Olympus Pen F on GXR A12 Module (no adapter) - test shots

[kuuan]

bad news about having a PenF>M adapter made: visited my 'ens repair man' today, I gave me back my LTM > M adapter and said: cannot..

Too bad... perhaps when the A12 moduleis replaced be the next version, we can modify the Leica M bayonet for an Olympus Pen mount..!

so I took the case into my own hands and found a workshop that has a turning lathe


for first thing to be able to accommodate the Pen-F lens mount seen to the right is to cut a groove inside the LTM>M adapter seen to the left:

I told him to cut it as deep as it protrudes on the lens mount and that almost cut the adapter into two pieces! Only half was still connected, half of the inner corner of the groove cut all the way through. Do I make myself understood?
Later, when reducing more from the inside of the adapter to make room for the Pen-F lens mount it actually completely broke into two pieces. I simply superglued the two parts together again and proceeded to file out what was needed from the LTM>M adapter to accommodate the Pen-F lens mount which was not easy, the adapter becomes very thin. It looks terrible but in the end I was able to mount the lens on the adapter though I would not have found any way to cut it further to be able to lock the lens in it.



Looking for an alternative I thought that it might be easier to swap the mount on the lens to be LTM, but screwing off the mount from the lens reveals that it exposes a lot from the rear of the lens, so that won't be easy neither:



However the register distance of the Pen-F mount is 0.15 mm longer than that of LTM. Therefore cutting the groove seen on the first pic with precision 0.15mm less deep may be just enough to keep the adapter in one piece. Most likely not enough for anyone to make a commercial product but possibly enough for a DIY adapter. Furthermore modifying the adapter to make the lens lock is beyond me and therefore I gave up on the adapter project.

Instead I plan for a non destructive, easily reversible conversion of the lens to M mount: For that I'd cut another LTM > M adapter similar again but with the groove 0.15 mm less deep and I'd try to cut out the space for the Pen-F bayonet more precisely using a milling cutter instead of only using a file. In the end I would simply screw this modified LTM > M adapter together with a 0.15mm spacer or metal ring, on top of the lens mount using longer screws, utilizing the original screw holes on the lens.

 

[zmix]

Incredible..!! Thanks Kuuan.

 

[kuuan]

Incredible..!! Thanks Kuuan.

wish me luck to have access to precision tools, a good workshop

 

[autochrome]

it seems that the correct mechanic solution is probably to change the rear part of a PEN lenses mount for M mount.A dream would be a rear portion is compatible with a wide range of focal PEN , and without requiring a complicated machining , but that's a dream.

 

[riccadonna]

Gee, kuuan. You really go heavyweight with that tiny Oly lens by just looking at the size of that turning lathe which looks more shipyard then watchmaker outfit. I wonder if this Zuiko 1,4/40 is so much better then f.ex. lovely Minolta m-rokkor 2/40 superlight and sharp. I think Zuiko belongs more on micro 4/3 compact Pens. Anyway, me too silly one, ventured in unfinished adventure trying adapt Samyang 8/2.8 fisheye with NX mount into m-mount. Good luck to you and me too. Stanislaw

 

[kuuan]

it seems that the correct mechanic solution is probably to change the rear part of a PEN lenses mount for M mount.A dream would be a rear portion is compatible with a wide range of focal PEN , and without requiring a complicated machining , but that's a dream.

yes, you are right! However the Pen-F mount not only covers the rear of the lens but also it's sides where the f stops are written on, the M mount to exchange it with would leave the sides near the rear of the lens exposed. Or in other words to make a good job isn't all the easy again, but once I will be 'off the road' and back to Europe, which is in a few days, I will have access to better tools, albeit less free time..but I hope I'll find some time to try adaptation again, most likely by switching the mount

 

[kuuan]

Gee, kuuan. You really go heavyweight with that tiny Oly lens by just looking at the size of that turning lathe which looks more shipyard then watchmaker outfit. I wonder if this Zuiko 1,4/40 is so much better then f.ex. lovely Minolta m-rokkor 2/40 superlight and sharp. I think Zuiko belongs more on micro 4/3 compact Pens. Anyway, me too silly one, ventured in unfinished adventure trying adapt Samyang 8/2.8 fisheye with NX mount into m-mount. Good luck to you and me too. Stanislaw

The Pen-F 1.4/50 is one of the very best lenses I have ever have had the joy to use! Wide open sharpness rivals that of the best 1.4/50 I have experience with, I'd suppose of any f1.4 normal lens.

The Pen-F lenses imo fit a NEX even better than a m4/3, on a NEX it covers almost exactly the same image circle it was designed for ( halfframe is 24x18mm, A12 mount APS-C 23.6 x 15.7 mm ) Please see my samples taken with the Pen-F f1.4/40mm on NEX5N: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuuan/sets/72157629315399105/

The Rokkor M f2/40mm certainly must be a great lens! The Pen-F has extra speed, the Rokkor must have better coating, otherwise I have no idea how they compare ( in about half year I will have both and be able to compare them ).

thank's, and wow, 8mm...wish you best luck too

 

[kuuan]

Even though I still think that it 'may' be possible to cut out an LTM>M adapter to make the Pen-F mount fit into it, so that the adapter can be screwed on top of it, this would need various very precise tools and quite some cutting. The piece still might come out too fragile to be really useful.

So in the end I opted for a different route, decided to change the mount.
Taking off the original mount will leave the last half cm of the sides of the lens exposed

therefore I had a piece of brass cut that covers the rear of the lens just like the original mount

and screwed a M39>M adapter on top. It needed drilling 3 wholes for the screws, ( which was done very badly by the workshop that had cut the cover and later very well by my 'lens doctor', thus 3 'wrong' wholes ) three slightly longer screws, and well, a rubber band to make the aperture work

voila:

Pen-F Zuiko 1.8/38 mounted on the GXR M

there is no harm done to the lens at all, restoring original condition just needs opening 3 screws, putting back on the original mount and tightening it's 3 screws, it is very easy.
I am very happy that finally I can use a Pen-F lens on my GXR M. For now it is a 1.8/38 but I plan to do the same conversion to my other Pen-f lenses too. As side effect I can focus the Pen-F lens really close when I use it on my NEX with a Leica M > E mount helicoid adapter.

 

[kuuan]

first results make me very happy, the GXR M gives very beautiful tones with this Pen-F lens

wide open at night

stopped down

100% near center crop

100% corner crop

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Well done Andreas,

This little exercise intrigues the "fiddler" in me. I have taken the first step of buying myself a Pen F to M4/3 adapter. Even before I have a lens!

Will look around for some lenses.

What I am wondering is why not think of a destructive change to the lens mount itself? What occurs to me is that the Pen bayonet flanges could be removed entirely and replaced with a LTM-LM adapter screwed into place. With a bit of care enough of the stub of the Pen mount might be left to leave a locating ring to properly centre the LTM to LM mount.

This would be non-reversable and have to be approached with care. But once done the modified lens would be to all intents and purposes a LM mount lens.

I would know better with Pen lens in hand - this is why I have bought an adapter to another mount just in case my optimism runs out.

Tom

 

[kuuan]

thank you Tom.

Your conversion definitely should be rather easily done too.
I'd first cut off the protruding 'ring' on the mount, here pointed at with the arrow, that would save having to cut a groove on the adapter


and reduce the locking parts of the bayonet until the whole mount of the lens fits inside a LTM>M adapter and then screw the adapter on top of the reduced mount. Register distance would end up just about right, register distance of Pen-F is 1mm longer than that of Leica M and the LTM>M adapter has thickness of 0.85mm, that is one still could add a shim of max. 0.15mm to get it exactly right.
However one would still need to drill three wholes in the LTM>M adapter, just as I did for my conversion. To do this precisely is not all that difficult, my adapted lenses are perfectly well centered.
This method would save having any part machined but as you point out it also would be destructive. Advantage would be that the original f stop marking still would be there, my adapted lenses don't have any, but actually I am not missing them and don't plan to add markings on my machined part.
I still prefer my method, having the parts machined was big fun, and, in Vietnam, didn't cost me all that much. If one has no access to get the part machined I am sure that one also could find some lid or other existing part that could be adapted to fit.

good luck finding a lens, resp. if you want a 1.8/38, 1.4/40 or 3.5/100 Pen-F lens I could sell you a copy, possibly also any other Pen-F lens, I shall be in Japan soon where I could try to score them. If you are interested please P.M.
I also could sell Pen-F Zuikos adapted to Leica M as shown, but only later in the year ( I left Vietnam a week ago, only had 6 pieces machined for my own Pen-F lenses. So far 1.8/38 and 1.5/60 are already converted, now and I am waiting for more LTM>M adapters to arrive to finish 4 more conversions. Most likely I shall be back in Saigon July or August, then I could have more parts made ) For converted lenses I'd ask 55 usd on top of the price of the lens

cheers, andreas

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Andreas,

Myself I think I would go the permanent destructive route. This is the only way that you can adapt Altix lenses. The Altix bayonet register distance is different from M42/PK but seems to be measured from the flange and not the mating surfaces which seem co-incidentally exactly the same as M42/PK. This makes me think that the Altix mount started off from the M42 register and the bayonet lugs were just designed to fit on front. The M42 thread will fit over the Altix lens mount base and make a tight fit if machined properly. Therefore I have it working satisfactorily with infinity focus simply by interference fit and it looks very professional. Howeevr it is possible to over-tighten the lens on a M42 mount and pop the thread off the Altix mount stub. So I have to devise a method of permanent attachment. Will get back on to it asap. I could simply glue it but it seems a less than a professional adaption. Also the screws that hold the end of the lens body in place are partly covered and the thread needs to be removeable in order to access them.

A further lesser problem is that all M42 lenses seem to have a limit in how far their lenses might protrude into the cavity at infinity focus. My adapted 90mm f3.5 Telefogar protrudes further. This means that it still works fine with a regular dumb M42 adapter but hits the front element of a M42 focal reducer (ouch). Focal reducers are out with this particular lens - otherwise it works fine.

I have had a look at Olympus Pen lenses on the internet and decided to pass for the moment. I am supposing that there are enough M4/3 mount buyers to keep them bubbling along at US$150+. I am sure that they are worth this, but I have enough lenses to play with without spending that sort of money to create some more work for myself. In oher words I would need to be buying them in excellent condition for less than $100 so that it might be worth $50 of my effort to convert them. This is obviously not posisble as long as M4/3 mount users are buying them - they will fit straight on to those cameras as the adapters are readily available. I have bought a Pen to M4/3 adapter in case I see a good buy. Obviously if I purchased a pristine Pen lens then common sense says I should just use it on my Panasonic GM1 and avoid all problems.

Meantime what I really need is a $20 working but "near parts" quality Pen mount lens to practice with as I would hardly like to destroy a good one even with the best of intentions of making it into a LM mount version.

Tom

 

[kuuan]

Hi Tom,

sounds like you got it all figured out for the Altix!

regarding the Pen-F Zuikos, adapters are not only readily available for m4/3rd but also for NEX E mount, Fuji X mount and the Nikon 1 cameras. They are very good to fantastic lenses, size of rangefinder lenses but with minimal focus distance of SLR lenses, most of the fast lenses, the 1.8/38, 1.4/40 and 1.5/60 are impressively sharp from wide open, not the 1.2/42.
After the release of the Sony A7/r prices might have stopped going up, the expensive ones might even had dropped a bit. For 150 usd one may get the 3.5/100 or 1.8/38, in the US with luck the 1.4/40. In Europe the 38mm will be around 200 usd and the 1.4/40 between 250 and 300 usd. The other Pen-F Zuikos are even more costly, the 1.2/42, 1.5/60 and 3.5/38 macro have been selling closer to 1000 than to 500

I shall look out if I find a 'near parts' cheap Pen-F Zuiko for you in Japan, but I'd say that chance to get one for just 20 usd is close to zero, for 50 usd there is just a slight chance

andreas

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Thanks Andreas,

I apreciate your summary of current prices for Pen lenses and I am sure that they are good value. I am just in no particular rush. I have a tendency to go for "a set" of lenses once I get fired up. I have a good (80%? perhaps) collection of M42 mount Takumars - all in good condition as they seem to last well. Once going on "Pens" I might end up doing the same. But I have plenty of lenses at the moment, but if you do find a working Pen, maybe rough looking but with good glass for $50 then I would be interested as I woudl find the challenge of finding my own way to convert to LM mount interesting. Of course once converted to LM successfully then these lenses can be further adapted to a lot of mounts.

I also have almost all the Schneider Kreuznach Kodak Retina DKL lenses with the Yeenon adapter to make them useful. They are very sharp if on the slow side lenses. The 200mm f4.8 is a monster, diffucult to focus (the focus ring is at the base of the lens making it hard to frame the lens hand held while adjusting focus - which is extremely critical), with a close focus distance of 8.5 metres (hah!). But with a M42 macro adjusting helical adapter the close focus comes down to something more reasonable. It is the only lens I know that has a focus scale marking for 80 metres before infinity. It is relatively small but quite heavy and really a predantically slow to use and rather a made-for-tripod lens. But it does very well with patience in one hand and beating yourself over the head with a lump of wood with the other. Luckily they are pretty cheap even if the Yeenon adapter is not. But that Yeenon DKL adapter is a work of art and worth every cent.

Nice lens, pity is is such a pig. Must try it again, when I have it working I am delighted and forget all the missed shots.

Right at the moment I am in love with the Panasonic GM1 and unfortunately it has become a deep love affair and my Ricoh cameras have been (temporarily) sidelined but not forgotten. I am also designing an improved version of the Clearviewer style device. Keeps me busy.

Tom

 

[kuuan]

Thanks Andreas,

I apreciate your summary of current prices for Pen lenses and I am sure that they are good value. I am just in no particular rush. I have a tendency to go for "a set" of lenses once I get fired up. I have a good (80%? perhaps) collection of M42 mount Takumars - all in good condition as they seem to last well. Once going on "Pens" I might end up doing the same. But I have plenty of lenses at the moment, but if you do find a working Pen, maybe rough looking but with good glass for $50 then I would be interested as I woudl find the challenge of finding my own way to convert to LM mount interesting. Of course once converted to LM successfully then these lenses can be further adapted to a lot of mounts.

oh Tom, here we certainly have a few things in common:
first me too I usually go for a 'set of lenses', and me too I mostly have a Takumar collections, there are not all that many Takumars ever produced that I don't own For various reasons they are still me favorite lenses, specially love the stunning variety of the very first normal lenses, but sadly nowadays only in theory as they don't get much use any more. I am kind of 'on the road' and living 'out of the suitcase' most of the time and since I use mirrorless have started to accumulate and use either rangefinder or halfframe lenses, their smaller size and adapter imo simply make such a better fit on a mirrrorless, specially if carrying the gear a lot. I do have a few lenses from this or that other maker, above all some OM lenses which are noted to be small and light, some Nikkors, Canons, Yashicas, Mamiyas asf. I really should better sell these again, just keep my Takumar collection, maybe some small Olys besides the halframe and rangefinder lenses. But then again I rather have the lenses on a shelf than the money in the bank

So by now I have, for my use a rather complete, set of Pen-F lenses, the 3.5/20, 4/25, 2.8/25, 1.8/38, 1.4/40, 1.5/60, 3.5/100 and the 3.5/50-90 zoom. Still I am very happy with my GXR M and NEX5N but in anticipation of a future FF mirrorless ( I really want it's EVF to be articulating ) I have started to get rangefinder lenses, Voigtlander for wide angles for which I rather like modern performance, the CV 4.5/15 and 4/25, also the 2.5/75, and have started to go for old LTM Canons for 35mm and up where I like the various characters of vintage lenses. Until now I have 1.8/50 ( and defective 3.5/100, still looking for a good copy ) and already acquired 1.8/35, 2/35, 1.4/50 and another version of the 1.8/50, also a Minolta M 2/40 but it will taken another 3 weeks or so before I will have these in my hands.

I also have almost all the Schneider Kreuznach Kodak Retina DKL lenses with the Yeenon adapter to make them useful. They are very sharp if on the slow side lenses. The 200mm f4.8 is a monster, diffucult to focus (the focus ring is at the base of the lens making it hard to frame the lens hand held while adjusting focus - which is extremely critical), with a close focus distance of 8.5 metres (hah!). But with a M42 macro adjusting helical adapter the close focus comes down to something more reasonable. It is the only lens I know that has a focus scale marking for 80 metres before infinity. It is relatively small but quite heavy and really a predantically slow to use and rather a made-for-tripod lens. But it does very well with patience in one hand and beating yourself over the head with a lump of wood with the other. Luckily they are pretty cheap even if the Yeenon adapter is not. But that Yeenon DKL adapter is a work of art and worth every cent.

Nice lens, pity is is such a pig. Must try it again, when I have it working I am delighted and forget all the missed shots.

Right at the moment I am in love with the Panasonic GM1 and unfortunately it has become a deep love affair and my Ricoh cameras have been (temporarily) sidelined but not forgotten. I am also designing an improved version of the Clearviewer style device. Keeps me busy.

Tom

Schneider Kreuznach lenses must be very interesting lenses, but I hardly know anything about them. Most likely I will never find out much neither, as mentioned I won't be getting SLR lenses any more, but try to get a more complete set of rangefinder lenses.
have much fun with them, and good luck for you Clearviewer project.
I'll inform you once I know if I found a Pen-F lens for you.

cheers, andreas

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Thanks Andreas,

I apreciate your summary of current prices for Pen lenses and I am sure that they are good value. I am just in no particular rush. I have a tendency to go for "a set" of lenses once I get fired up. I have a good (80%? perhaps) collection of M42 mount Takumars - all in good condition as they seem to last well. Once going on "Pens" I might end up doing the same. But I have plenty of lenses at the moment, but if you do find a working Pen, maybe rough looking but with good glass for $50 then I would be interested as I woudl find the challenge of finding my own way to convert to LM mount interesting. Of course once converted to LM successfully then these lenses can be further adapted to a lot of mounts.

oh Tom, here we certainly have a few things in common:
first me too I usually go for a 'set of lenses', and me too I mostly have a Takumar collections, there are not all that many Takumars ever produced that I don't own For various reasons they are still me favorite lenses, specially love the stunning variety of the very first normal lenses, but sadly nowadays only in theory as they don't get much use any more. I am kind of 'on the road' and living 'out of the suitcase' most of the time and since I use mirrorless have started to accumulate and use either rangefinder or halfframe lenses, their smaller size and adapter imo simply make such a better fit on a mirrrorless, specially if carrying the gear a lot. I do have a few lenses from this or that other maker, above all some OM lenses which are noted to be small and light, some Nikkors, Canons, Yashicas, Mamiyas asf. I really should better sell these again, just keep my Takumar collection, maybe some small Olys besides the halframe and rangefinder lenses. But then again I rather have the lenses on a shelf than the money in the bank

So by now I have, for my use a rather complete, set of Pen-F lenses, the 3.5/20, 4/25, 2.8/25, 1.8/38, 1.4/40, 1.5/60, 3.5/100 and the 3.5/50-90 zoom. Still I am very happy with my GXR M and NEX5N but in anticipation of a future FF mirrorless ( I really want it's EVF to be articulating ) I have started to get rangefinder lenses, Voigtlander for wide angles for which I rather like modern performance, the CV 4.5/15 and 4/25, also the 2.5/75, and have started to go for old LTM Canons for 35mm and up where I like the various characters of vintage lenses. Until now I have 1.8/50 ( and defective 3.5/100, still looking for a good copy ) and already acquired 1.8/35, 2/35, 1.4/50 and another version of the 1.8/50, also a Minolta M 2/40 but it will taken another 3 weeks or so before I will have these in my hands.

I also have almost all the Schneider Kreuznach Kodak Retina DKL lenses with the Yeenon adapter to make them useful. They are very sharp if on the slow side lenses. The 200mm f4.8 is a monster, diffucult to focus (the focus ring is at the base of the lens making it hard to frame the lens hand held while adjusting focus - which is extremely critical), with a close focus distance of 8.5 metres (hah!). But with a M42 macro adjusting helical adapter the close focus comes down to something more reasonable. It is the only lens I know that has a focus scale marking for 80 metres before infinity. It is relatively small but quite heavy and really a predantically slow to use and rather a made-for-tripod lens. But it does very well with patience in one hand and beating yourself over the head with a lump of wood with the other. Luckily they are pretty cheap even if the Yeenon adapter is not. But that Yeenon DKL adapter is a work of art and worth every cent.

Nice lens, pity is is such a pig. Must try it again, when I have it working I am delighted and forget all the missed shots.

Right at the moment I am in love with the Panasonic GM1 and unfortunately it has become a deep love affair and my Ricoh cameras have been (temporarily) sidelined but not forgotten. I am also designing an improved version of the Clearviewer style device. Keeps me busy.

Tom

Schneider Kreuznach lenses must be very interesting lenses, but I hardly know anything about them. Most likely I will never find out much neither, as mentioned I won't be getting SLR lenses any more, but try to get a more complete set of rangefinder lenses.
have much fun with them, and good luck for you Clearviewer project.
I'll inform you once I know if I found a Pen-F lens for you.

cheers, andreas

Andreas,

This seems like an exercise as to who is madder than the other .. I have the CV 15/4.5 as well but also the 40/1.4 75/1.8 and the 90/3.5 APO Lanthar. In Canon RF I only have the 100/2.0, but I have some others to make up for it such as Ricoh's own 28/2.8 and an as new Russar MR-2 20/5.6 and a few other "Ruskies". I would not really recommend the SK lenses - they are quite nice, but heavy and slow and the adapters cost a mint. Disappointed that the M4/3 mount will not take my very nice Jupiter-12 and the Russar.

Tom

 

[kuuan]

haha Tom, by the price of some you listed you must be the madder :lol:
but I am getting there, certainly envy you for your fast CVs, the Apo and the 2/100 Canon, whhoa!

actually I have a few Ruskies too, but mostly in Contax mount and I didn't like their use much on my selfmade adapter, from a broken Kiev, for my NEX. Should have spent extra for their LTM counterparts instead. The Russar must be very interesting, I guess tiny for a 20mm.

your Ricoh 2.8/28 is the one in M mount? if so, big envy alert