Getting to 1200mm ?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by GreinerStudio, Jan 11, 2018 at 9:20 PM.

  1. GreinerStudio

    GreinerStudio Mu-43 Regular

    62
    Feb 15, 2017
    While considering multiple options for pushing my reach beyond that of even the very impressive Panasonic Leica 100-400, adapting a Tamron 150-600 is something that has caught my interest. Can anyone who has done so speak to the performance?

    I know all he pitfalls of shooting any lens at 1200mm equivalent, but in particular:

    • What adapter did you use?
    • Which mount did you adapt from (Cannon, Nikon, etc)
    • How was auto focus performance?
    I would also consider similar feedback on the Sigma C 150-600 but I tend to prefer the Tamron unless the Sigma simply performs much better adapted to micro four thirds.

    The other option I have considered is the 300mm f/2.8 (Big Tuna) + EC20 + MMC3 + E-M1ii
     
  2. barry13

    barry13 Super Moderator; Photon Wrangler Subscribing Member

    Mar 7, 2014
    Southern California
    Barry
    Hi,

    Will you be shooting in good light?

    iirc @Phocal@Phocal has a 500mm Sigma zoom.
     
  3. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    The Sigma C and the Tamron (original) are really not worth adapting, they have a really low resolution. The only one I would even consider is the Sigma S, but even it doesn't have the best resolution (personally I wouldn't bother with it either).

    Now the ZD 300mm f2.8 aka big tuna with EC-20 is about the only thing I would trust going to that distance, well......other than maybe a Canon 600mm f4.0.......but the big tuna would be weather sealed.

    I do have the Sigma 50-500 aka Bigma in the 4/3's mount. Resolution wise it sits between the two Sigma's and I find it acceptable if you get close and fill the frame, other wise it just can't hold up to printing large or really any cropping. If you put the EC-14 on it, you have a very slow lens but it's a bit better than cropping a shot without the TC. With the EC-20 it is super slow and the IQ is poor. I will probably be selling the 50-500 soon, just don't use it because I don't need that kind of range either.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. DoofClenas

    DoofClenas Who needs a Mirror! Subscribing Member

    Nov 9, 2012
    Traverse City, MI
    Clint
    Get the big tuna!!
     
  5. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 31, 2013
    Plain tube or a 1.4xTC+Speedbooster + 150-600s is another option if you want to play those games.

    A less sane game I am personally considering in the future is a Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 OS with a 2x TC + 1.4x TC and a Speedbooster. Gives you a crazy 240-600 f/5.6 that's probably going to be soft wide open.
     
  6. archaeopteryx

    archaeopteryx Mu-43 Regular

    150
    Feb 25, 2017
    Yeah, my experience is cropping is often competitive with zooms on TCs, sometimes better. Results from cropping prime + 1.4x versus prime + 2x haven't been much different. though the 2x can be preferable if aperture isn't a tight constraint and the 2x is well matched. With a very few exceptions, that means expensive designed for DSLR kit. 500 4.0 + 1.4x should be OK here. 400 4.0 + 1.4x is close, though short of 1200.

    My solution for 1200 for some time has been to to fake it with 300mm. Cropping the center 4-5MP from 16-20 is adequate for online and small printing. I hardly ever run high quality big prints so, if anything, not using equipment capable of 1000+ is a gain.
     
  7. masayoshi

    masayoshi Mu-43 Veteran

    254
    Dec 5, 2016
    Salt Lake City
    Masaaki
    Just curious, what are you trying to shoot?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    852
    Feb 29, 2012
    I have the Panasonic 100-400 and the following in Canon mount, Tamron 150-600 (g1) and Bigma 50-500 and Sigma 120-300/2.8 (older version).

    I’ve used all three lens via Roxsen and Metabones (glassless) on my GH2, GH3 and G7 for video. I’ve shot some stills for record shots of birds, but at those distances, atmospheric factors reduce the quality significantly. The Panny 100-400 is far sharper, AF is many times faster and so light and portable. Given a choice btwn the Panny and the other 3, I’ll take the Panny most days.
     
  9. PacNWMike

    PacNWMike Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Dec 5, 2014
    Salish Sea
    I have Tamron 300mm f/2.8 + 2x-A + adapter + (body)

    It works, it's cheap and is acceptable but not great. The 1.4x-A is better. I've also tried it with the 4:3'rds 2x and 1.4x with similar or maybe better results. Unfortunately the old manual focus lenses sharpened up as you stopped down a bit but with digital you are quickly up against diffraction limits.
     
  10. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    852
    Feb 29, 2012
    Just to follow on my post. I tested my Tamron 150-600 g1 with the Metabones AF only adapter on my GH3. It was very slow, a good 2 seconds at the worst to about 1/2 second if it was close to begin with.
     
  11. Keeth101

    Keeth101 New to Mu-43

    8
    Jan 5, 2018
    Such a shame that Olympus hasn't/won't make a long zoom.
     
  12. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    Metabones doesn’t offical support the Tamron 150-600’s. My understanding is they take more power than is available from the batteries in m4/3 cameras. But the adapter does allow for external power if you wanted to try that since you already have the lens.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    Why? They are going a more proffesional route with their lenses. By that I mean they are making their lens lineup for someone shooting 2 bodies, which is what most sports shooters do (if not 3 or 4 bodies). There is not anything I couldn’t shoot with the current lens lineup running two bodies. Actually if I was still shooting a lot of sports I could easily run 3 bodies because of the smaller size and it’s what I probably would do.

    Long zooms are more a consumer oriented lenses and they have that with the 75-300.