Ernie Aubert wrote:
Bobby, those look doggone good. I just got an OM-D, and I have Canon stuff, including the 100L. Do you consider that that lens on the OM-D gives you an image superior to what you could get by using it with a 5D II or a 1D IV? I\'ve wondered if there\'d be any point for me to get an adapter to use EF lenses on the OM-D...aperture control would not be available, right? What about AF?
Hi I would like to chip in and say. A few days ago I took hold of the EF to OM-D adapter which has an inbuilt aperture. About twice the price of a straight EF to MFT adapter. £36. I did not think it would work and increase the depth field, but took the punt. The aperture within the adapter does work to a fashion, in that it is much more effective on the shorter focal length lenses and where, the rear lens element, is closer to the sensor. So with the 400mm f5.6 and the macro I have, where their rear lens element is quite a distance from the sensor, the aperture worked to a certain point, but did vignette very early in shutting down the aperture, where as the 50mm lenses worked much better and the vignetting kicked in a lot later. It was also increasing the depth of field but I have not as yet worked out how much but it is very noticeable in live view. So all in all I have an adapter which can be used and is fine with the option of having some vignetting sometimes yet sometimes not so bad ta all. No vignetting at all wide open, so for those lenses with a deep tube I can use wide open without a problem.
