wide angle lens selection

As you said, you need to keep in mind the doubling of the focal length. I remember trying the Canon 15mm f2.8 EF fisheye on my 1.6x Canon aps-c DSLR and it looked little more than an extra wide angle lens with lots of distortion that would correct to something that could barely be considered wide angle, and this, at 2x, is even more that affect. I am dubious you would be happy with the results using what you describe.

The best option in this format at a reasonable price is the Rokinon (Samyang in some markets) 7.5mm f3.5 Fisheye that's made for the micro four-thirds format. Manual focus only and it is TINY, but there's no real need to do much focusing. I leave it set to infinity 99% of the time. It uses an old-school aperture ring to set the aperture and is a very nice, sharp lens.

If you keep it level both horizontally and vertically, it gives a very nice image. These are uncorrected files from my E-P3 where I simply kept the camera and lens level in both planes..

I was standing, literally, against the rail at the bottom of this image, which is the reason it bows like it does..

If you are an Adobe user (Photoshop or Lightroom), you can buy the program Fisheye Hemi, a plugin, and it will do a partial de-fish correction and lose very little of the coverage. These images were all corrected by Fisheye Hemi. The objects still showing some bending were, literally, right on top of me as I shot. I really like this program..

There's another issue, in that there are a lot of suggestions on the net that film-era wide angles do not work as well on digital M43 as do longer focal lengths. It's apparently a function of the angle at which the light from the rear lens element hits the photosites. Certainly when I tested my Nikon 20/2.8 AIS on an EP1 it was not as good as 50/1.4 preAI, 55/3.5 pre-AI (great!) and 105/2.5 AIS. So even wider angles may have issues. Fun finding out though!

Greg, THANK YOU! Exactly what I wanted to know! (Great pic's too!)
John, I have the Pre AI 50/1.4, AI 50 2.0, 55/3.5 AI, and 105/2.5 Pre AI.
I just picked up a 300 4.5 ED with the TC14B and am anxious to see how it behaves with the EP body.
I still haven't purchased the camera...been going back and forth between the E-P1 and the E-P2. The main reason i would purchase it would be to compliment my D90...and to try out my F lens collection with the 2x factor. I am positive that the EP1 would be an outstanding camera by itself as well. So easy to get bogged down with techno "well its a great camera but..."
Thanks again!
Mark

Mark, I have a Nikon D200 and an m4/3 camera as well, so I know exactly where you're coming from, and what you're trying to get. While the m4/3 cameras are a great digital home for your non-Ai lenses, you can't really get any sort of acceptable wide angle performance from these adapted lenses. The widest lens I use on my m4/3 camera (Panasonic G2, but it's all the same) is a non-Ai 24mm f/2.8, which acts as a normal lens. First, even rectilinear lenses become not-wide on an m4/3 camera, such as a 15mm lens giving a 30mm FOV. Second, fisheye FOV doesn't abide by the crop factor, because it is not linear. Using an 8mm fisheye on an m4/3 camera would probably give you an effective focal length more like 35m-40mm. If you want some more cheap ways to get ultrawide performance, in addition to Greg's recommendation, you could consider the 4/3 version of the Olympus 9-18mm lens, plus a 4/3-m4/3 adapter. The autofocus will be a bit slow, but it will provide you a rectilinear image. Plus, if you find the E-PL2 for a reasonable price, it gives noticeably improved performance compared to the E-P1 and E-P2. It delivers sharper images and is not so hokey-pokey slow in its operation. Or, you could do what I did and find a Panasonic G2; they were recently being clearanced for $300, and they come with a pretty good viewfinder built-in. Considering you're going to be using Nikon lenses, the improved ergonomics along with the viewfinder will be welcome features for you.

Ariel, I would definitely consider the G2, but...I am really hopeful that by using the 300 F4.5 ED with the TC1.4..is going to bring my focal length to 420?mm x 2...I am planning on using with tripod, but if somewhere along the line on a bright sunny day with a higher ISO I thought the in-body stabilization of the Oly's might be helpful if handholding this combo... or do I not use the 1.4 TC and "suffer" (LOL) with "only" 600mm of focal length.
thanks for any additional input!
Mark

Ariel, I would definitely consider the G2, but...I am really hopeful that by using the 300 F4.5 ED with the TC1.4..is going to bring my focal length to 420?mm x 2...I am planning on using with tripod, but if somewhere along the line on a bright sunny day with a higher ISO I thought the in-body stabilization of the Oly's might be helpful if handholding this combo... or do I not use the 1.4 TC and "suffer" (LOL) with "only" 600mm of focal length.
thanks for any additional input!
Mark

While image stabilization is useful, there are so many features that are more important to your image quality that I wouldn't choose one camera body over another because of it. Considering the increases in stability from having a proper handgrip on my G2, and the exponentially increased stability from holding a camera against your face, using the the viewfinder instead of at arm's length looking at an LCD, I don't think you're looking at the big picture. Even if you had an Olympus PEN with IS turned on, I think that I'd still be getting sharper images than you with my G2. I have the Nikon 300mm f/4 lens, but I have only used it on my D200, not on my Panasonic. If you put such a large lens on a PEN, having to support the lens, hold the shutter, AND manually focus, I don't think that image stabilization is going to be the deciding factor of your photos.

The E-P1 would be exceptionally hard to use with a lens like the 300mm f4.5 since it does not allow you to mount an eyelevel electronic finder, unless you are ready to stay mounted on a tripod virtually 100% of the time.....and the lens had a tripod mount. The E-P2 was the first Pen to allow the VF-2 or (now) the VF3 to be used, but the grip is.....lacking. The E-P3 offers interchangeable grips and one of the first things I did was to pick up the largest available when I bought mine, but it's still an awful small form factor for that type lens.

I tried using my 50-200 f2.8-3.5 SWD on my Pen. The mass was just too much for such a small body. It did work great off a tripod, but my main aim is in using these tiny cameras without needing the extra support.

Ariel and Greg...Thanks again for your inputs....I feel dumb, never even considered the VF thing...You raise some very valid points about trying the big glass...Having a third hand might be a bigger issue than what body to mount glass on! I didn't think much about the IS thing being not as important as I thought it would.
Sounds like I have some more homework to do!
THanks again,
Mark