Micro 4/3 vs. 3rd party lenses at DVinfo.net

Peter Manojlovic · March 8th, 2011, 10:32 PM

My question is, what makes the smaller 4/3 lenses more desirable or better, than somebody who uses Nikon or Canon lenses via adapter?

Is there a sacrifice in F-stops or other functionality that i'm not aware of??

Olof Ekbergh · March 9th, 2011, 06:07 AM

Well take the Voighlander 25mm f.95.

It is really small light, the optics are very sharp. It is very well made. Mechanical only, no auto anything, I like this myself. There is no other lens in this category really. The only thing I don't like about it is the clicks in the iris settings, for video. I may see if those can be removed.

The down side is it will only fit MFT cameras. This is true for all MFT specific lenses.

In my opinion the MFT lenses are great for this format. But also limited, there are not that many yet, and they may not work on other cameras you may buy in the future.

With PL, Nikon, Canon, Zeiss etc. lenses, you have a huge choice of great lenses that will work on many present and future cameras, but they tend to be bigger and heavier.

One downside of almost all still lenses is that they breathe (Zoom a little when racking focus), this is a good reason to look at cine lenses.

When the Birger mount comes out for Canon and later Nikon, then you will have auto iris and auto focus on those lenses, but right now they only work mechanically, this is not important to me, I never use auto anything, but it will be great to have good control over f-stop and the remote focus will be very useful on jibs, Stedicams etc.

MFT lenses and FT lenses tend to work with the AF100 auto iris and may also have AF, so this may be an important consideration for you. Make sure to test if these features actually work before buying a lens.

I think one reason many people like to use the still lenses is that they like me already have a lot of them.

If I was buying all new lenses I would probably get cine lenses, they will always be the best for video and are future proofed. Who knows how long MFT will be around, my guess is for a long time, but I am not sure how many new video cameras will use this new (relatively) standard.

I hope this helps a little. All lens focal lengths and f-stop ratings are the same no matter what camera they are on, the only thing sensor size changes is the angle of view.

Ed Roo · March 9th, 2011, 08:13 AM

I am curious as to why readers are not recommending Olympus Zuiko lenses?

Olof Ekbergh · March 9th, 2011, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ed Roo

I am curious as to why readers are not recommending Olympus Zuiko lenses?

I have no experience with them, but from what I read they are quite good. There are many other lense manufactures that make good glass as well.

I was just making general recommendations in the above post. And I can really only comment on what I have experience with.

David W. Jones · March 9th, 2011, 04:55 PM

I think you are going to see a very broad range of lens usage on the AF100 series cameras due to the M4/3 mount. Just about any lens made can be mounted to the camera via adapter. Which opens up huge possibilities. As mentioned there's not a huge variety of native M4/3 lenses available yet. The Olympus Zuikos could be a nice zoom set if starting from scratch if you were so inclined. I think the most cost effective thing to do is to purchase a high quality adapter for any lenses you might already own first.

Nigel Barker · March 10th, 2011, 01:37 AM

The Olympus Zuikos zoom lenses although pricey are interesting as they have a maximum aperture of F2 rather than the F2.8 of most other zoom lenses that I can think of.

Lee Mullen · January 8th, 2012, 09:38 PM

What are good adapter for Canon EF lenses?

Olof Ekbergh · January 11th, 2012, 07:46 AM

I use the RedRock adapter it can adjust iris but does not enable IS or auto focus.

It works very well and seems rugged.
Redrock Micro - Live Lens MFT

There will also be a MTF adapter (Mike Tapa) from Britain available soon, it is supposed to have IS enabled.
Mounts & Adaptors

Nigel Barker · January 11th, 2012, 10:38 AM

Don't forget the fabled Birger Mount which is about a year late in shipping Birger Engineering, Inc.. In fact all communication & promises from the company ceased a few months ago. The last tweet was in November https://twitter.com/ErikBirger

I'm guessing that the company has some serious problems either technical or financial so I think that it's time to ask for my deposit back.

Lee Mullen · January 15th, 2012, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Olof Ekbergh

I use the RedRock adapter it can adjust iris but does not enable IS or auto focus.

It works very well and seems rugged.
Redrock Micro - Live Lens MFT

There will also be a MTF adapter (Mike Tapa) from Britain available soon, it is supposed to have IS enabled.
Mounts & Adaptors

The Redrock looks awesome but the $151 shipping to Indonesia does not justify myself to purchase it. That is just ridiculous.

March 8th, 2011, 10:32 PM	#1
Peter Manojlovic Major Player Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Hamilton Ontario Posts: 769	Micro 4/3 vs. 3rd party lenses My question is, what makes the smaller 4/3 lenses more desirable or better, than somebody who uses Nikon or Canon lenses via adapter? Is there a sacrifice in F-stops or other functionality that i'm not aware of??

March 9th, 2011, 06:07 AM	#2
Olof Ekbergh Sponsor: Westside AV Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA Posts: 1,365	Re: Micro 4/3 vs. 3rd party lenses Well take the Voighlander 25mm f.95. It is really small light, the optics are very sharp. It is very well made. Mechanical only, no auto anything, I like this myself. There is no other lens in this category really. The only thing I don't like about it is the clicks in the iris settings, for video. I may see if those can be removed. The down side is it will only fit MFT cameras. This is true for all MFT specific lenses. In my opinion the MFT lenses are great for this format. But also limited, there are not that many yet, and they may not work on other cameras you may buy in the future. With PL, Nikon, Canon, Zeiss etc. lenses, you have a huge choice of great lenses that will work on many present and future cameras, but they tend to be bigger and heavier. One downside of almost all still lenses is that they breathe (Zoom a little when racking focus), this is a good reason to look at cine lenses. When the Birger mount comes out for Canon and later Nikon, then you will have auto iris and auto focus on those lenses, but right now they only work mechanically, this is not important to me, I never use auto anything, but it will be great to have good control over f-stop and the remote focus will be very useful on jibs, Stedicams etc. MFT lenses and FT lenses tend to work with the AF100 auto iris and may also have AF, so this may be an important consideration for you. Make sure to test if these features actually work before buying a lens. I think one reason many people like to use the still lenses is that they like me already have a lot of them. If I was buying all new lenses I would probably get cine lenses, they will always be the best for video and are future proofed. Who knows how long MFT will be around, my guess is for a long time, but I am not sure how many new video cameras will use this new (relatively) standard. I hope this helps a little. All lens focal lengths and f-stop ratings are the same no matter what camera they are on, the only thing sensor size changes is the angle of view. __________________ Olof Ekbergh • olof@WestsideAV.com Westside A V Studios • http://www.WestsideAVstore.com/

March 9th, 2011, 08:13 AM	#3
Ed Roo Major Player Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Columbus USA Posts: 312	Re: Micro 4/3 vs. 3rd party lenses I am curious as to why readers are not recommending Olympus Zuiko lenses?

March 9th, 2011, 04:55 PM	#5
David W. Jones Trustee Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Little Rock Posts: 1,383	Re: Micro 4/3 vs. 3rd party lenses I think you are going to see a very broad range of lens usage on the AF100 series cameras due to the M4/3 mount. Just about any lens made can be mounted to the camera via adapter. Which opens up huge possibilities. As mentioned there's not a huge variety of native M4/3 lenses available yet. The Olympus Zuikos could be a nice zoom set if starting from scratch if you were so inclined. I think the most cost effective thing to do is to purchase a high quality adapter for any lenses you might already own first. __________________ David W. Jones www.joneshdfilms.com

March 10th, 2011, 01:37 AM	#6
Nigel Barker Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK Posts: 3,531	Re: Micro 4/3 vs. 3rd party lenses The Olympus Zuikos zoom lenses although pricey are interesting as they have a maximum aperture of F2 rather than the F2.8 of most other zoom lenses that I can think of.

January 8th, 2012, 09:38 PM	#7
Lee Mullen Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Western Australia Posts: 576	Re: Micro 4/3 vs. 3rd party lenses What are good adapter for Canon EF lenses?

January 11th, 2012, 07:46 AM	#8
Olof Ekbergh Sponsor: Westside AV Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Mount Washington Valley, NH, USA Posts: 1,365	Re: Micro 4/3 vs. 3rd party lenses I use the RedRock adapter it can adjust iris but does not enable IS or auto focus. It works very well and seems rugged. Redrock Micro - Live Lens MFT There will also be a MTF adapter (Mike Tapa) from Britain available soon, it is supposed to have IS enabled. Mounts & Adaptors __________________ Olof Ekbergh • olof@WestsideAV.com Westside A V Studios • http://www.WestsideAVstore.com/

January 11th, 2012, 10:38 AM	#9
Nigel Barker Inner Circle Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK Posts: 3,531	Re: Micro 4/3 vs. 3rd party lenses Don't forget the fabled Birger Mount which is about a year late in shipping Birger Engineering, Inc.. In fact all communication & promises from the company ceased a few months ago. The last tweet was in November https://twitter.com/ErikBirger I'm guessing that the company has some serious problems either technical or financial so I think that it's time to ask for my deposit back.