Functionality of Legacy Olympus OM MF Lenses with Pen Micro

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:40 pm

elf wrote:Are these latest shots sharpened?

Yes.

All (RAW) get a one-step sharpening in the camera. Then I add anoth 1-2 stages (JPEGs) in Olympus Master

Harold

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:59 pm

OzRay wrote:I've done macro shots outdoors with a Nikkor 400mm and macro tubes and it works very well to give you standoff distance, but I find it better for larger subjects such as butterflies etc.

That's why I bought mine too.

This is an exercise. That the (non-macro) lens resolves the legs of a pollen beetle from a couple of meters away proves something, not necessarily something of practical use. Daffodils, being the only subject available, are mainly a mass of yellow and don't offer much fine detail.

Next task is to use some of the lenses I use for butterflies, etc. Unfortunately, sunny weather doesn't last very long in the current weather system. By the time I get setup it is often gone.

Harold

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 3:03 am

Harold Gough wrote:Well, I just won an EP-2, 14-42mm lens and a Zuiko 70-300mm digital lens on Ebay.

The 70-300 has some pros and some cons. At the 70mm end, with 72mm extension, I can get 2/3 of a standard postage stamp to fill the frame but at about 10cm from the front of the lens. The 300mm, no extension, covers slightly more than two stamps at about one meter, similar to what I am used to with my Tamron 70-210mm* plus a x2 converter, used for many years for larger, active insects. That reminds me: I have a rare Carl Zeiss Jena 75-300 for OM which I have yet to use/test. Watch this space!

* http://www.adaptall-2.org/lenses/19AH.html

What I don't like is the 70-300's focusing ring. It has exactly the same feel (rather lack of it, turning freely at all times) whether it is having effect or not (AF + manual fine focus or manual focus).

Neither do I like the 'hair trigger' characteristics of the camera's shutter release button when half-depressed for focusing. (I do have it on shutter priority but that is no excuse).

Harold

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 5:59 am

I have compared the three zoom lenses of most interest to me, the idea being to see the comparative detail resolved in a similar area of a subject. I used two subjects: a Chinese 3-D coloured knitted/cloth wall-hanging decoration, selected area ca 2"/59mm wide; part of the back cover of a book, showing part of the bar code.

The camera was on a tripod with 8 second delay, lenses at f11 or so, the EP-2 having its own ideas: f13 & f22!), no filters, hoods, no in-camera sharpening, RAW files each given 2 steps of sharpening in Olympus Master.

Shutter speeds 1/25 or 1/30 sec for the fabric; 1/40. 1/2000! and 1/40 for the bar code.

a) The Olympus Zuiko Digital 70-300mm f4-5.6 which came with the camera

b) My Tamron SP MF Model 19AH 70-210mm (macro capability) film lens

c) My previously untried Carl Zeiss Jena f75-300mm Macro Jenazoom II (OM mount).

Well, I'm pleased I bought that Zeiss!

I hope some of this is of some interest.

Harold

Harold

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Tue Mar 22, 2011 6:55 am

There is one of the Carl Zeiss lenses on Ebay UK right now currently at a bargain price:

Item: 390298677708

Harold

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:14 am

This sharpening lark is driving me insane! Albums here, albums there, albums everywhere!

Here are some results for a funnel spider web (entrance ca 10mm wide). Tripod arrangement and delayed release as before, ISO 400 f11, each lens on closest working distance/maximum magnification, all sharpened to my satisfaction:

Olympus Zuiko 50mm MF macro:

Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 90mm macro MF

Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 35-80mm

Harold

lauriek · Post by **lauriek** » Wed Mar 23, 2011 2:48 pm

Harold have you got the 4/3->micro4/3 adapter? Is that 70-300 the micro4/3 or the 4/3 lens?

If you do have the adapter you owe it to yourself to check out the Zuiko digital 35mm/f3.5 macro lens, it's for 4/3 bodies - and it's a little cracker of a lens, seriously sharp, compact for a 4/3 lens and really quite cheap for new Olympus glass.. The only downside is relatively short working distance at 1:1 inherent to a lens/sensor combo like this.

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:38 am

lauriek wrote:Harold have you got the 4/3->micro4/3 adapter? Is that 70-300 the micro4/3 or the 4/3 lens?

If you do have the adapter you owe it to yourself to check out the Zuiko digital 35mm/f3.5 macro lens, it's for 4/3 bodies - and it's a little cracker of a lens, seriously sharp, compact for a 4/3 lens and really quite cheap for new Olympus glass.. The only downside is relatively short working distance at 1:1 inherent to a lens/sensor combo like this.

I attach the 4/3 zoom (I didn't think there was a micro equivalent but it came with the camera anyway) via the 4/3 adapter. As of yesterday, I can attach OM lenses via that adapter, plus a 4/3 OM adapter, or direct to Micro 4/3.

Thanks, Laurie, for the recommendation. I'll check out the 35mm macro. Yesterday I was potentially into £1,500 for an engine refurb for my car. I may have a much cheaper alternative. In the meantime my piggy bank is behind razor wire!

In the longer term, possibly this summer, a lightweight but versatile digital kit could replace my OM/Tamron for trips by air, but the X-Pan will still reign supreme (panoramic and 35mm formats).

Harold

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:54 am

By the way..
That Oly 50mm f3.5 was apparently optimised for 20:1, which seems odd bearing in mind its focus abilities. ( I have one I bought as "broken" for £18.

)
It seems to me that most lenses give a respectable image for web pictures about 800 pixels wide, they have to be real duffers not to.

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 3:00 am

ChrisR wrote:By the way..
That Oly 50mm f3.5 was apparently optimised for 20:1, which seems odd bearing in mind its focus abilities. ( I have one I bought as "broken" for £18. )
It seems to me that most lenses give a respectable image for web pictures about 800 pixels wide, they have to be real duffers not to.

Interesting. That would suggest its main use was to be on extension.

Although my drift into digital is partly to be able to post web images they must be usable at higher resolution elsewhere.

Harold

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:28 am

lauriek wrote:If you do have the adapter you owe it to yourself to check out the Zuiko digital 35mm/f3.5 macro lens, it's for 4/3 bodies - and it's a little cracker of a lens, seriously sharp, compact for a 4/3 lens and really quite cheap for new Olympus glass.. The only downside is relatively short working distance at 1:1 inherent to a lens/sensor combo like this.

It isn't weather-proof either but I don't do much photography in the rain. Anyway, the lens has some glowing reviews and I've just bought a used one for £159 and should have it tomorrow. (My car repair will not be too expensive after all!).

Thanks Laurie.

Harold

Pau · Post by **Pau** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:03 am

ChrisR wrote:By the way..
That Oly 50mm f3.5 was apparently optimised for 20:1, which seems odd bearing in mind its focus abilities.
...

any reference for that?
I have this OM lens from my film days and it's a pretty standard macro lens (it focuses to 1:2 without extension tubes). It's a very good lens form infinity to 1:1, in the same league as my Canon compact macro 50mm 2.5, but I never suspected i would be optmized as a microscope objective.

ChrisR · Post by **ChrisR** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 1:44 pm

I'll look for it. Perhaps I should have said 1:20 .
Or perhaps more likely a mis-print or a mis-read somewhere!

Later - poking around the net I found various descriptions (one said it has 6 elements, the rest 5 !) , perhaps Alan Wood's http://www.alanwood.net/photography/oly ... 50-35.html is the most reliable.
Optimised for 1:0.1, ie one tenth of life size, but the "recopmmended" range is given as 1:0.1 to 1:2, then the 80mm Macro lens is preferred.

lauriek · Post by **lauriek** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 2:13 pm

Good news on the car and the lens, I'm pretty sure you'll like this one!

The 35/3.5 is not _rated_ as weatherproof but I have used it for years outdoors in all sorts of weather, except really heavy rain, and it's continued to work flawlessly. I do mostly shoot outdoor stuff with weatherproof bodies though, E1 or E3 since the 1 wore out (and I generally pop a plastic food bag or something over the macro flash controller if I'm using that rig in the wet)

Harold Gough · Post by **Harold Gough** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:55 pm

ChrisR wrote:I'll look for it. Perhaps I should have said 1:20 .
Or perhaps more likely a mis-print or a mis-read somewhere!

Later - poking around the net I found various descriptions (one said it has 6 elements, the rest 5 !) , perhaps Alan Wood's http://www.alanwood.net/photography/oly ... 50-35.html is the most reliable.
Optimised for 1:0.1, ie one tenth of life size, but the "recommended" range is given as 1:0.1 to 1:2, then the 80mm Macro lens is preferred.

Correct but the 80mm, which I obtained last year but have yet to use, works only on extension, only at around 1:1* and focusing only at close distances. * Of course, as with all lenses, you can use at higher magnifications than the designers intended.

Harold