1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

How much weight would you hang off a m4/3rds?

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by RichA, May 29, 2012.

  1. RichA

    RichA Mu-43 Regular

    120
    Mar 28, 2012
    I carried my old E-1 with a heavy lens, from the strap, off and on. Eventually, it caused major wearing of the eyelets. This isn't a problem with the slotted steel eyelets of cheaper DSLRs, but the old chrome over brass (be nice if they were stainless steel) eyelets are subject to wear.
    However, the camera lens mount is another issue. I would hang a heavy lens off the E-1's mount without a second thought because the camera body was solid. Would you hang 600gms from an E-M5? I picked up a Nikon 35-70mm f2.8 lens and that is what it weights.
     
  2. Mellow

    Mellow Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2010
    Florida or Idaho
    Tom
    I had an interesting (read: sad) experience with an E-PM1 recently. My tripod carrying the E-PM1 + 9-18mm lens blew over, pitching the whole thing directly onto a rock.

    Miraculously, the lens itself wasn't damaged at all. I had a lens hood on, and that took the brunt of the damage. The bayonet mount for the lens hood had a good-sized chip out of it, but the glass was completely untouched. Very lucky.

    What WAS damaged, to my surprise, was the tripod mount at the bottom of the camera. In fact, the entire bottom of the camera was bent and twisted, pretty severely. I was able to more or less bend it back into position, though the camera obviously now shows signs of abuse and won't pass as new.

    So, to answer your question, it's not the lens mount I'd be worried about, it's the tripod mount--assuming you're going to mount this big lens + camera on a tripod. I'm would think the EM-5 would be a lot stronger than the E-PM1, but it's something to think about.
     
  3. I can't find the ref at the moment, but somewhere on a website for the Panasonic AF100 there is a reference to max lens weight. I think it is 1.8 or 1.5kg. I was searching because of an 800g lens I was mounting.
    Most lenses over 1kg come with a tripod mount anyway, and you should carry them
    by the lens barrel.
     
  4. Found the detail. The manual for the AF100 says to use lens support for lenses over 1kg.
    But remember that will be a static weight guideline. The force (moment) exerted by a heavy & long lens will be more if, say, it's bouncing around on the shoulder strap when you're running. My 800g 200/F3 did work the screws loose on my adapter, but they were probably not loctited to start with. They are now!
     
  5. Crdome

    Crdome Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 11, 2011
    West Central Indiana
    Chrome
    Caution must prevail.

    There are a huge number of factors to consider when mounting heavy lenses on m4/3 cameras. Besides the ones previously mentioned in this thread consideration must extend beyond the camera's mount itself.

    With nearly infinite adaptability of lenses on m4/3 we have capacity to greatly exceed the engineered capacity on these diminutive wonders.

    Referencing my 46oz (1300g) the Cosmicar 22.5~90mm/1.5 Television lens here are additional factors to consider: Cosmicar f1.5/22.5~90mm - Mu-43 Gallery

    Weight distribution of lens: Is it evenly distributed along its length or it it front heavy as the Cosmicar? Here the union of the lens and camera mounts becomes a fulcrum between the camera and lens. The force exerted by the lens could by 5-10 times greater than its actual weight.

    Capacity of the adapter: Generally c-mount adapter are very thin spun aluminum. SIG Member Ekoe provided a heavy stainless c-mount adapter for the Cosmicar. Otherwise the lens would have ripped out of an aluminum mount.

    Strap's capacity:
    RichA stared the initial thread mentioning the strap. A neck strap probably isn't a prudent means to carry massive lenses. A sling which bolts into the tripod mount would be more appropriate.

    Tripod Mount:
    If the lens is big, it must be supported. The tripod mount clamps to the lens with its foot facing toward the len's front. This orientation place the tripod's threading farther towards the front of the len better balancing the weight of lens vs. camera.

    Tripod capacity:
    Often tripods have specifications listing their load capacity. Don't believe it! For the GH2 and Cosimicar combined weights of under 5lbs I considered a named brand rated at 12 lbs. I thought the >2x factor would be prudent, but when reading customer reviews I found numerous reports of tripod failure with substantially lighter loads than my combo.

    Tripod Head and Quick Release:
    Plastic or metal. I owned a substantial aluminum tripod with plastic head and quick-release mount. Mounting the comb I immediately noticed the head was bowing under the load.

    Double locking quick release head.
    I always felt vulnerable using quick release dreading an unintentional release, or the adapter remaining on a camera not with me. With the large comb I felt more vulnerable. It is essential that the rekease knob have a locking mechanism to prevent accidental release.

    Don't Scrimp:
    You are entrusting a huge investment in equipment to the tripod. Be certain it is capable of your trust. I took my equipment to a "real" camera shop staffed by a professional staff who were all photographers. We tried out various combinations of legs and heads to find one appropriate setup and my price range.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. RichA

    RichA Mu-43 Regular

    120
    Mar 28, 2012
    That's what happened to the E-1 eyelets. Lots of walking, some bouncing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. RichA

    RichA Mu-43 Regular

    120
    Mar 28, 2012
    I don't know about that "B" statement. The tripod mount is one screw into what is probably a boss held on by two tiny screws. If you are lucky, it is cast into a bottom plate and the bottom plate is thick. You are supporting the camera and lens weight on one mounting hole, versus supporting the lens by 4-6 screws spaced around a 2.3" circle, bolted directly into the body for the lens mount.

    Most of the time, the body material is either an internal steel cage in the case of plastic bodies to the magnesium frame of the metal-bodied cameras. Doing the math and not accounting for unequal forces, each screw of the lens mount is supporting 150gms in my case of the lens weighing 600gms. It probably will have no effect on the body. The other support area, the eyelets of the camera body is another issue. They are supporting the weight of the camera body and the lens.

    Interesting anecdote; A friend of mine owned a Nikon D80 and D300 and he was convinced that the D80 body was flexing slightly under the weight of a 17-55mm f2.8 lens which was a heavy lens. He was used to supporting most of the lens weight by the D300 body and grip.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    You might want to consider using an adapter that has an integrated tripod mount for a lens of that size.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. CUB

    CUB Mu-43 Veteran

    275
    Apr 19, 2012

    The body of the Olympus PEN E-P1, 2 and 3 models is made of plastic. I have seen them when they are taken apart for repair. I would imagine that the cheaper E-PL1, 2 and 3 and E-PM1 will also have plastic chassis.

    I was surprised when I first saw an E-P1 in bits because the external appearance and quality feel suggested it might have a strong metal chassis. I guess it is a case of "don't judge a book by its cover", but it wouldn't stop me buying one. It is the results that matter.
     
  10. Great suggestion, will go looking. That would be great for those lenses that are a similar weight to the body: giving a nice balance on cheaper tripod heads.
    Do you know of such an adapter for m43 to OM?

    Cheers,
    Tom
     
  11. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    I know that Rayqual offers an OM-to-:43: adapter with an integrated tripod mount, which can be found here. It's not particularly cheap at $189, but I believe that Rayqual has a good reputation for quality.

    I was also able to turn up a couple of cheaper options on eBay. As always, caveat emptor.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. I am considering one of these for carrying my E-M5 and telephoto lenses (once I get the E-M5!).
    Both my longer lenses are legacy, so the adapters with built in tripod mounts would work really well with the Capture clip.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. drathquark

    drathquark Mu-43 Regular

    28
    Feb 21, 2012
    UK
    DSC_0047.

    I've had that attached to a tripod via the camera tripod mount, probably wasn't a good idea, but it didn't kill the camera.
     
  14. Crdome

    Crdome Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 11, 2011
    West Central Indiana
    Chrome
    My GH2 seems up to the challange. But you have a valid point. Their is no teling what is under the camera's skin. My first Olympus digital camera, their first produced with removable memory came with a threaded nylon tripod mount which stripped after the first two usages. It took enormous 640k images. I think the memory card capacity was no more than 4mb.. Smaller that most single image file size now.

     
  15. Crdome

    Crdome Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 11, 2011
    West Central Indiana
    Chrome
    drathquark, If it hasn't created any suspicions you are probably safe with your setup. The lens itself isn't truly "heavy" but with adapter and tele converters it pprobably puts a lot of torque on the camera mount.