Why no m4/3 tele converters like Nikon/Canon others?

Started Nov 10, 2013 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Treeshade
Treeshade Junior Member • Posts: 38
Re: Tele converters are a horrible kludge

Steen Bay wrote:

Louis_Dobson wrote:

You have to be utterly desperate to want to go beyond 600mm, it's a specialised field, either the pictures will be abysmal or else the kit will cost an absolute fortune and be used with extreme care, and I don't think the demand is there yet....

If shooting for example small birds, then you'll need all the 'reach' you can get. Most often 600mm equivalent won't be enough (and 1200mm equiv. doesn't necessarily cost a fortune).

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50760288

When I use the Panny 100-300 for small birds, I often have to crop the photo, sometime up to 50% crop. Longer range would be very useful.

At 300mm (600mm) the lens is f/5.6 wide open. If the rumored 300mm/f4 prime is paired with a 1.4 converter, the combo would be 420mm (840mm) at f/5.6. I would happily pay triple price for that extra 240mm range.

 Treeshade's gear list:Treeshade's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Olympus E-PL7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
ayt
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow