Olympus lens on Canon EOS - PixelPix Photography Help Blog

Hello.

My latest blog entry talks about the use of Olympus lenses on Canon
EOS bodies.

http://russellspixelpix.blogspot.com...lr-one-of.html

Cheers

Russell Stewart
My Gallery:
http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery

My Competition Web Site:
http://www.potd.com.au

My Photography Help Blog:
http://blog.pixelpix.com.au

"PixelPix" wrote in message
oups.com...
Hello.

My latest blog entry talks about the use of Olympus lenses on Canon
EOS bodies.

http://russellspixelpix.blogspot.com...lr-one-of.html

Cheers

Russell Stewart
My Gallery:
http://www.pixelpix.com.au/gallery

My Competition Web Site:
http://www.potd.com.au

My Photography Help Blog:
http://blog.pixelpix.com.au


Hi

In spite of all the times I have slagged off blogspots dot com postings, I
must say that this site is both worthwhile and interesting.

The articles are very well written, (in spite of his comments about his
typing skills), and provide advice and info which will be of use to most
Photographers. Even if, like me, you think you know a lot, you will still
find something of use.

Roy G

In article .com,
PixelPix writes
Hello.

My latest blog entry talks about the use of Olympus lenses on Canon EOS
bodies.

I think you have your critique of your early adapter the wrong way
round: if you couldn't focus at infinity it is because the adapter was
too thick, not too thin. Closer focussing moves the lens away from the
sensor.

There are a couple of other reasons for needing a quality adapter, one
with the correct thickness which, although they don't apply to the
lenses you list, could be important to anyone else following your blog.

If you are using a zoom lens then the wrong adapter thickness, whether
too thick or too thin, will result in the focus drifting with zoom. So
you might get excellent manual focus at the long end of the zoom and
find the focus shifting when you pull back to the wide end of the zoom.
All of my OM lenses have separate zoom and focus rings and hold their
focus excellently throughout the range. This seems to be typical of
older MF lenses, while AF lenses which can rely on the electronics
correcting any mis-focus as soon as the shutter is pressed, and it is a
shame to lose that reliability because of a cheap adapter.

Also, lenses which use internal focussing mechanisms (rather than
shifting the entire optical assembly back and forth) rely on the correct
backworking distance for optimum performance. A poor adapter can result
in sub-optimal lens performance, with resolution much lower than it
should be.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

On Jun 24, 12:29 am, Kennedy McEwen wrote:
In article .com,
PixelPix writes

Hello.

My latest blog entry talks about the use of Olympus lenses on Canon EOS
bodies.

I think you have your critique of your early adapter the wrong way
round: if you couldn't focus at infinity it is because the adapter was
too thick, not too thin. Closer focussing moves the lens away from the
sensor.

There are a couple of other reasons for needing a quality adapter, one
with the correct thickness which, although they don't apply to the
lenses you list, could be important to anyone else following your blog.

If you are using a zoom lens then the wrong adapter thickness, whether
too thick or too thin, will result in the focus drifting with zoom. So
you might get excellent manual focus at the long end of the zoom and
find the focus shifting when you pull back to the wide end of the zoom.
All of my OM lenses have separate zoom and focus rings and hold their
focus excellently throughout the range. This seems to be typical of
older MF lenses, while AF lenses which can rely on the electronics
correcting any mis-focus as soon as the shutter is pressed, and it is a
shame to lose that reliability because of a cheap adapter.

Also, lenses which use internal focussing mechanisms (rather than
shifting the entire optical assembly back and forth) rely on the correct
backworking distance for optimum performance. A poor adapter can result
in sub-optimal lens performance, with resolution much lower than it
should be.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

Thanks Kennedy,

I have made the change and also quoted your zoom and internal focus
comments (giving you full credit naturally)... let me know if this is
not OK and I will remove it.

Cheers

Russell

In article . com,
PixelPix writes
Thanks Kennedy,

I have made the change and also quoted your zoom and internal focus
comments (giving you full credit naturally)... let me know if this is
not OK and I will remove it.

Thanks Russell, your welcome.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

Good article Russell. Well written and good information. I'll post a
link to it off of my site, if that's ok?

Cheers,

Wayne
--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/
Publisher, Experimental Digital Photography
http://www.experimentaldigitalphotography.com
Personal art site http://www.cosshall.com/

On Jun 24, 7:59 am, PixelPix wrote:
On Jun 24, 12:29 am, Kennedy McEwen wrote:



In article .com,
PixelPix writes

Hello.

My latest blog entry talks about the use of Olympus lenses on Canon EOS
bodies.

I think you have your critique of your early adapter the wrong way
round: if you couldn't focus at infinity it is because the adapter was
too thick, not too thin. Closer focussing moves the lens away from the
sensor.

There are a couple of other reasons for needing a quality adapter, one
with the correct thickness which, although they don't apply to the
lenses you list, could be important to anyone else following your blog.

If you are using a zoom lens then the wrong adapter thickness, whether
too thick or too thin, will result in the focus drifting with zoom. So
you might get excellent manual focus at the long end of the zoom and
find the focus shifting when you pull back to the wide end of the zoom.
All of my OM lenses have separate zoom and focus rings and hold their
focus excellently throughout the range. This seems to be typical of
older MF lenses, while AF lenses which can rely on the electronics
correcting any mis-focus as soon as the shutter is pressed, and it is a
shame to lose that reliability because of a cheap adapter.

Also, lenses which use internal focussing mechanisms (rather than
shifting the entire optical assembly back and forth) rely on the correct
backworking distance for optimum performance. A poor adapter can result
in sub-optimal lens performance, with resolution much lower than it
should be.
--
Kennedy
Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)

Thanks Kennedy,

I have made the change and also quoted your zoom and internal focus
comments (giving you full credit naturally)... let me know if this is
not OK and I will remove it.

Cheers

Russell

On Jun 24, 10:53 am, Wayne wrote:
Good article Russell. Well written and good information. I'll post a
link to it off of my site, if that's ok?

Cheers,

Wayne
--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker,http://www.dimagemaker.com/
Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/
Publisher, Experimental Digital Photographyhttp://www.experimentaldigitalphotography.com
Personal art sitehttp://www.cosshall.com/


[CHOMP]

I am happy for you to link to any part of, or all of my blog
Wayne. ;-)

Sorry I don't have a "links" page on the blog yet, but I will get to
it soon and return the link.

Cheers

Russell
My Photography Help Blog: http://blog.pixelpix.com.au