I would like focal markings for some of the 'typical' prime lenses within this range e.g 50mm, 85mm- (i think eyeballing roughly between the current markings isnt going to cut it) any suggestions?
Does the kit lens 14-140 electronically show the exact focal length?

I think these companies might make adapters if we ask...lots of cheap d mounts around...nice fast broadcast lenses with huge zooms and constant apertures. some say it's not possible but get dpi forum user hakkalo has lots of examples.

Why f/1.4? Nokton 0.95 is great for GH1 with usual max ISO 800. But GH2 can push ISO to 3200. That's 2 stops gain. Then f/1.4 lens might be good enough at much lower cost. Also 1.4 bokeh looks nicer than 0.95 bokeh.

Voigtlander seems going after classical focal lenths for 2x crop factor of m43 with 4:3 ratio. Thus the 17.5mm and 25mm. But I want 2.35:1 ratio... and it's easier to create the wider look with wider angles.

Specifically I want 11mm, 14mm, 20mm, 35mm with native µ43 mount, f/1.4, only manual focus... to keep the price and the overall size/weight down. You know... a set of modern fast manual focus lenses at good cost. The focal lengths seems weird, but Panasonic already produced 14mm and 20mm pancakes. Since Olympus already made 12mm 2.0, I hope Panasonic produces 11mm prime lens. There is a huge gap between 20mm 1.7 and 45mm 1.8. I hope Panasonic produces 35mm prime lens. So 11/14/20/35 don't sound too crazy. But they wouldn't be 1.4.

Samyang?

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=gh2&N=0&InitialSearch=yes

Without realizing it, my GH1 had become a video camera as I found myself taking less and less pictures with it. Much as I like the 20mm, I find that I tend to use it much less as I shoot people a lot and it is not the lens for portraits.

I just got the Samyang 85mm last week and suddenly I have re-discovered the joy of shooting the stills. The 85mm is quite a joy for both video and stills and the manual focus is not the trouble I had imagined it to be. So I am looking for add a normal lens (35mm equivalent) may be in the range 35-60mm, preferably in Nikon mount with manual focus and aperture rings. Of course, I don't mind using a m4/3 or a FD lens. I would like to try a macro lens as well, so don't mind if it is macro lens in 50-60mm range. This will be used mainly for portraits, product photography and video.

I have considered the following:

Samyang 35mm 1.4 Nikkor 50mm AIS 1.8 Vivitar 55mm macro FD 50mm 1.2 Lumix Leica Elmarit 45mm 2.8 macro'

Please advise your suggestions. Thank you...

The Sigma 30mm is fairly sharp but not stellar across the frame from F2.8 thru F8. Starting with F11, the effects of diffraction start to blur the images. I have not tested vignetting but I don't see it in my test shots and it is unlikely to be an issue because the lens was made for a larger image circle. The main problem that these test shots reveal is chromatic aberration, which can reduce the positive impression of a fairly sharp lens considerably. Interestingly, chromatic aberration is not corrected even on a Panasonic body.

Read review at: http://www.superflexible.com/photography/sigma30mm.htm

Am leaning towards Zeiss ZE 21mm 2.8 (Canon Mount) but wanted to see if anyone had used it here on GH2 here yet.

Thanks in advance. I have no issue using a constant aperture zoom that covers the range as long as its optically competent.

I've been looking for this fantastic lense for while. As I live in Germany it seem to be pretty difficult to purchase it here. Id also go for international purchases, just need a proper platform or dealer.

Can anyone help? Help would be much appreciated.

Best, Alex

Here it is:

Forget the 1.4 and get the Panny 20mm 1.7 instead?

Will the Canon 100mm macro be as good on the GH2 than it is on EOS?

(Also, if anamorphic lens 2x used, then the picture becomes ultra wide, so in this case how to achieve a picture with 2.35:1 ratio without objects stretched?) Thanks in advance!

So between looking at a film called Musgo, which was filmed entirely on GH2 with Tokina (I can't afford) and Nikon 28mm and 50mm lenses, I decided I would purchase a couple. I like the look of the film. I found a Nikkor 50mm 1.4 AIS on Ebay for $158 and a Nikon 28mm f2.8 AIS for $135...I have only $300 to spend, so I thought this might be a good set. I haven't purchased them yet. I saw cheaper non-AIS lenses, but not sure if that matters.

On the other hand, I recently saw a video I liked that had a Vivitar 28-90mm f2.8 lens and a Konica Hexanon 40mm f1.8 lens that I liked. I found them for $139 and $70 on Ebay....and another fixed lens Vivitar 28mm AIS f2.8 for $80.

Much of where I will be shooting is right here in the city, lots of shaded streets, under bridges, subway, in vehicles, as well as indoor and bright outdoor settings, etc..so I want lenses that can cover a wide variety of light situations. I love the look of rich contrast and I didn't think the Canon 50mm samples showed much of that. I don't want to be spending money on a focal length that I already have covered with the 14-140 unless it gives me a lot more options as far as light goes.

I would love some input from people who have more experience with any of these lenses. I'm trying to make the most out of my limited $$$. Thanks a lot!

-Mike

So in the other thread about using Lomo lenses, I decided to try going back to using Russian glass. I found some interesting "Lomo" lenses but it turns out they are in a rare mounting called KSK/KCK. This apparently was used in only a model or two of camera. The actual lens modules are the same Lomo modules that all of the other 35mm lenses use but the mounts are made by someone else. The mounts are bayonet like the BNCR/PL lenses are but are a different diameter and much longer, which means the FFD is a few mm too far away from being usable as-is. It was obvious that I needed to modify the lenses to get the rear of the lens closer to the sensor. I also needed to make an adapter for the KSK flange to the M4/3 mount.

I'll try to include as much info as possible (such as the drawings/measurements I made) but be warned, the modifications needed to make the lenses work are not easy and cannot be done without access to precision tools. Also needed is a lot of patience and many years of practice machining different metals. So far I've spent 40$ on the adapter parts but have spent probably 20 hours machining it and the lenses. If I still had access to the machine shop I used to work in, it would have taken me a lot less time using a multi-axis mill. Unless someone figures out a better way to modify the lenses, simply making an adapter will not work.

KSK mount: 60mm diameter, 40mm flange depth. Unknown Flange Focal Distance (estimated to be around 55mm which is 5 mm too far away for M4/3 flanges)

Adapter: I started by looking at adapters already on the market to see if there was anything I could purchase and modify. Most of the adapters out there are OUTRAGEOUSLY priced for what they are. I couldn't justify spending hundreds of dollars on something I didn't even know would work. I decided to machine my own. I started by buying a piece of 3"OD/2"ID 6061 aluminum round pipe and a C-mount to M4/3 adapter. I cut the C-mount adapter down to 2.010"OD to press fit into the 2" pipe. This eliminated the need to machine the M4/3 mount. I started out cutting a 40mm section of pipe for the adapter body and cutting a 15mm section for the retaining ring. I used a lathe to open the ID of the pipe to 60mm for most of the length while leaving a 10mm section where I could press fit the M4/3 adapter. I then machined down the OD of the pipe to 70mm to match the OD of the KSK mount. I machined a notch for the retaining ring's retaining screws to rotate in. While there was some machining done to enhance the fit of the adapter, it was pretty easy to make. The hardest part was finding the right balance between adapter length and lens modification.

Retaining ring: I machined the ID of the retaining ring to match the adapter body while leaving a lip to hold the bayonet ears. I scribed the outline of the KSK mount and used a saw and rotary file to cut the notches for the ears. I drilled and tapped a few holes for retaining screws. I used the rotary tool to angle the ring's retaining fingers so that when turned, would tighten against the flange.

Lens modification: So the flange body needs to be shortened but the pin that keeps the focus body from turning is located at the back of the lens:

Before:

After:

This means that the focus body needs to be shortened as well to move the focus pin towards the front for more clearance for the adapter. First I cut down the flange to the point where I could gauge the FFD using the actual lens and camera. I would need to machine ~8mm from the flange and focus body to clear the internals of the adapter while moving the rear of the lens back far enough to focus.

The KSK mount is held to the outer focus housing with a large threaded ring. The ring would need to be moved to get the focus range we need. Since I don't have the machines needed to make a fine pitch metric thread, I decided to machine a groove and use a retaining clip (also called a snap ring). I picked one out that had the right OD to fit and then machined the groove in which it would sit. I then machined back the KSK mount to the point where the ring would hold it tight without play.

I then took a thin piece of the KSK mount that I had cut off and welded it back onto the mount. I filed this down to 5mm width and machined a 1mm thick steel plate to guide the focus mechanism. This reduced the mount depth from 40mm to something like 30mm which ultimately gave me 1mm of clearance in the mount.

I've done 2 lenses already and I'm currently finishing up the modification to 2 more lenses. I'll also be making a second version of adapter, hopefully making it a little nicer and tighter fit. I'm also trying acetal plastic for the focus guide plate instead of steel to see if I can get it tighter without dragging.

The actual lenses are really nice. I think they are sharper than my Nikons and when set up properly I also get more focus range and a lot less breathing while due to the precision helicals. I also switched to a boron based grease which is the smoothest grease I have ever used in a lens.

What is strange is that the focus marks are off in range. If I get something in focus at 10ft and then focus at something 3ft away, the focus mark shows 1.5ft. This is the same as my set of Nikons which makes me believe that it's a function of using a 35mm lens on M4/3 sensors.

Thx alot! :)

I heard some tape is good but where to seal it up not to sure

Both seems good glasses, the main use is video and film, photography as secundary, The examples indicate both are greats and cinematographic look. So, i like much use mi GH2 in the night, the luminosity is therefore a necessary condition for my.

Some people say the Panix is best, and argue the SLR is a CCTV overpriced, that argument isnt mine, so, for the tests, I think the SLR is wonderful and the price isnt excessive.

Actually I have a 14-42 its a regular lens, but is poor in low light condition and noisy in high ISO. A FD 50mm 1.8, superb, great look and softness, but have a limited angles.

I need objective opinions, thanks

Hope to get a Swarovski eventuatly when I start my new Job.

You want optics quality your going to have to pay for it, but it still better than spending £11,000 on a dedicated lens.

Anything out there like it, that has stabilization?

Thanks! - not yet able to find this out net searching.

Sorry if this has been done to death, just couldn't find a topic - I remember a few odd postings though.

Does anyone have a good one that might work with the 14-140? I like the idea of:

• having a wider field of view than 14mm
• keeping the image stabilization
• being a bit safer than taking the lens off the camera and changing to a different one and
• less expensive than (say) buying a 7-14 or other small but pricey zoom lens.

I'm not interested that much in anamorphic (might have one for sale soon!) but I am very interested in knowing if there's an adaptor that's good enough quality and more cost-effective to use on my existing lenses than buying one of those expensive Panasonic / Olympus zooms.