srtiwari
Daktari
In considering an X-E1 as an in-between the Olympus OMD and the Leica M9, I was surprised the the adapter (for Leica M or L lenses) does not allow several very popular lenses to be mounted !
I am particularly disappointed about the likelihood of not being able to use the Summilux 35/1.4, the Summicron 35/2 (3rd) and the Biogon- C 35/2.8.
What a bummer ! Anyone else experience this bit of trauma ?
I am particularly disappointed about the likelihood of not being able to use the Summilux 35/1.4, the Summicron 35/2 (3rd) and the Biogon- C 35/2.8.
What a bummer ! Anyone else experience this bit of trauma ?
ZorkiKat
ЗоркийК&
How about the third party adapters? They allow more lenses to be mounted on the F-X. Unlike the original Fuji X-M adapter, the third party adapters have 'wider' throats which do not complicate the fitting of many M or LTM 39 lenses.
StaaleS
Established
I bought an X-E1 last weekend, with the Fuji M adapter. The problem here is that the adapter has electronic connections to the camera, which means that its throat is narrower than it would need to be otherwise. The upside to this is that the camera knows that an adapter is mounted and switches to "shoot without lens"-mode automatically, and the adapter itself gives you a button to press to get into the "select focal length" menu on the camera, for correct EXIF information if nothing else.
The downside is that certain lenses with large-diameter rear elements don't fit. In my case, this included the VC Nokton 35/1.2 (rear diameter) and the DR Summicron 50 (focusing helix), plus an LTM Jupiter-12 35/2.8 which simply pokes too far into the camera.
I picked up a third-party adapter for the Nokton and DR cron (The Jupiter is a lost cause, it interferes with stuff inside the camera itself, irrespective of adapter used.) The two lenses fit with this adapter; problem solved. The downside is the need to select "shoot without lens" and focal length the hard way, which actually isn't all that hard.
The usual caveats about build quality and precision engineering, or lack thereof, of any third-party adapter do apply, I haven't had opportunity to test it out yet.
The downside is that certain lenses with large-diameter rear elements don't fit. In my case, this included the VC Nokton 35/1.2 (rear diameter) and the DR Summicron 50 (focusing helix), plus an LTM Jupiter-12 35/2.8 which simply pokes too far into the camera.
I picked up a third-party adapter for the Nokton and DR cron (The Jupiter is a lost cause, it interferes with stuff inside the camera itself, irrespective of adapter used.) The two lenses fit with this adapter; problem solved. The downside is the need to select "shoot without lens" and focal length the hard way, which actually isn't all that hard.
The usual caveats about build quality and precision engineering, or lack thereof, of any third-party adapter do apply, I haven't had opportunity to test it out yet.
Last edited:
ZorkiKat
ЗоркийК&
Just about all the LTM lenses I have fit the XE-1; not being able to use the Jupiter-12 is a minor disappointment.
I have been using lenses from 15mm to 135mm on the XE-1. In those times, the 'shoot without lens' FL has been at 21mm. I keep forgetting about that function in the menu. I have not seen any adverse effects when I put on the 15mm Heliar (which is what I use with the camera 90% of the time now) or the 50mm Industar/Jupiter lenses, or even the long 85/90/135 lenses.
I shifted the focal length selector from 21mm to a custom value of 15mm for the Heliar. I do not really see differences in the 'before' and 'after' phtoos. Or am I missing something?
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
The Fuji adapter gives you two things really. Easy selection of focal length for correct EXIF. And more importantly, you can store 5 presets with lens corrective data, distortion, chromatic abberations etc.
If you use an after market adapter, changing the focal length may result in correct EXIF, but it will do nothing to correct lens characteristics.
If you use an after market adapter, changing the focal length may result in correct EXIF, but it will do nothing to correct lens characteristics.
srtiwari
Daktari
Thank you for all the feedback.
It sounds like many have visited this issue. Once I'm close to making a decision,I will need to decide re: the adapter.
Since the Fuji X series uses a larger , and different, sensor than the Micro4/3rds body (OMD), I assume there will be a significant improvement in IQ. Has anyone switched over and experienced this ?
It sounds like many have visited this issue. Once I'm close to making a decision,I will need to decide re: the adapter.
Since the Fuji X series uses a larger , and different, sensor than the Micro4/3rds body (OMD), I assume there will be a significant improvement in IQ. Has anyone switched over and experienced this ?
StaaleS
Established
Just about all the LTM lenses I have fit the XE-1; not being able to use the Jupiter-12 is a minor disappointment.
I have been using lenses from 15mm to 135mm on the XE-1. In those times, the 'shoot without lens' FL has been at 21mm. I keep forgetting about that function in the menu. I have not seen any adverse effects when I put on the 15mm Heliar (which is what I use with the camera 90% of the time now) or the 50mm Industar/Jupiter lenses, or even the long 85/90/135 lenses.
I shifted the focal length selector from 21mm to a custom value of 15mm for the Heliar. I do not really see differences in the 'before' and 'after' phtoos. Or am I missing something?
Yeah... the Jupiter will fit if focused to minimum focus distance I think (I just tried once, didn't want to damage the glass) but you cannot use the full focusing range because the rear element bumps into the camera body.
Selecting focal length on a third-party adapter will give you updated EXIF. Nothing more - but if you remember to update the setting it can be useful info. God knows I often wished my film-Leicas had this function
willie_901
Mentor
The OMD sensor is excellent.
The main advantage of the APS-C sensor is: in order to achieve equivalent performance to an APS-C sensor all your m4/3 lenses must be faster than the APS-C camera's lenses. In fact the lenses have to be 1.5 times faster. This also holds when the lenses are stopped down because you have to change perspective (move the camera) to achieve equivalent DOF because the m4/3 camera has a wider aperture.
This means to achieve equivalent performance you will need larger and more expensive lenses. There is less variety too because in general there are fewer fast lenses with short lengths made and sold than less expensive slower, longer focal length lenses. For me this is an issue because I prefer wide angles of view and there are fewer fast wide angle lenses out there. Another factor is corner performance as the focal length decreases and the maximum aperture increases to maintain equivalence.
Put another way, the only way to record more light, or signal, is to increase the sensor area or decrease the f stop number. The noise levels are determined by quantum uncertainty and the camera electronics. So the noise levels are essentially constant for many contemporary cameras with the latest CMOS technology. All we can do improve IQ is record more photons.
This white paper goes into the details.
http://www.falklumo.com/lumolabs/articles/equivalence/
The main advantage of the APS-C sensor is: in order to achieve equivalent performance to an APS-C sensor all your m4/3 lenses must be faster than the APS-C camera's lenses. In fact the lenses have to be 1.5 times faster. This also holds when the lenses are stopped down because you have to change perspective (move the camera) to achieve equivalent DOF because the m4/3 camera has a wider aperture.
This means to achieve equivalent performance you will need larger and more expensive lenses. There is less variety too because in general there are fewer fast lenses with short lengths made and sold than less expensive slower, longer focal length lenses. For me this is an issue because I prefer wide angles of view and there are fewer fast wide angle lenses out there. Another factor is corner performance as the focal length decreases and the maximum aperture increases to maintain equivalence.
Put another way, the only way to record more light, or signal, is to increase the sensor area or decrease the f stop number. The noise levels are determined by quantum uncertainty and the camera electronics. So the noise levels are essentially constant for many contemporary cameras with the latest CMOS technology. All we can do improve IQ is record more photons.
This white paper goes into the details.
http://www.falklumo.com/lumolabs/articles/equivalence/