Olympus Bayonet Lenses...

[ChristopherCoy]

Are the old Bayonet mount Olympus lenses useable on any if the "newer" cameras... If you catch my drift?

 

[Dan Fromm]

Are the old Bayonet mount Olympus lenses useable on any if the "newer" cameras... If you catch my drift?

Look on eBay, lazybones.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

There are adapters to use OM system lenses on Canon D-SLRs and on Olympus's 4/3 cameras. I don't know about using them on 4/3 but I think using them on Canon is a waste of time. You have no auto-aperture, no AF, and the whole thing is just really fiddly. Digital users have driven up the price of OM lenses to stupid levels because some of them imagine the lenses are better than Canon. As a lifelong OM film user, and a Canon digital user as well, my advice is to shoot the OM lenses as they were intended, on film in OM bodies. If you want to shoot digital, buy the digital camera maker's lenses.

 

[MattKing]

My main 35mm system is OM.

I have a few Canon EOS film bodies as well, because:

1) I wanted something with AF and built in winders and built in flash;
2) Their eye control focus models work for me; and
3) All but the top line bodies are available used with "amateur" lenses at ridiculously cheap prices.

And because I have Canon EOS film bodies, I have picked up two cheap, relatively old used digital Canon EOS bodies.

I do use my OM lenses on my EOS bodies from time to time - both film and digital. The adapters I have let me use the focus confirmation function in the EOS viewfinders. I do this because I have relatively fast OM glass (35mm f/2.0, 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/2.0). I also have a 24mm f/2.8 OM lens that I like, and an OM 50mm f/3.5 macro that gives me good close focus results.

On the film bodies, the results of using the OM glass are good.

On the digital bodies, I like the flexibility that the fast glass and macro add, but would prefer a "full frame" over a "cropped" sensor.

You have to use stop-down metering, which I find to be a pain unless I have the camera on a tripod or I am shooting at or near wide open.

In my mind, the ability to use adapted lenses is useful if you, like me, aren't able or willing to purchase the equivalent purpose built lenses for your non-OM body.

 

[MattKrull]

My advice is to shoot the OM lenses as they were intended, on film in OM bodies. If you want to shoot digital, buy the digital camera maker's lenses.

I have the opposite opinion as Chris - use the glass you like, even if it wasn't the original purpose.

I really like using my OM glass on my 4/3 camera. I've never found it fiddly. I don't care about auto-aperture (stop down metering isn't a lot of work, the lenses are bright enough I can usually shoot and compose at my selected aperture), and while AF is nice, I like the feel of a good MF lens. Admittedly, without a split-image, I have a lot more out of focus shots, but digital lets you bracket with plenty of shots, so not a concern.

I used my Vivitar Series 1 70-210 to photograph my wife's football games because I couldn't afford a fast digital lens, and I was always really happy with the results. I was also happy with the macro work it did, even if it isn't as sharp as a proper 4/3 macro lens. Even using the plain jane 50mm F1.8 as a portrait lens (since it becomes a 100mm F1.8 with the DoF two stops wider) produces really nice protraits with a colour response I find very pleasing (it lends itself very well to earth tones).

These were taken on a digital camera, so I'll just link to them, but I think they show how nice the basic OM glass works on (a now old and inexpensive) digital camera:
28mm F3.5 http://mattkrull.tumblr.com/post/24547169717/please-this-is-actually-one-of-the-first-photos
50mm F1.8 http://mattkrull.tumblr.com/post/27002241052/portraits-from-the-bbq-maggie-gentle-soul-has

One piece of advice, if you use an old telephoto zoom like the OM 65-200 or the Vivitar 70-210, get a telephoto support rig (I use a manfrotto 293). Those ebay adapters have a tiny bit of play in them, and I worry about hanging a heavy lens off of them. The primes (even teh 135mm F3.5) are so light it is a non-issue.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Well the reason I'm asking is because I have a friend with an OM-1 full film setup, complete with fisheye's etc... She is a glass artist and is taking classes on doing her own product photography. She has no intention of selling the OM, so she was wondering if there were any if the "newer" cameras that she could use them on.

 

[wiltw]

Tell your friend that the OM lenses adapted to any modern dSLR have lost the following:

Ability for the meter to know what actual f/stop is selected
Automatic stop-down of the diaphragm at time of exposure...they are essentially Manual aperture lenses

 

[GRHazelton]

There are adapters to use OM system lenses on Canon D-SLRs and on Olympus's 4/3 cameras. I don't know about using them on 4/3 but I think using them on Canon is a waste of time. You have no auto-aperture, no AF, and the whole thing is just really fiddly. Digital users have driven up the price of OM lenses to stupid levels because some of them imagine the lenses are better than Canon. As a lifelong OM film user, and a Canon digital user as well, my advice is to shoot the OM lenses as they were intended, on film in OM bodies. If you want to shoot digital, buy the digital camera maker's lenses.

Stupid levels is right! I scored a really clean OM 10 with f1.8 and ER case for under $30, but the f2.8 28mm and f2.8 135 would cost, either, about double the cost of the camera and 1.8 50. Too bad, it would have made a nice little walkabout kit.

 

[wiltw]

You have no auto-aperture, no AF, and the whole thing is just really fiddly. Digital users have driven up the price of OM lenses to stupid levels because some of them imagine the lenses are better than Canon. As a lifelong OM film user, and a Canon digital user as well, my advice is to shoot the OM lenses as they were intended, on film in OM bodies. If you want to shoot digital, buy the digital camera maker's lenses.

I got an OM-to-EF adapter, to user my many OM lenses on my Canon dSLRs. With conventional lenses, I rather use the Canon lenses or aftermarket lenses on my dSLRs with only two exceptions:
1) wide open fast aperture, where all of my OM lenses outclass any of the EF lenses that I have for lens speed
2) with special purpose lens, like my OM24mm Perspective Control lens

While I grew up with 35mm SLRs since the mid1960's and bought my OM-1 new about 1976, and I do not consider manual cameras and lenses to be 'fiddly', I have found the EF lenses to be 'fiddly' in one regard...the Canon dSLR does NOT necessarily yield an accurate exposure measurement with stopped down lenses! I have proven that over and over, testing many different Olympus and Tamron and Sigma glass with OM mounts adapted to EF. And the behavior seems to be lens-dependent...some tell you to overexposure more and more as you stop down, some tell you to undexpose more and more as you stop down, so it is impossible to simply use some rule of thumb for compensating meter error! And the testing shows metering irregularity on more than one Canon model dSLR that I have owned.

My technique, therefore, is to always meter using my OM glass with an incident handheld meter, and set the camera manually, ignoring the presence of any meter in the dSLR.

 

[ChristopherCoy]

Tell your friend that the OM lenses adapted to any modern dSLR have lost the following:

Ability for the meter to know what actual f/stop is selected
Automatic stop-down of the diaphragm at time of exposure...they are essentially Manual aperture lenses

I did.

Most of her photography would be in a table top light tent, and on a tripod. Pretty much set once, and always the same.

 

[MattKrull]

Stupid levels is right! I scored a really clean OM 10 with f1.8 and ER case for under $30, but the f2.8 28mm and f2.8 135 would cost, either, about double the cost of the camera and 1.8 50. Too bad, it would have made a nice little walkabout kit.

Like any other system, you keep your eyes peeled for deals. I picked up a pair of OM-10s, both with the 50mm F1.8, a 28mm F2.8, a 135mm F3.5, a 65mm-200mm F4, and a third party 18mm-28mm F4. Now, if I was buying off of KEH or someplace, that would add up to a stupid sum; but as it was I happily parted with $60 for the kit.

I haven't developed any shots from the 135mm F3.5 yet, but I'm looking forward to it, it's a nice handling lens.