Olympus MC-14 1.4 x Teleconverter for Olympus 40-150 f2.8

Colin K. Work wrote:

77phil77 wrote:

I have just received my MC-14 and now had a chance to try it 'in action' with my EM-1 and Olympus 40-150 f2.8. I must say I am very very impressed! I thought I would share my experience for any who are considering this rather nice little optical gem and are unsure, happy also to answer any questions through this forum.

To start with the size and weight makes it hardly noticeable on the lens or in the kit bag. It comes with a small padded bag and carabiner, very handy.

It makes the lens the equivalent of an f4 which is a little more of a challenge when the light falls off, especially in our UK winter days, though this appears to be balanced nicely by the EM1's stabilisation system, the weight of the combination and what a little better ISO performance than my EM5 (the latter is my perception only)

In performance its very nice indeed, feels half the weight of my FF sports combination, focus is still lightning fast to lock on, and I don't see any noticeable change in performance between having the converter on or off. So for me unless low light forces me I think the MC-14 will stay locked to this lens as the standard rather than the other way round. That in itself it possibly the best compliment it can have.

Subjects close the camera have a nice out of focus feel, those further away less so - I would so have wanted the same bokeh as my Nikon 70-200 f4 (though do understand the science won't let me)

Anyway please see and judge the results for yourself, here is an flickr album of photos all with the MC-14 x1.4 converter attached that I took this weekend, I think probably 90% are at the maximum focal length of 210 (or 420 in 35mm terms)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/phils--photos/sets/72157650825838858

All have been through lightroom and have my variation of Erik Meijs presets for OMD5, thank you Erik (you can find them here on the dpreview forums if you haven't already). In case any one is concerned that the lens itself vignettes - no that's me, my preference I know some like it and other loathe it. The EXIF data is on the flickr page so please interrogate settings etc

The examples are mostly sports pictures, rugby my local Saracens side being beaten by London French, a great game, just the wrong score, and also a few at the Olympic white water venue just north of London - Sport photography is my favourite genre (I am still getting to grips with m4/3 and sports though haven't really cracked it yet to the level of my FF kit, I am optimistic through!) I may write a piece on the difference from FF to M4/3rds once I've fully explored it sufficiently. it would be good to hear other views.

Overall verdict for the MC-14 is 5 stars from me.

Pros - Optics, speed of focus, weight, size and overall portability

Cons - price (it is a lot for a converter!), also some of the results out of the camera can be a little too heavy on the contrast side, am I being picky?

I hope this helps

Phil

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/phils--photos/
Instagram: http://instagram.com/77phil77

Good to hear - still haven't got mine

On the price - I don't think it unreasonable ... comparable with Canon and cheaper than Nikon. In fact if you get it with the 40-150 its £100 cheaper making it a bargain.

Given that you are losing almost nothing in IQ and gaining 60mm I think it's good value. What would a 200mm f4 of comparable quality cost?

Well, owning the combination myself and being thrilled by its performance I still have got to say: I'd preferred an µFT version of my beloved 50-200 SWD 2.8-3.5.
f 2.8 throughout the range are of no real significance compared to f 3.5 at the long end and I'd rather do without fiddling with the converter any time I need more than 150 millimetres.