![]() ![]() I think I can see a pattern to what is going on now. I have done some daylight comparisons with the A7ii. You can always try it and see for yourself and if not happy Amazon gives you 30 days on the return. Here's the result of adapter is $19.95 at Amazon. However, I did have success, using an old Nikon Nikkor 55mm f3.5 AI micro manual lens on the E-M10 Mark II. I used a Fotodiox 4/3 adapter to mount the lens. I had a Helios 44 that I tried a couple of weeks ago on an E-M10 Mark II and was not successful with it to any degree. I know I am a little late to this particular party but I still can't find the answer to my question which is: does the Helios 44 produce ANY interesting bokeh on the OMD EM5 (or, I guess, similar M43) as is, or must I necessarily get somebody to reverse the front element to get the swirly effect? I know there will be MORE swirls with the adjustment, but I am after a fairly subtle, but discernible, effect, especially for nature closeups. On the other hand, if you think it might be helpful, I will post some examples and/or do some more comparisons. However, I can't see any reason why a lens might perform so differently with different sensor sizes, so perhaps this is a red herring.)Īnyway, perhaps none of this would be of any concern to you. (I have it in mind that you said you had a friend who got great results with the Heliios on full frame and that is why you were wondering about using it on MFT. ![]() Entirely unlike the G80 comparisons, the Helios came out better from this. Rather strangely, I did a single test series (indoors, at night, high ISO, hand-held, slow shutter speeds) doing like for like comparisons of a single scene (a bookshelf) with a Sony A7ii full frame camera at several apertures with the Helios and a Sony 24-240 (not regarded as a great performer, but the only native Sony lens that I have). It also seemed that the in-focus area became softer as the aperture increased from f/5.6 to f/2, becoming very soft at f/2 (when the swirlies would be best I suppose). The 12-60 at 60 has a maximum aperture of f/5.6, so obviously it can't match the background blur that the Helios can achieve, but the Helios seemed to suffer from a comparative lack of sharpness that looked rather significant to me, and also possibly lens flare contributing to a comparative lack of contrast. I have done some like for like comparisons, shooting these 11 scenes on two G80s, one with a Helios 44 and one with a Panasonic 12-60mm kit lens kept at 60mm. I don't know if this will matter to you, as I think you may be most interested in the swirly side of things, and the Helios may be sufficiently inexpensive for this to matter to you, but I thought I should mention it anyway just in case it would matter. Thanks for all useful info and, especially, examples of images! Much appreciated! When I have a spare grand burning a hole in my pocket I'll think about the Lumix 42,5mm F/1.2. That said, I think a 120mm or so minimum scene width is pretty large for flower close-ups, at least for a lot of the ones I do, and even less suitable for most invertebrates. 1:2 of course has nothing to do with magnification. Thanks to a speedy response in the Adapted Lens Talk forum, I now know this was a pretty stupid mistake I made. ![]() Under normal circumstances I would probably have kept only three of them. All have been processed in DXO PhotoLab and post processed in Lightroom. These are not straight out of the camera. I'm afraid I didn't keep track of which I used for which images. Is the adapter throwing it out? Perhaps with the adapter it can't go to 1 2, or anything close?Īnyway, here are some images. It seems to work ok, although I noticed that setting the focus to infinity it is out of focus and I have to put the focus distance around half way between the 4m and 10m marks to get distant things in focus. Perhaps I have a faulty lens? Don't know. With the lens set to its minimum distance of 0.5 metre the scene width was around 117mm. It is marked as 1:2 but I didn't seem to be able to get any of the flowers large in the frame. ![]() The first thing that struck me was how little magnification it gave me. There aren't many flowers around now, but enough to try it out on. Turns out though that I also bought an MFT adapter for it so I took it out into the garden on a G80 for 20 minutes before rain stopped play. That didn't work out and I haven't used it for anything else. I bought it a while ago because (as far as I recall) I wanted a manual lens to reverse for macro. I don't really know anything about legacy lenses, but is this the lens you are referring to? Thanks for opinions but I do have a friend who gets GREAT effects with this setup.but on a full frame. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |