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

If Oly would make a 1.4X Teleconverter For the Non Pro mu 43 lenses

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Fred S, Dec 30, 2014.

  1. Fred S

    Fred S Mu-43 Veteran

    493
    Feb 20, 2012
    Calgary
    Fred S
    IMO, they would sell Thousands

    Is it a possibility or A dream
     
    • Like Like x 3
  2. jrsilva

    jrsilva Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 1, 2012
    Portugal
    Jaime
    Well, I don't know if it is possible or not, but I would love to have a 1.4 teleconverter compatible with the Olympus M.Zuiko 75mm f/1.8 :rolleyes:
     
    • Like Like x 3
  3. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Lorenzo
    Which lenses are you thinking about? I see no point in adding a TC to a 25mm lens for example. A TC usually takes one stop of light so it would be hard to use with "non-fast" zooms.
    The 75 seems the only one.
     
  4. evilnim

    evilnim Mu-43 Veteran

    201
    Mar 27, 2012
    Birmingham
    ...or if Panasonic made a 2xTC for the 35-100...!


    Sent from my iPhone using Mu-43 mobile app
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. EarthQuake

    EarthQuake Mu-43 Top Veteran

    831
    Sep 30, 2013
    It certainly is possible, numerous generic teleconverters have been made for nearly every other camera system that work for most lenses. It likely wouldn't be the same quality as the current 1.4x, as that TC is designed specifically for the 40-150, and likely the 300 as well, but there is nothing physically preventing Olympus or anyone else from designing one.

    Though as mentioned about, it would be of limited use for most lenses. The long zooms would be too slow to accurately AF, the shorter primes don't make much sense either (you would be better off using one of the longer primes or even the kit tele zooms). Even the 60/2.8s make minimal sense with a TC, at 85/4(1.4x) or 120/5.6(2x) a basic 40-150/4-5.6 is just about as fast and probably similar in image quality. The 75/1.8 and 2.8 tele zooms do make some sense, and of course the 300/4 when it is released.

    So really what we have is a situation where there are 4 lenses that would make sense to use a TC with and 2 of them will have an available 1.4x TC. Is there a big enough market to make a TC thats only particularly useful for the other two lenses?

    The fact that there are not many long and fast lenses in the system is likely the real reason there are not more teleconverters available, as for TCs to make sense, you need long and fast lenses. There are a variety of fast teles in 43rds mount, and coincidentally teleconverters as well, so thats always an option until we see more fast and long lenses for the M43rds system.

    Additionally, for a TC to work well, you need a lens that significantly out resolves the sensor at the long end. Almost certainly the case with the 75/1.8, but unlikely to be so with the 35-100/2.8 which softens up a little at the long end. If you don't start with a super sharp lens, the end result of using a teleconverter is not much better than simply cropping. Traditionally, TCs were helpful in that they would give you accurate framing with using an OVF, but that isn't generally a problem with mirrorless cameras, you can use the ETC mode to get accurate framing.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  6. Rudy

    Rudy Mu-43 Veteran

    449
    Jan 24, 2013
    Oakland, CA
    I think a TC for u4/3 is of limited appeal.
    The TC really just magnifies the center portion of the image and it uses up one f-stop in the process.
    For you to get any benefit over just cropping the image the lens would have to be able to outresolve the sensor.
    With the TC 14 Olympus is taking advantage of the fact that they can optimize for the two lenses it is meant to work with.
    A general purpose TC would have to be more generic and therefore have more compromises in its design.
    The main reason why a Speedbooster (reverse TC) can actually improve image quality is that it shrinks the image down and with it the aberrations.
    A TC, in contrast, will magnify any aberrations of the image projected by the lens.
    It probably would be better to wait for a higher Megapixel sensor as this would benefit the entire image area.
    Even though I think 16 Mpix is plenty for just about everything a high MP count would be useful for cropping when your lens does not have the reach. But then there is the trade-off in noise with the smaller pixels...
    Rudy
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Fred S

    Fred S Mu-43 Veteran

    493
    Feb 20, 2012
    Calgary
    Fred S
    Yes the 75 would be ideal

    I was thinking my slow 75-300 f 6.7 at 300 . With good light or even average light the images and AF is fine . so losing 1 stop should be OK
    I am like most people, I cannot afford a f 2.8 40-150 at $ 1500.00 or a f 2.8 300 at ???? $ 2000 to 2500 ( a guess )
     
  8. EarthQuake

    EarthQuake Mu-43 Top Veteran

    831
    Sep 30, 2013
    The 75-300 with a 1.4 would give you 420/9.4 at the long end, F/9.4 is really, really slow. Probably slower than the minimum aperture size required for AF in the M43rds system specs. On most DSLRs its 6.3 or 6.7. So AF performance would likely be very poor if it worked at all.

    The 75-300 and 100-300 lenses both soften up a bit at the long end, which again suggest that they would not be sharp enough for TC use. To get any advantage with a TC you really need a lens sharper than the sensor, so there would likely be no point in using a TC with these lenses, cropping will give you the same result with better AF performance and at a lower ISO.

    If you're on a budget, really need the extra reach and can life without AF, you might try a 500/8 mirror lens instead.

    There is also the 43 50-200 which could be used with the 43 1.4x and 2x as far as I am aware, and shouldn't cost as much as the 40-150/2.8.

    Perhaps someday Olympus, Panasonic, or even Sigma or Tamron will design a mid-grade lens in the 150-400/5.6 range, I think that would be very popular if it wasn't too expensive.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Harvey Melvin Richards

    Harvey Melvin Richards Photo Posting Junkie

    Feb 15, 2014
    Southwest Utah
    I like my MC-14 teleconverter, but I think that it is more difficult to swap than a regular lens. It's just so small., and yet it's still just like a lens, yet both end are exposed.
     
  10. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    I think Olympus has changed their lens design philosophy considerably from the 4/3 days. Back in those days, they predominantly made zoom lenses; some reasonably fast variable f stop and some very fast constant f stop zooms (as well as a few fast primes), which worked well with the 1.4x and some with the 2x converters.

    Now Olympus is tending to make fast primes, but generally slower zooms, which aren't ideal with even a 1.4x converter. So I suspect that it would be with some reluctance that Olympus would produce a general fit 1.4x converter for m4/3. In fact, I doubt very much that they would, as they appear to be filling gaps with primes (which is what so many seem to want).
     
  11. Carbonman

    Carbonman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 10, 2014
    Vancouver BC
    Graham
    Samyang/Rokinon could easily produce 1.4x or 2x teleconverters for M43 and other non-full frame formats. They could even include the electrical transfer a la Fotga extension tubes. It would be easy for them to engineer and they would sell boatloads if the price was below Olympus TC pricing. They would be usable with adapted lenses as well.
     
  12. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Lorenzo
    If AF is not mandatory there are a lot of great manual focus lenses like 80-200 or 70-210 f/4 or f/3.5 from nikon , canon, vivitar, tamron, etc. for about 100$. I just got the Tamron SP 70-210 f/3.5 and with a focal reducer you can also choose to trade a little reach for one extra stop.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Ray, not Oz
    I'm not convinced that it would be such an easy task, else we'd already have seen it happen. Just consider the differences between the Metabones speedboosters and the others, many copies are fraught with poor/poorer quality results. In many ways, a tele-converter takes a lot of effort to get right.
     
  14. Fred S

    Fred S Mu-43 Veteran

    493
    Feb 20, 2012
    Calgary
    Fred S
    Unfortunately AF is a almost must have. .My main interest is wild life and My eyes are by far not the best
    BUT for a $ 100 or even $200 it a cheap gamble
    I should takeout my 40-150 and try in in manual mode
    for a 70-210 Oly has a very nice 2X digicrop which I occasionally use and I get good results
     
  15. Klorenzo

    Klorenzo Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 10, 2014
    Lorenzo
    Consider that manual focus only lenses usually have a much finer and precise focus feel. If your camera has focus peaking that is a quick way to go.
    Also many MF tele lenses had their dedicated tele-converters that go for 50$. And many can be used for limited macro too.

    I swear nobody is paying me to sell you one :)

    I'll post a few pictures as soon as mine lands here.
     
  16. EarthQuake

    EarthQuake Mu-43 Top Veteran

    831
    Sep 30, 2013
    I think its important to add, most manual focus zoom lenses were not particularly good optically. Much progress has been made in the last 10 years in terms of optical quality with zooms, so if you're looking for a manual focus lens, definitely shoot for a prime. Something like a Canon FD 300/4 isn't super expensive and you can get an FD 1.4x and/or 2.0x, probably total cost under $300.

    http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/extenders.htm
    http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/canon/fdresources/fdlenses/300mm.htm
    https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=38766