nikkor 50 AIS as i like its rendition the best, plus i get full aperture metering. though its only 1/2 or 1/3 a stop of extra light, it is really a totally different lens. you won't be disappointed.

if you like beautiful bokeh with somewhat more 'artistic'/muted/old school colours, keep a look out for the very old nipon kogaku 5.8cm f/1.4. its not technically good, but if u use its shortfalls properly you get some very beautiful images. esp so for portraits.

pm me if you d like samples, dun wanna flood this thread. i think already v off topic. hope the others dun mind.. =D

 

[ManWearPants]

My 5D is in such excellent condition, shutter about 7k, so much so that when I wanted to sell it, it actually tells me not to. Currently, I am considering a couple of alternatives as a smaller set-up for daily use and keeping my 5D until it dies on me. What do you guys think of the Samsung NX10 or the Soney Nex5, both aps-c and can take the range of lenses I have.

On crop cameras, u'll lose the WA, DoF. Anyway, I still find composing on LCD quite awkward. So I will stay with 5D.

I am abit skeptical about Samsung as used to own a couple of PnS. The battery don't last. Don't know if it is the same with these higher end products. If really looking at APS-C, I'll go for a used SD14 and convert the mount permanently to OM.

BUT, if size is what matters to you, i think you ll be hard pressed to find a smaller 135mm anywhere. that was its real strong point where it was noticable smaller and lighter than the rest i ve tried.. this has always been the strong point of the OM system.

abit off point, but u can also look out for RMC lenses, the 80-200 f4 is really good as is the 17 f3.5 & 28-85 f4

Yes, the price point and size makes OM lenses very practical. Thanks for the recommendation on the RMC, they look a bit like the Minolta MD. Anyway, will check out the 17/3.5 but the price does not appear that cheap. Does these RMC comes in native EF mount?

Is Anthony really selling his 5D?

Sorry, my info is outdated. Hang ard B&S, there are the occasional 5D.

but i have converted the FL 58 1.2 and FD SSC 55 1.2. the first was pretty good, the second one has one of the richest colours i ve seen from any lens. punchy yet natural. this one is def better than the older nipon kogaku 55 f/1.2, but still looses in sharpness to the newer 50 f/1.2 AIS. both the canons will focus to infinity even on full frame EOS bodies. but not on fullframe nikon bodies.

another one to look out for is the MD 50mm f/1.2 which is supposedly very good (i ve never tried it). and the noct nikkor but that one abit out of reach. haha!.

though i loved the canons, i sold them in favour of the nikkor 50 AIS as i like its rendition the best, plus i get full aperture metering. though its only 1/2 or 1/3 a stop of extra light, it is really a totally different lens. you won't be disappointed.

I am wondering how diff is the FD 50/1.2 SSC compared to today's 50/1.2. Aren't they on the same SSC coating? Also, how do you use them on EOS. I understand you need to do surgery on the rear and change the mount.

Again, the Minolta MD will need customized irreversible rear mount change before it fits EOS. I owned the Rokkor 58/1.2 for a brief period of time but the cost of conversion + the inability to focus beyond 5 feet are the reasons why I did not keep it. I think the Minolta's are well built. I would have gone for the fisheye and 24mm if not for the need to perform irreversible conversions and also high probablility of mirror hit.

 

[magicdragon]

My 5D is in such excellent condition, shutter about 7k, so much so that when I wanted to sell it, it actually tells me not to. Currently, I am considering a couple of alternatives as a smaller set-up for daily use and keeping my 5D until it dies on me. What do you guys think of the Samsung NX10 or the Soney Nex5, both aps-c and can take the range of lenses I have.

Kekekeke...Anthony dont sell it then...you'll regret it like you did with your 40D....as for a more portable set up I would suggest the NEX. It's quite good.

 

[Ben Ang]

Yes, the price point and size makes OM lenses very practical. Thanks for the recommendation on the RMC, they look a bit like the Minolta MD. Anyway, will check out the 17/3.5 but the price does not appear that cheap. Does these RMC comes in native EF mount?

I am wondering how diff is the FD 50/1.2 SSC compared to today's 50/1.2. Aren't they on the same SSC coating? Also, how do you use them on EOS. I understand you need to do surgery on the rear and change the mount.

Again, the Minolta MD will need customized irreversible rear mount change before it fits EOS. I owned the Rokkor 58/1.2 for a brief period of time but the cost of conversion + the inability to focus beyond 5 feet are the reasons why I did not keep it. I think the Minolta's are well built. I would have gone for the fisheye and 24mm if not for the need to perform irreversible conversions and also high probablility of mirror hit.

from reviews i ve read, the current 50 1.2L doesnt stand well esp with its 2k+ price tag... if u check the samples on photozone, the bokeh is really harsh.. if u can get yr hands on a 55mm f/1.2 SSC aspherical, that would be yr best bet. it should be the best that can be converted. its quite rare.. can check cam hospital, they might have.

the older SSC coating technology was optimized for the older film emulsions and it shows very well especially when u shoot black and white. i find newer lenses too clean, almost sterile in character... and yes, conversion is sort of reversible, but u still need to grind off a good 1.5mm or so and then put on an EF mount. as far as i know New FD lenses have the rear element fixed INTO the canon lens mount so you need to house this last element into the new lens mount. for these, the flange distance is also too short to clear the mirror without shaving.

from the lenses i ve tried, minolta is excellent. im using an MC rokkor 135 f/2.8 and the colours are really solid. got an MC 200mm f/3.5 on the way and i ll convert that for nikon F as well. also managed to convert a 35mm f/2.8, though the glass was bad, the image quality was very solid. contrasty and sharp. as a general rule of thumb, anything longer than 50mm should be convertible, anything 100 and over is easy. how was your experience with the MD 58 1.2?

i m not sure about the RMC lenses, i havent seen any in EF mount. but the 17mm is abit more ex cos it really does perform. my 80-200 f4 is surprisingly good, im happy with it since dumping the nikkor 80-200 2.8. that one was a beast to lug around. it doesnt match my primes, but very nice for a zoom.

 

[ManWearPants]

im doing a semi-permanent IR conversion. with this conversion,i'll be able to shoot IR at handheld speed and i will still be able to see through the viewfinder compare to the usual case where you have to compose and put on the filter den take the photos

If you are doing IR, why are you selling your OM lenses. I thot some of these have got IR distance scale on them???

from the lenses i ve tried, minolta is excellent. im using an MC rokkor 135 f/2.8 and the colours are really solid. got an MC 200mm f/3.5 on the way and i ll convert that for nikon F as well. also managed to convert a 35mm f/2.8, though the glass was bad, the image quality was very solid. contrasty and sharp. as a general rule of thumb, anything longer than 50mm should be convertible, anything 100 and over is easy. how was your experience with the MD 58 1.2?

Don't want to OT too much, so we just touch very briefly on the Minoltas. How do you do the conversion? Do you have a lathe? I only know have to send the lens to Jim Buchanan in US. That itself will incur additional cost. But the conversion is top notch. My 58/1.2 is done by him. There are too many quality 50mm in the market. Sad to say I couldn't appreciate the 58/1.2 but instead negate too much on its poor mirror clearance. Also, the next stop after 1.2 is 2.0, there isn't something in the middle which I feel would have been useful. The only positive about this lens is it has a very dreamy bokeh wide open. I believe the 58/1.2 would have been a perfect lens on APS-H where the light fall off will be reduced by the crop and you get a very nice 75/1.2 FL with full mirror clearance. But I am not going to buy a camera for a lens so I have to let it go. I did keep a photo of it for rememberence.

 

[Ben Ang]

If you are doing IR, why are you selling your OM lenses. I thot some of these have got IR distance scale on them???



Don't want to OT too much, so we just touch very briefly on the Minoltas. How do you do the conversion? Do you have a lathe? I only know have to send the lens to Jim Buchanan in US. That itself will incur additional cost. But the conversion is top notch. My 58/1.2 is done by him. There are too many quality 50mm in the market. Sad to say I couldn't appreciate the 58/1.2 but instead negate too much on its poor mirror clearance. Also, the next stop after 1.2 is 2.0, there isn't something in the middle which I feel would have been useful. The only positive about this lens is it has a very dreamy bokeh wide open. I believe the 58/1.2 would have been a perfect lens on APS-H where the light fall off will be reduced by the crop and you get a very nice 75/1.2 FL with full mirror clearance. But I am not going to buy a camera for a lens so I have to let it go. I did keep a photo of it for rememberence.

its not difficult to do.. you basically have to compensate for the difference in the flange distance of the different systems. so if the lens need to be brought closer tot he film plane, then realign the focus helical or shave off some. if it needs to be further, add in spacers. some are even easier as u just need a screw to calibrate inf focus. then the rest is just finding a suitable new mount and matching the holes to secure it onto the lens. its easiest with tele lenses as here is alot of room to play with behind the lens. for wide angle/very fast lenses, then you run into the possibility of the lens hitting the mirror/mirror box. its really just a mechanical conversion. down side is you have to use stop down metering

btw, i believe the canon and nikkor 1.2 lenses have a stop for f/1.4. sure about the nikon, not tooo sure about the canon..

 

[Anthony Lee]

Ben and MWP, appreciate your exchanges on these classic legacy lenses. Personally, I would prefer an alternative lens section where we can discuss many of such lenses. Hopefully, our CS admin will grant us this wish in the near future. The main reason I invited Ben to share his experience on these 50s was to have some direct comparision to the OM 50f1.2 which I am interested to purchase. So, many thanks for your sharing and let's get back to the OMs.

 

[kenji87]

If you are doing IR, why are you selling your OM lenses. I thot some of these have got IR distance scale on them???

i will most likely be using only canon 17-40mm on the converted 350d .. and fatique will be calibrating for auto focus at the focal length.

im really new to IR too. waiting to get the converted 350D to play with . will definitely try out the OMs on the converted body once i get it do you know about any hotspot issue for OMs lenses doing IR ?

 

[Anthony Lee]

I love both my OM 24f2.8 and 35f2 as they sevre as perfect PnS on your SLR or FF DSLR. Both render the sort of color and feel that I personally love.

OM35f2 on 5D at f8.

MBS

Merlion with MBS

 

[ManWearPants]

Got it Anthony.

its not difficult to do.... not tooo sure about the canon..

Ben, let's move the discussion to this Rollei thread.
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=758212&page=2

i will most likely be using only canon 17-40mm on the converted 350d .. and fatique will be calibrating for auto focus at the focal length.

im really new to IR too. waiting to get the converted 350D to play with . will definitely try out the OMs on the converted body once i get it do you know about any hotspot issue for OMs lenses doing IR ?

I am new to photography. This guy gary Ayton has compiled a list. I think he also mentioned somewhere in his site that he used an OM 21/3.5 with 1DsIII.
http://www.ayton.id.au/wp02/?page_id=3466
http://www.ayton.id.au/gary/JAlbumAll/ByLens/Canon1DMIII/OM21mmF3.5/index.htm

 

[ManWearPants]

There are 2 interesting articles by the same guy that are worth some time reading.

OM lenses for m4/3 or Canon:
http://www.ayton.id.au/wp02/?page_id=3097

fast 50mm lenses:
http://www.ayton.id.au/wp02/?page_id=3631

 

[ManWearPants]

16mm Fisheye @ f5.6. This lens led me astray into the Ommmph lenses.

 

[nordleadx]

Tried a Tagotech adapter on my OM 200f4 yesterday and worked perfectly but did not use it a infinity as I usually don't trust the focus confirmation at infinity, prefer to do hyperfocal focusing instead with my 24f2.8 and 35f2, and most other lenses, seldom use at infinity.

OM 200f4, s/no 260xxx
Lens rim data: OLYMPUS OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO AUTO-T 200MM 1:4 260XXX made in japan

Both images shot at f5.6, handheld, to test image isolation and bokeh as I usually use this lens for portraits only on my 5D.

i have the same lens , got together with my om2 or om 1 if i can remember.

my example with this lens, sorry i dont use slr often to post more example