Olympus E1/E300/etc. and use of manual lenses

Here is what I have heard so far regarding lenses and their
requirements for digital bodies:

1) Full frame=excellent (i.e. Leica/Contax) lenses can actually
outresolve the body.
2) 1.5/1.6X crop cameras=Cropping helps most lenses since a lens
usually performs its best in the center. With this cropping, many
lesser quality lenses can perform as well as higher end lenses.

and now...

3) Olympus with a 2X crop would make me think that if a 1.5/1.6X crop
factor means that one must not need to use such high dollar glass, then
a 2X crop would mean one could use even lesser quality glass to achieve
good results.

Question 1 is: Why are high end lenses from the 35mm world needed to
produce results comparable to the digital glass used for the Olympus
4/3 cameras???

Question 2 is: What is considered "high end" glass when it comes to
comparing to the Olympus digital lenses? In other words, what manual
lenses from any manufacturer are able to equal or even outperform the
Olympus digital ones? Are there any manual lenses that can outperform
the digital lenses?

 

They aren't. Regular Olympus Zuiko OM lenses will match them, in large
part
because of the "only using the centre of the 35mm light cone" thing you
mentioned.
Best of all, ZERO vignetting because the lens area (edges) that cause
fall off are not
used to form the image.
http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/58937829

However, the top end Olympus glass (pro digital stuff) is very good.

The standard lenses being used by image fanatics are:
Leica R glass
Zeiss glass
Olympus Zuiko OM glass.

Check out the threads here:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/board/55

 

<--- not really. Olympus 2x crop TRICKS you thinking that you can get SHARP
result from their entry level lenses.
well .. its not. ie .. my 14-45 glass said to have 3.5-5.6 aperture , while
in the 35mm world .. the FoV is 7-11.2 ... which basically most lens max
performance.
if you see the output from it, it is comparable to Canon 17-40 L glass [-
the distortion] which cost almost twice more.

If you want, try grabbing a FF dslr [== Canon 1Ds Mk II] and use the 17-40 L
glass on it.
crop it to E-1 / E-300 FoV and see which ones is sharper.

Many.
Leica, Zeiss, some Nikkor can easily outperform Oly ZD lenses.
BUT a friend of mine who uses the 35-100 / 2.0 ZD [on E-330] and the 70-200
f/2.8 L IS [on 1Ds Mk II] swore the Olympus is much sharper.
Which is true as the FoV of the 35-100 /2.0 on a Oly body is like a 70-200
f/4 with more light coming in ... the wonder of Olympus system.

=bob=

 

I cannot help but laugh that his 35-100 glass is sharper on the E330
than his 70-200 is on the 1DSMKII)! I do not at all think it is
impossible. I have posed this topic because of the mixed
reviews/statements that many have posed about using manual lens glass
on the Olympus bodies vs. the digital lenses made for them. I have not
seen enough opinions or feedback so I wanted to get some more since I
have the E1 on the way and am looking into the manual lens use on this
body along with the 11-22mm for a wide angle lens (unless major
correction can be done to a fish-eye lens to make the image look
uniform, it cannot work on the 4/3 body)...and for wide angle work, you
can still get a 20mm lens from the manual world that will not produce
the fish-eye look and still be relatively wide enough lens for overall
useage. I would love to see a high end 10mm lens designed for the 4/3
body. I can understand the zoom concept since all the manufacturers
seem to have to have one for the wide angle part on digital cameras,
but it would be nice to see a trend towards the making of prime lenses
for these cameras.

You raised a very important point that I have not read anywhere=FOV on
digital Zuiko lenses=2X which makes it obvious why the digital lenses
would be as good as they are since they are operating already in stop
down mode (for 35mm world) which is what most zoom lenses like to do to
have best results.

I think a lot of people that have claimed the manual lenses are not as
good as the digital or need to have so much resolution in order to
compare to the digital ones of the Olympus lineup have not stopped the
lens down enough and tend to shoot at/or close to wide open when in
fact Olympus themselves say that for users of an OM adapter, you should
stop the lens down a lot. From a Luminous Landscape review: "The
instruction sheet included with the OM adapter listed recommended
apertures for these lenses when used on 4/3 bodies. Basically, they
recommend working in a range from one stop under maximum aperture to
F/8 or F/11." Funny the reviewer didn't follow Olympus's instructions
when he made a comparison between an OM lens, Zeiss lens, and the 14-54
digital...

Thanks for the replies and I look forward to trying out some manual
lenses of all sorts with the Olympus E1 coming tomorrow!...not sure if
the adapter for the manual lenses will be here, though (sad face).

 

<-- well you can laugh all you want.
but considering he is a friend and he uses all the top lens and top system
availiable ..
I'll stick to his comment on a system rather than reading on the web.

The bodies he is using atm : 1DsMkII, 1DmkIIn, 20D, 20D IR, D2x, H1D, R-D1s,
E-1, E-330, E-500, Mamiya ZD
and name any top glass you can remember .. he might own one .. the Noctilux
definitely is his pocket camera lens, plugged into his R-D1.

 

May I have just one of those cameras...maybe the R-1DS?! I suppose
we'll see the E3 on that list sometime this year. Thanks again for the
info and opinion. It really helps a lot and now it is time to find the
right glass for the E1 body. I like the look of the digital glass for
the E1 (more expensive zooms), but they are way out of my price range.
Thanks again for your input. It is greatly appreciated!

 

One thing for sure .. they are weatherproof.

Was using my E-1 + the 14-45 kit lens in a pouring rain the other day .. no
dramas at all !

 

You do understand the 14-45 ISN'T weatherproof!

 

Who said this?

I'm not sure where you got this info..

Because the digital zuikos are very good optics. It's not hard to find
something better than a canon WA zoom..

A few I've used that work "as good as" the DZ lenses include the OM 85mm F2,
100mm f2, nikon 300mm F2.8 in other words, top shelft lenses from 35mm
systems.

 

I know. That's why I said .. they are good !
[hence .. I packed after the photos are taken . .which is around 5 mins ]

 

Have you read Andrzej Wrotniak's comments on using non-4/3 lenses on
a 4/3 camera?
http://www.wrotniak.com/photo/oly-e/any-lens.html
He addresses a bunch of the concerns and issues involved.