lfp
Newbie
I have a few M lenses that use together with my M7.
As I do not intend to buy the M8 for now.
I'm looking for the best digital solution to use those M lenses.
Any ideias ? Lumix/Panasonic ? Olympus ? Epson ?
What the best solution avaiable....
thanks
lfp
As I do not intend to buy the M8 for now.
I'm looking for the best digital solution to use those M lenses.
Any ideias ? Lumix/Panasonic ? Olympus ? Epson ?
What the best solution avaiable....
thanks
lfp
Axel
singleshooter
There are a lot of threads for the fourthirds-M-theme in this forum.
Make your own choice.
My opinion is that the use of such devices have nothing to do with the use of M-Lenses on a rangefinder.
If you want, have a look at some used Epson R-D1.
They are cheaper than M8s but they are true rangefinders too and a crop of 1,6 (my 35mm lens "becomes"
a 50mm in the digital world) is just acceptable for me.
On fourthirds, with a crop of 2,0, just a 35mm-lens will be a "tele"...
What do I have to expect when a camera only uses the inner half of my expensive lens?
No, thats not really my use of a M-lens in the digital world...
Regards, Axel
Make your own choice.
My opinion is that the use of such devices have nothing to do with the use of M-Lenses on a rangefinder.
If you want, have a look at some used Epson R-D1.
They are cheaper than M8s but they are true rangefinders too and a crop of 1,6 (my 35mm lens "becomes"
a 50mm in the digital world) is just acceptable for me.
On fourthirds, with a crop of 2,0, just a 35mm-lens will be a "tele"...
What do I have to expect when a camera only uses the inner half of my expensive lens?
No, thats not really my use of a M-lens in the digital world...
Regards, Axel
Last edited:
Al Kaplan
Mentor
Scan the negatives.
willie_901
Mentor
I thought about this issue quite a bit since I handled an EP-1 and a G1 a several weeks ago. In the end I concluded that all digital solutions for M lenses (including a used M8) have significant disadvantages. You just have to decide which issues/problems you can live with. If the new Epson RD-1X was sold in the US, I'd choose that body over all the other currently available options.
I decided I can't live with any of the current alternates to film for M lens usage, so I am sticking with my ZI-M body. Luckily I have access to a good film lab – and I can develop my own TriX if needed.
I do believe the instant success of the EP-1 bodes well for a different platform digital for M lenses in the next 18-24 months.
I decided I can't live with any of the current alternates to film for M lens usage, so I am sticking with my ZI-M body. Luckily I have access to a good film lab – and I can develop my own TriX if needed.
I do believe the instant success of the EP-1 bodes well for a different platform digital for M lenses in the next 18-24 months.
back alley
IMAGES
i was first as excited as anyone to be able to use my zeiss m lenses on a g1 but have grown less so. in fact, i am thinking of selling my adapter as i have not used it in ages.
i love the g1 but much prefer using the panasonic lenses on it.
but the rd1 is another matter completely. i love it. it IS a rangefinder, feels like a rf and offers the rf experience and i get to use my lenses on it. i would prefer full frame just so there would be no crop factor but i am learning to live with it. the quality is sufficient for me and no one has complained about any of the prints that i have shown them.
i would like to try an m8 but my budget does not allow for that.
joe
i love the g1 but much prefer using the panasonic lenses on it.
but the rd1 is another matter completely. i love it. it IS a rangefinder, feels like a rf and offers the rf experience and i get to use my lenses on it. i would prefer full frame just so there would be no crop factor but i am learning to live with it. the quality is sufficient for me and no one has complained about any of the prints that i have shown them.
i would like to try an m8 but my budget does not allow for that.
joe
What Al said. To get the best out of your M lenses, send your film to a pro lab like North Coast, and have them do the premium scan.
That said, I use M lenses on a G1, they work extremely well, the character comes through, although the effective focal length doesn't. But there are many good things about 100mm effective focal length Summicrons and Summiluxes!
That said, I use M lenses on a G1, they work extremely well, the character comes through, although the effective focal length doesn't. But there are many good things about 100mm effective focal length Summicrons and Summiluxes!
djonesii
Well-known
M lenses on G1 vs M lens on M6
M lenses on G1 vs M lens on M6
I went off down the bunny trail of large format. In order to get ready for the fact that I would need to develop my own film, I started shooting the M6 again, and using my 40mm like a 40mm rather than an 80mm is sweet!
I can get a roll developed and into digital in an evening, so for me, that's 24 frames. As a general rule, I will call about 50% of those images keepers at the web level. ... so 12 frames. With the G1/24mm F4, I can easily shoot and look at several hundred frames in the same time. For some reason, my keeper rate drops down to about 10%, so I'll end up with about 50 frames of what I'm willing to put on the web. I think the M6/range finder and film just slows/allows me to make better composition decisions.
As other folks have mentioned, the character is different. I frequent a forum called APUG, and they have a quote from some one or another at the top of their page,
That is called grain. It is supposed to be there." -Flotsam
While I would call the scanned images not as good from a technical view, not as sharp, more apparent noise, and sometimes not as well focused, they just have something that I prefer. When I move up to MF or LF, the images can be just as good, if not better than what I can get from the Nikon, and the G1, but that is a different discussiion.
So each one has different attributes, and I'm fortunate enough to have a few cameras to choose from.
M lenses on G1 vs M lens on M6
I went off down the bunny trail of large format. In order to get ready for the fact that I would need to develop my own film, I started shooting the M6 again, and using my 40mm like a 40mm rather than an 80mm is sweet!
I can get a roll developed and into digital in an evening, so for me, that's 24 frames. As a general rule, I will call about 50% of those images keepers at the web level. ... so 12 frames. With the G1/24mm F4, I can easily shoot and look at several hundred frames in the same time. For some reason, my keeper rate drops down to about 10%, so I'll end up with about 50 frames of what I'm willing to put on the web. I think the M6/range finder and film just slows/allows me to make better composition decisions.
As other folks have mentioned, the character is different. I frequent a forum called APUG, and they have a quote from some one or another at the top of their page,
That is called grain. It is supposed to be there." -Flotsam
While I would call the scanned images not as good from a technical view, not as sharp, more apparent noise, and sometimes not as well focused, they just have something that I prefer. When I move up to MF or LF, the images can be just as good, if not better than what I can get from the Nikon, and the G1, but that is a different discussiion.
So each one has different attributes, and I'm fortunate enough to have a few cameras to choose from.
JBurnett
Member
NOT the G1, nor the E-P1.
These cameras must be considered for their own merits -- reasonably compact, interchangeable-lens cameras, with quite good IQ. The fact that a couple of your M-lenses may make splendid portrait or telephoto lenses on these m4/3 cameras would be an added bonus, not the primary reason to buy.