Micro 4/3 1.4 Teleconverter

Started Nov 11, 2012 | Discussions thread
danieladougan Regular Member • Posts: 130
Re: Micro 4/3 1.4 Teleconverter

gandalfII wrote:

gandalfII wrote:

Gregm61 wrote:

Johann D wrote:

More than any lens, I have been waiting for Olympus or Panasonic to come out with a m4/3 1.4 teleconverter. With so many m4/3 zooms and primes out there, isn't it about time for a high optic, sealed micro 1.4 TC?


The current option Panasonic and Olympus use (2X Digital TC with the E-M5 and Panasonic's Extended optical zoom) are better options because a 1.4 TC comes at the cost of one stop of light and the two most obvious lenses you would use with a TC, the Panny 100-300 and Olympus 75-300, are already slow and would be awful candidates for using teleconverters.

The only type primes that make sense for use with TC's are long primes, like 200-300mm or longer, and we have none of those. Panasonic's 35-100 f2.8 is the first lens that comes even remotely close enough to warranting a TC and we're not going to see a TC for just that lens. Yes, there are several high quality lenses in this system, but there none that warrant a teleconverter being developed right now.

-- hide signature --

"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights

Um, a 75/1.8 with the option to become a 105/2.5 would appeal to me...

With the new 40-150mm f2.8 PRO from Olympus, you can get to 105 (or even 150) at f2.8. Probably not all that different from f2.5. And you get to 210 at f4 with the MC-14 teleconverter.

Not that I can afford them.

I recently sold a 50-200 because it was too big, keeping my older 40-150. The 75 would suit me where the new 40-150 is too big and slow, with the option to go longer with a tc as a benefit.

I need fast primes indoors, don't need fast zooms outdoors, and keep things as small as possible.

I'm all for making the MC-14 work with any Micro 4/3 lens. But since it doesn't...a few questions for you to think about:

When you say "slow," do you mean in terms of aperture or autofocus speed? Because if you're talking about aperture with the teleconverter, it's not f1.8 vs f2.8, it's f2.5 vs f2.8. Is that significant? I wouldn't think so.

If you're talking about actual autofocus speed, that's different. I don't know how the two lenses compare in that sense. Apparently the new pro lens is incredibly fast to focus. Here's a side-by-side review of those two lenses from Robin Wong:

"Both lenses were VERY close. In fact, they were so close, I have to refer to the image name/numbers a few times just to make sure I did not do the comparison boxes wrongly. Generally, I still think that the 75mm F1.8 is a tad sharper. But we are talking about zoom lens vs prime lens here, and for the M.Zuiko 40-150mm F2.8 pro lens to come so close to the quality expected from the 75mm F1.8 lens, this was surely a great feat."


In terms of size, the teleconverter would make the 75mm f1.8 at least a little bigger. Maybe a third option for you to consider would be the Panasonic 35-100mm f2.8. So then you're comparing 105mm at f2.5 vs 100mm at f2.8. Is that a significant difference to you? It wouldn't be to me...you can always crop a little.

 danieladougan's gear list:danieladougan's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL5 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-42mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4-5.6 R +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow