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

DonParrot wrote:

pede59 wrote:

77phil77 wrote:

Hi Pitchertaker

Good question. i was very excited when they announced the 300mm f4. Now its arrived im dissapointed that they've priced it so high and effectively above mine and the amateur market. I guess thats one answer, and I think Olympus have shot themselves in the foot here as they don't have enough of a hold on the pro market yet.

On reflection if I had a choice the answer is no, I would stick with the 40-150 and 1.4 converter its just so versatile, light, and delivers really great quality. Where else can you get such a range and a choice of F2.8 or F4. 2.8 is really useful for depth of field (which M4/3 lacks) and poor light - so valuable for us in the northern hemisphere

I hope that was helpful and good luck with the lens selection

Regards

Phil

First - nice set of pictures you referenced in your original post. If i would have seen that then i might have purchased the 40-150 + TC probably a little earlier

Anyways - i bought the combo a little later. But my assessment is very similar. A very useful focal range, 2.8 (or f4 with TC), i can still carry it in a fairly small bag and the cost of the combos is only about half of the 300 f4.

Also i agree that Olympus appears to have targeted the pro market. For me it is too much money because i would use it only occasionally. Because of the size i would have to think about bags and how to carry it and so forth. I might consider the Panasonic 100-400 once more image samples and reviews become available. It is a little smaller and costs less.

...and according to the pics we could see to date its IQ is on the level of the 100-300. Should this turn ióut toi be true, it'a absolutely no option for the 1800 Euros we will have to pay for it in Europe.

Seems like there is only one set of pictures out there, taken with a prototype. I have to look again but i thought the quality looked definitely better than 100-300. I agree though that the lens has to be substantially better than the 100-300 to justify the price. While it is unrealistic to assume that the quality of a zoom can be as good as that of a prime i was actually wondering how big the difference between the zooms long end to the 300 f4 will be.

So my option arguably will be to buy the two converters for my 50-200 SWD and find out how much i will use the focal lengths beyond 200mm. Should I use them a lot I'm going to save for the 300 4.0 after having purchased the E-M1 MKII and if I don't I will settle for using the 50-200 with one of the two converters.
--

-- hide signature --

I wish I was an OLYgarch