Using OM lenses

[kumagelo]

Hi all,

Pretty much my first post here.. have been a ghost member for sometime (just looking and reading articles). I have a question on using Olympus OM lenses.. I am thinking of getting one. (specifically the 50mm f1.4) But i was wondering if what I should expect with them, how to use, drawbacks, advantages. any advice would greatly be appreciated. I am currently using an E-510. Thanks!

[egnaro]

Hi,

advantage of using OM lens is decent price with decent image.
drawback is using it in manual and not all aperture is really "usable" especially large aperture. (it is pretty hard to use 50mm at F1.4[I think it is not usable in the 1st place])

Here the list for usable aperture on various OM lens.

Limit of use
AF not available
Only pre-set aperture metering available
Only A mode (Aperture priority mode) is available, but AE may not be accurate.
No f indication on the body.
Distance indicator on the lens may not be accurate. Focus should be done on the finder screen only.


Item Recommended F-Stop Range
Wide Zuiko Fisheye 8mm F2.8 F4-F8
Zuiko Fisheye 16mm F3.5 F4-F8
Zuiko 18mm F3.5 F5.6-F8
Zuiko 21mm F2 F2.8-F8
Zuiko 21mm F3.5 F4-F8
Zuiko 24mm F2 F2.8-F8
Zuiko 24mm F2.8 F4-F8
Zuiko 28mm F2 F4-F8
Zuiko 28mm F2.8 F5.6-F8
Zuiko 28mm F3.5 F5.6-F8
Zuiko 35mm F2 F4-F8
Zuiko 35mm F2.8 F4-F8
Zuiko Shift 24mm F3.5 F5.6-F8
Zuiko Shift 35mm F2.8 F4-F8

Standard Zuiko 40mm F2 F4-F8
Zuiko 50mm F1.2 F4-F8
Zuiko 50mm F1.4 F2.8-F8
Zuiko 50mm F1.8 F2.8-F8
Zuiko 55mm F1.2 F2.8-F8

Telephoto Zuiko 85mm F2 F5.6-F8
Zuiko 100mm F2 F2.8-F8
Zuiko 100mm F2.8 F5.6-F8
Zuiko 135mm F2.8 F5.6-F8
Zuiko 135mm F3.5 F5.6-F8
Zuiko 180mm F2 F2-F11
Zuiko 180mm F2.8 F4-F8
Zuiko 200mm F4 F8-F11
Zuiko 200mm F5 F5-F5.6
Zuiko 250mm F2 F2-F11
Zuiko 350mm F2.8 F2.8-F11
Zuiko Reflex 500mm F8 F8

Macro Zuiko Macro 50mm F2 F2.8-F8
Zuiko Macro 50mm F3.5 F3.5-F8
Zuiko Macro 80mm F4 F5.6-F11
Zuiko Macro 90mm F2 F4-F8
Zuiko Macro 135mm F4.5 F4.5-F11

Item Recommended Focal Length / F-Stop Range

Zoom Zuiko Zoom 28-48mm F4 F5.6-F8 at 28-48mm
F11 at 36mm (close range)

Zuiko Zoom 35-70mm F3.5-4.5 F5.6 at 35-50mm
F8 at 35mm (close range)
F4 at 50mm (close range)
Zuiko Zoom 35-70mm F3.6 F5.6-F8 at 50-70mm
Zuiko Zoom 35-70mm F4 F8 at 35-50mm
F5.6 at 35mm (close range)
Zuiko Zoom 35-70mm F4(AF) F8 at 35-50mm
F5.6 at 35mm (close range)
Zuiko Zoom 35-80mm F2.8 F5.6-F8 at 35-80mm
F4 at 35mm (close range)
Zuiko Zoom 35-105mm F3.5-4.5 F8 at 60-105mm
F5.6 at 60mm (close range)
Zuiko Zoom 50-250mm F5 F8 at 250mm (close range)

Zuiko Zoom 65-200mm F4 F8 at 115-200mm
F5.6 at 115mm (close range)
Zuiko Zoom 75-150mm F4 F5.6-F8 at 105-150mm

Zuiko Zoom 85-250mm F5 F5.6 at 150-250mm
F8 at 150mm (close range)
Zuiko Zoom 100-200mm F5 F5.6-F11 at 140-200mm
F5 at 200mm (close range)

[Notes] ** under consideration
(1) AF not available
(2)Only pre-set aperture metering available
(3) Only A mode (Aperture priority mode) is available, but AE may not be accurate. No f indication on the body.
(4) Distance indicator on the lens may not be accurate. Focus should be done on the finder screen only.

[Kirika]

I disagree! Even the 50mm f1.4 is really quite usable at f1.4. I'm using an E510 myself, and I have a sharp copy of the lens (well, as sharp as those got). The problem is that your viewfinder's DOF will be vastly greater than that of your lens. So the slightest slippage in focus will result in the thin DOF rendering your intended area as a nice smooth blur.

If you find that your eyesight's not good enough to distinguish between the in-focus and out of focus areas, it's possible to use live view to have a more accurate rendition of the situation. Focus bracketing is possible, too. Or maybe a split focus screen, if that's your thing.

Oh, and on the E510, don't forget that you can set the IS to the lens's focal length. That means you can set it to 50mm for the 50mm f1.4. Hey presto! Stabilized film lens =p I'd count that as a plus. heh. But the drawback is that you'll need to keep changing that value if you're using a manual zoom, which may or may not be too much trouble to bother with. I keep IS off for those.

[srinivasanj]

Actually egnaro is kind of right.

Firstly, the details from the site mention the recommended aperture, not the usable aperture.

Secondly, this recommendation is based on the fact that the 4/3 sensor is smaller by about 2 times compared to the size of a standard film. What this means is that at the widest apertures (say 1.4 or 1.8) the picture will be overexposed and compensation is almost always a must.

Stop it down a couple of notches and the lens would work really well. I had a 50mm/1.8 which I sold off because the results were not all that great. For some reason, the depth did not change much between 1.8 and 2.8. I do not have a clue but remember discussing that in one of the threads here.

I retained the 50mm/3.5 though. One of the best lenses I've had to date. Its really sharp even at the wide end.

[srinivasanj]

Managed to get something out of wrotniak's site. It explains the details really well..

http://www.wrotniak.net/photo/43/any-lens.html

[spidey89]

also,using it with adaptor,wide open is quite easy to focus in dim lighting,stop down your aperture,the aperture will close before exposure,meaing that with the adaptor,you can see the aperture blades moving,dimming the entire viewfinder,making it even harder to focus,can only use aperture piority mode or manual mode,just use it like any other lens,only this one has manual and no auto

[Kirika]

One thing to beware of: It's said that the focus may shift slightly for some lenses once you stop them down. In practice, that probably isn't a problem as the extra DOF more than compensates for it.

From personal experience, I do not have exposure problems with the 50mm at f1.4. However, that seems to vary by lens. For some lenses, I have exposure problems even at f2.8. I'm not sure about the physics behind this, but it's something to take note of. I usually memorize which lens has which exposure quirk at what aperture, then compensate accordingly. To be fair, that problem I've observed is with Russian M42 lenses, and not OM. YMMV.

[kumagelo]

wow thanks! quite informative.. too much to handle at the moment and i think would have to read these articles again.. i'm kind of a newbie in photography but quite familiar with the terms though I still get lost around it at times .. my real concern in a simple terms is would the 50mm f1.4 OM be good for portraits?

@egnaro - thanks for the list this has been bookmarked for my future reference

I'm curious how does one do this.. ( set the IS to 50mm)

Quote: Oh, and on the E510, don't forget that you can set the IS to the lens's focal length. That means you can set it to 50mm for the 50mm f1.4. Hey presto! Stabilized film lens =p I'd count that as a plus.

TIA

[spidey89]

i almost wanted to tell you to read the manual then realise that you're using E-510 and this is not the default setting,it's an firmware update for E-510,basically,your firmware must be V1.3 if i remembered correctly,press the IS button,than press the exposure compensation button than turn the dial to your lens focal length

[srinivasanj]

That's right. And I think the 520 onwards, this feature is part of the factory loaded firmware.

In any case, just to state a personal opinion, I stay away from manual lenses in general except for macro since that would more or less involve manual focusing. The reason being, the digital lenses, of course, have auto focus and the settings are much better controlled with these lenses since information is fed back to the body. Additionally, as per wrotniak's write up, manual lenses might not resolve as well as the digital lenses.

The bottom line is that digital and manual lenses were designed for different camera bodies and combining these might not always yield desirable results (though I have had very good results with my macro lens). Cheers.

[Kirika]

Agreed. Not all manual lenses resolve as well as the digitals (I'd say most wouldn't match up, but there are a precious few that will!). One caveat about the 50 1.4: The DOF is shallow enough that it's painfully easy to miss the eye focus if you're going for that. Be warned =p

For me, I generally go for the shallow DoF afforded by fast primes, but also the softness of cheap lenses. There's a certain nostalgia to certain color renditions, flare and the softness of a Mir 1 (for example) relative to the clinical sharpness of modern glass. I'm talking about acceptable softness (that isn't blur per se. Blur is classed "disaster") actually enhancing the pics in a way that's hard to replicate in photoshop. In fact, I think it's hard to replicate even with a softening filter...

[egnaro]

I state based on my personal experience on 50mm F1.4, at F1.4, it is really hard to get subject in focus (close subject) and offen Out of focus. I think mainly it is becuz DOF is too shallow at F1.4

maybe I am not there yet. however @ F2.8, it is much easier.

[OlyFlyer]

Kumagelo, if you are looking for a fast 50mm lens I can really say I am very happy with the Nikkor 50/1.4 I use. It is sharp even wide open and have no problems with colour or metering. I have an E-3, so I don't know how it would perform on the E-510, but this Sunday I'll have a little get together in my home with a few forumers and one of the guys will test the lens on his E-510, so I can get back on it if you are interested.

I also have an OM 100/2.8 which is also a very nice lens. I have several other film lenses, but these two are the best of my lot. Maybe a Tokina 135/2.8 is also in the same, high class but that is too long for many occasions.

[kumagelo]

I'd wait for that OlyFlyer. A few samples images would be nice to the effect of a portrait, if its not requesting too much.

At the risk of being OT, what lenses OM or ZD, do you guys use for portraits? It was my want for a lens for taking portraits that this thread actually came to.

[spidey89]

since f1.8 and f1.4 not a huge difference in terms of aperture,it varies from person to person,some can focus on E-510,some cannot,my friend has problems using my OM on his Canon 1000D and the view finder is about the same as E-510 and yet i don't,so i guess just have to train your eye to focus manually

[srinivasanj]

Another problem with the OM or for that matter the manual lenses from the film days is the fact that there were batches of the same lens produced which were absolutely brilliant and others which were pretty ordinary.

Moreover, you would need to watch out for single coating, multi coating etc. Quite a bit of research required before you jump in. But having said that, you wouldnt be too wrong when investing a couple of hundred bucks in trying these out.

I still want to get the OM Zuiko 90mm/f2. But its just too expensive!

Cheers.

[nstclicks]

Originally Posted by kumagelo my real concern in a simple terms is would the 50mm f1.4 OM be good for portraits? D

Hmm... good question. I've never seen the manual OM 50's described as portrait lenses, though the zuiko digital 50/2.0 is. I suppose going by the logic that the olympus 100mm lenses on full-frame were "portrait" lenses and a 50 mm lens on 4/3 has the field of view of a 100 mm lens in full-frame format, a 50mm lens would be suitable for use as a portrait lens on a E-510 body.

My own experience with OM lenses is that a 50/1.8 has been very nice, but for some reason, the 50/3.5 has not been as sharp as the reviews on the net say it should be. Maybe I'm expecting too much out of it - macro is just challenging. Or maybe I need to clean the lens :-)

[Kirika]

There are many reasons for a vintage lens being somewhat soft. Maybe some goon took it apart and tried to fix it, then didn't realign properly when assembling. Maybe the lens is mighty dirty (unlikely). Maybe the shot was simply OOF (quite likely). Especially considering it's macro. Sometimes the area just happens to be near the DOF, making it appear that the image is in focus, but is not exactly in the DOF itself. I've puzzled over why some of my shots looked off that way, then I saw that sliver of sharpness in front or behind my target! Front/back focus there.

[nstclicks]

Yeah. I think the biggest constraint on my pictures is the guy holding the camera rather than the lens I realize that the main handicap of using manual lenses is not so much the lack of auto-focus, but lack of auto-aperture. I actually don't find it that hard to focus when the lens is mid-to-fully open. The problem is that for macro we need to stop-down to get DOF, and once you stop-down it's impossible to focus manually. Which means you need a good tripod to make sure the camera doesn't move between focusing and shooting (if you set the aperture after focusing)

As for the 50/3.5, I'm probably just expecting too much out of it. It's a 1/2 magnification lens and I'm asking it to resolve details that would require a much higher magnification

[Kirika]

I suppose it also depends on the kind of macro you're doing? If you're shooting a still target, you may either stop down (which may introduce diffraction) or shoot multiple shots and stack them together. Ok so maybe we'll never be able to have access to a light scanning photomacrography rig, so I guess focus stacking is the closest I'd come to that =p

If you want even more details, why don't you get one of the 1x magnification lenses, or the legendary (and really very expensive) OM 20mm f2? Alternatively, flip your 50mm on its back and rig it to the OM bellows. I assure you you'd get some serious magnifications that way. You could even snap on a Raynox 250 on that macro lens to magnify further...