OM lens adapted for EF - good and bad

M

mumrar

Suspended / Banned
Messages
521
Name
Matt
Edit My Images
Yes
Let's start with the info and the good news. I purchased a Zuiko Auto-W 28mm f/2.8 off the bay, fine condition but cheap due to a dented filter ring but otherwise okay. I bought an AF-confirm adapter for OM-EF having heard good things about AF confirm. I can only add positive about the AF confirm, I'm getting shots spot on at f/2.8 all the time. The lens itself is a beauty, and the images are stunningly sharp, even wide open at f/2.8.

And now for the bad news, so firstly, see the image (hopefully) linked below
zuiko2028mm.jpg


If you look towards the top of the adapter you can see the screw that is put through to move a lever which enables full aperture control. This is not in the correct place, and with the adapter locked in place only engages the mechanism about 45-50%. This means apertures of only f/2.8-5.6 work fully.

This has left me a little downhearted due to having an actual Olympus lens, which must conform exactly to the specification of OM mount, and the adapter cannot do it justice. As you may be able to see, I've effected a gaffer tape fix for now, but I had hoped it would all work 'out of the box' or bubblewrap, so to speak.

Short of drilling and threading a very small diameter hole in the correct place, I'm not sure how to permanently remedy this. Does the blame for this lay with the adapter, or have I bought a lens not fully designed around the OM mount specification?

To help forum experts in this area, this is, in full, everything written around the front element of the lens:

OLYMPUS OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO AUTO-W 28mm 1:2.8 240278 Japan.

Hope someone can help me out, as the images produced part of this experiment has been extremely encouraging!
 
The lens is right, the adapter isn't.
 
interesting, ive got an OM-EOS adapter and an olympus 28mm f2.8..

i dont remember that being a problem (not to say it isnt.. i havent used it for a while..)

i'll have a look when i get home.
 
Last edited:
Hope you get this sorted. Maybe it's just a poorly made adapter.

Maybe those with adapters that work, and those that don't, could mention where they got them from? That'd be a great help for anyone looking at the same thing in the future. That way we could build up, over a forum search, a database of these little photo accessories that are worth buying, and those that aren't.
 
Mine works. Looking from the red dot on the lens side of the adaptor the pin should be about 145 degrees around.

P2090798%20copy.jpg



100 posts :clap:
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the advice and suggestions, and the pics were a great help. As is often the case, the lens and the adapter are both fine, it's the operator.

The silver ring which shows the hyperfocal distances against your focal ring held the answer. There's a button to the left of the left hand 22 (if you look from above the camera back), press that and it moves a little block out of the runner that the adapter runs around - BINGO!!

Cheers for the responses, its reinvigorated my keeness in photography, it's putting a bit more of my thoughts into the photography.
 
Thanks for the help, now I'm on the lookout for a list of 3 or 4 other 'must have' OM primes to complete a manual kit for me. Obviously not including the 28mm f/2.8
 
So 50mm 1.4 or 1.2?
 
300mm f/4.5 is a superb long prime. I keep trying to sell mine, but nobody wants it. Instead, I'm going to use it on the 550D [as I have a rare Kiron 1.4x adapter, the only 1.4x available not made by Olympus themselves]!

For those of you with decent working adapters - where did you buy?
 
I really like my Olympus 135mm f3.5 which I think can be picked up fairly cheaply as they were reasonable common after the 50mm f1.8.
 
21mm F2 - but be prepared to remortgage to get one.

24mm f2.8 is also good - but wasn't good enought to keep over my Vivitar equivalent.

Disn't rate the 135mm f3.5 much, but the 100/2.8 is supposed be excellent.

The 50mms are simply superb.
 
I forgot the 300/4.5. I had a later multicoated version. Whilst it resolves a decent amount of detail, there was a fair amount of ca visible in shots, which tallies with other reports I've read. I kept the Nikon ed if 300/4.5 over it. And the Canon ef 300/4l which is in another league altogether.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top