Mirror lenses and BIF?

I really don't know, I can only speak for the copy of the version I have (which is very tidy, but has a sticky aperture mechanism). It is entirely plastic, maybe the older lenses are better, but at least mine is light.

I got the camera, 28-80 Sigma Macro (which is surprisingly good as a close up lens) and the 100-300 all in a bag for NZD$50 a few years ago (back when there were only 2 m.Zuiko lenses). I actually only wanted the bag but the lenses were useful for a while. I still use the 100-300 for some things, I'd consider that because these manual focus OK, they'd be good for video, too.

Another lens I have is a 400/5.6 generic Japanese item (probably from the late 70s or 80s, works OK for what it is, and for what I paid for it, was a good deal. That was part of a Canon AE-1? kit with 28 and 70-210 Vivitar (truly awful, awful lenses) a Canon new FD 50/1.7? and the 400 telephoto. Whole lot was $50 I've published at least one image on DPR that used it.

The modern equivalent would be the Bower/Samyang long refracting teles, they are dirt cheap but you get what you pay for. May be better than current cheap mirror equivalents, perhaps?

I'd say it is possible to get usable images from all of these lenses, but my standards aren't very high and I'll use just about anything that gets an image. Pixel peeping? - forget about it.

For situations where you know you can return to get the shot, they are fine, but for a once in a lifetime safari, or for serious use, these lenses are not so good. That's why I have the 100-300 Panasonic.