Reading mode: Light Dark

I can't accept m43 mount.

Go to last post
B

Butchy

Active member
Messages
99
Reaction score
47
Question for those who are looking forward to switch to m43 when the new camera emerges at the end of 2013.

Say you have a complete range of SHG heavy lenses. Do you mind to use adapter? Will you stack your teleconverter with the adapter? You don't worry that after multiple changes of the lenses you will get a play? Don't you afraid that your heavy super grade lens will get astigmatism or other imperfection on the level of kit lenses? The diameter of the m43 mount is designed for small lenses. If you do sports for example or work in a harsh condition you need your equipment to be robust, you do not have time to think about your weak lens to camera link. Will you put on your 35-100mm f2 and carry it on the belt attached to your m43 camera?

In my opinion the answer is NO. The adapter is prosthesis that will give you good functionality but not the full functionality of the native 43 mount.
 
For the SHG lens, wouldn't you be supporting the lens, ie collar and not the camera supporting the lens anyway?

So it really shouldn't be an issue. The MMF3 is also weather sealed so you can use it with your 4/3 lens in harsh conditions as you would with your E5.
 
I would expect Olympus to have considered that and made the mount sturdy enough to handle this. :)
 
Yes and no. That's why the SHG lens have collars that you can mount it on a tripod. Even the 5-200mm lens has a tripod mount.

Just common sense I would think...
 
Hmmm.. I tend to use the 50-200 with a 1.4 hand held as my general walkabout lens for wildlife on my 620, I usually just sling it over my shoulder. Never felt that was an issue. In fact I took the collar off because it annoys me... So if the m4/3 to 4/3 is not up to this kind of use, then that would be a bit of an issue..
 
Butchy said:
Butchy wrote:

Question for those who are looking forward to switch to m43 when the new camera emerges at the end of 2013.

Say you have a complete range of SHG heavy lenses. Do you mind to use adapter? Will you stack your teleconverter with the adapter? You don't worry that after multiple changes of the lenses you will get a play? Don't you afraid that your heavy super grade lens will get astigmatism or other imperfection on the level of kit lenses? The diameter of the m43 mount is designed for small lenses. If you do sports for example or work in a harsh condition you need your equipment to be robust, you do not have time to think about your weak lens to camera link. Will you put on your 35-100mm f2 and carry it on the belt attached to your m43 camera?

In my opinion the answer is NO. The adapter is prosthesis that will give you good functionality but not the full functionality of the native 43 mount.
Click to expand...
You don´t hold a system camera, at least with a heavy lens, only by holding the camera (some people seem to believe the combo will be "front heavy")

Why?

Because you take the weight with your left hand holding the lens, carrying the main part of the weight, and maneuvre the combo by the right hand. Of course...

And if you want to let the combo hang in the strap the somewhat smaller (still made by metal mind you) m4/3 mount will easily take the weight even of a heavier than average lens. There IS enough margin designed into it, no problem!

Maybe, just maybe, the combo of fex the 12-35/2 w MMF adapter mounted on a m4/3 camera and placed on a tripod would to some extent put a "over a healthy limit" strain on the mount. Maybe...

I´d still think that would be OK, and not even in the long run would pose any noticeable problem.

IF a problem would appear w such a combo, it would be that it would be harder to get a good "feel", or good balance on anything except for a really stable tripod.
 
Last edited:
kittykat23uk said:
kittykat23uk wrote:

Hmmm.. I tend to use the 50-200 with a 1.4 hand held as my general walkabout lens for wildlife on my 620, I usually just sling it over my shoulder. Never felt that was an issue. In fact I took the collar off because it annoys me... So if the m4/3 to 4/3 is not up to this kind of use, then that would be a bit of an issue..
Click to expand...
 
jim stirling said:
jim stirling wrote:
jim stirling said:
kittykat23uk wrote:

Hmmm.. I tend to use the 50-200 with a 1.4 hand held as my general walkabout lens for wildlife on my 620, I usually just sling it over my shoulder. Never felt that was an issue. In fact I took the collar off because it annoys me... So if the m4/3 to 4/3 is not up to this kind of use, then that would be a bit of an issue..
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I have an M43 mount: EM5, along with my E3, E330, and E1. I also have a ZD 35-100. The combination looks something like this:

em35100.JPG


Note that I do have the grip installed - without it, handing is awful. With the grip, handling is pretty decent, the grip makes the EM5 + HG/SHG quite manageable.


Do I hang this from my belt? Of course not, way too heavy. But... when I put the 35-100 on my E3, do I hang that combination from my belt? Of course not, way too heavy. The 35-100 is a handful, whether it's on the EM5 or E3. Teleconverter? The MMF adapters are as stoutly built as the TC's, so a TC and the converter is about the same as stacking TC's. And I wouldn't use a TC with the 35-100, I'd break out the 50-200.


I bought the 35-100 about two months ago, specifically to use on the EM5. Why? Because I've seen too many gorgeous shots taken with it to pass up the chance to get one. Because the Panny 35-100 is an overpriced, mediocre rendering lens at $1500, while I picked up this absolutely mint beauty for $1200, thanks in no small part to people claiming that 4/3 is dying. Most if not all of them have never used HG or SHG on an EM5. For that matter, I bought the EM5 specifically to use with my HG and SHG glass, to get the greatly improved sensor.


You can talk yourself into believing that a future M43 body that will AF ZD glass quickly is a bad idea. In which case, the only alternative you have is to sell off HG and SHG, and go to FF.


Or, you can combine the best ZD lenses with the best sensor, and see what happens when the weakest link in 4/3, the somewhat mediocre sensor, is replaced.


From someone who has used the combination extensively since last April, I believe the main objections to HG/SHG on a larger M43 body are based more on entrenched thinking, not technical shortcomings. Even with the slower AF, I love HG and SHG on the EM5 - M43 has nothing like this, and won't get it in a smaller form.


Here's one quick effort with this combination, the cattail that the E3 kept locking on the wrong target. It is only with the EM5 RAW's ability to manipulate highlights and shadows that I could get that level of DR and darken the background that much without losing detail on the highlights or have artifacts appear. RAW out of the E3 couldn't even get close to that, and I tried.


cattail.JPG
 
I think the way Olympus will make the hybrid is the first fixed collar will be for the 4/3 lens and then if you have m 4/3 lens an attachable 3mm collar will be provided in front of the first one. Now the correct communication between camera and which lens you have on will be the trick.....
 
I think stacked adapters are tempting fate, and Olympus have advised against it before
just contemplate a Pen body, 43rds adapter and 2x holding your 300/2.8 off the deck

the thing is, we still dont know enough about the next camera, even not enough to identify that the next is even anything to do with four thirds. Have no choice but to wait and see as it may be materially very different from what we expect
 
Butchy said:
Butchy wrote:

... Don't you afraid that your heavy super grade lens will get astigmatism or other imperfection on the level of kit lenses? The diameter of the m43 mount is designed for small lenses. If you do sports for example or work in a harsh condition you need your equipment to be robust, you do not have time to think about your weak lens to camera link. ...
Click to expand...
That's nonsense.

There isn't an Olympus m4/3rds body with enough weight to put strain on the mount :)

The LENS holds the camera, see?
 
Just my luck a hybrid and an E7, you know a lot of us will just have to have both. :-) This is the way I have always thought Olympus should go. The thought of having access to both lens suites on one body is going to leave me broke and possibly divorced <grin>
 
jim stirling said:
jim stirling wrote:
jim stirling said:
kittykat23uk wrote:

Hmmm.. I tend to use the 50-200 with a 1.4 hand held as my general walkabout lens for wildlife on my 620, I usually just sling it over my shoulder. Never felt that was an issue. In fact I took the collar off because it annoys me... So if the m4/3 to 4/3 is not up to this kind of use, then that would be a bit of an issue..
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
I used my E-M5 and my 50-200 and the 1.4 to shoot from the stands at my son's junior varsity football games. There were no issues with the structural stability of the kit.

a68920de498c44568c3380c7c25ed209.jpg

As far as handling, I suspect the grip would be a benefit as the E-M5 alone seemed a little small at that end for balance. Also, manual focus was a must. And I do miss my vivid, beautiful E-3 viewfinder.

The difference in the conditions I could shoot in effectively versus my E-3 was dramatic. I am excited to see what Olympus puts out in this 'hybrid'.
 
Ulfric M Douglas said:
Ulfric M Douglas wrote:
Ulfric M Douglas said:
Butchy wrote:

... Don't you afraid that your heavy super grade lens will get astigmatism or other imperfection on the level of kit lenses? The diameter of the m43 mount is designed for small lenses. If you do sports for example or work in a harsh condition you need your equipment to be robust, you do not have time to think about your weak lens to camera link. ...
Click to expand...
That's nonsense.

There isn't an Olympus m4/3rds body with enough weight to put strain on the mount :)

The LENS holds the camera, see?
Click to expand...
Ulfric:

I dont think there are enough people left that believe that it is correct to carry the body/lens combo with the left hand carrying the lens/weight of the system.

I learned to carry any lens/camera that had a lens big enough to grab by the lens (to ease the strain on the shooting hand (right hand).

As long as there are shooters who think the left hand is only for Zooming/focusing there will be this talk of the "weak lens/camera link".

I think the right hand should carry almost no weight at all so the fingers of the right hand are free to dance all over the buttons on the camera when needed (thus relieving the mount from the "torque stress" of the heavy lens.)


If the lens is large enough to wrap your hand around, then the lens should NEVER be hanging free from the camera body.... (we even worried about stressing the mount on our slr cameras 50 years ago).

I was told more than 50 years ago that the original purpose of the neck strap was to keep you from maybe dropping/breaking the camera body while changing lenses NOT so you could walk about looking like great goober (twit) with a heavy lens slapping about on a strapped camera.

Times do change, and most of the time I just mind my own business, but this discussion seems stupid.

Having the right hand free of weight is to the benefit of the photographer.

Having the weight supported by the lens when the lens is heavy is to benefit both the system and the photographer.

Carrying all the weight in the right hand benefits only the doctor you visit to take care of wrist pain.
 
Both the 90-250 and the 300 come with straps, for the lens.

Maybe the E5 mount is too weak for those lenses.




I've tried to use the 90-250 with my em5 with grip. I would use it if it autofocussed better, it is tough for me to manual focus and support the weight at the same time.

150, 14-35 and the 50-200, I have no such issues. I think a E520 sized Micro43 mount camera with a MMF4 or whatever would be fine.

I use the panny adapter, and it is sturdy. The MMF3 did seem that solid when I saw it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top