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

Increasing focal lenght...

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by threebees, Apr 2, 2013.

  1. threebees

    threebees Mu-43 Regular

    37
    Mar 13, 2013
    My apologies if I screw up too much.

    I like doing nature photography, mostly wildlife. I've used 4/3 for some time with Zuiko 70-300mm and I would have loved to use a EC14 teleconverter (or 50-200 with EC20) but just couldn't afford it. Of course, I could either afford a nice prime.

    Sometimes you just have to try to get closer to get a nicer picture. But when we are talking about cocodriles you just don't want to get closer for a close-up...

    I have read that it is not possible to use teleconverters for mfourthirds between lens and camera. This is why I first thought about going to legacy lens (I was thinking some 200 2.8 prime with teleconverter for some cases).

    But then I thought: what if I save for a long time to get a panasonic 100-300? It would be more lightweight than a legacy lens. I know it's a great lens but sometimes I need more than 600mm equivalent for some cool closeups.

    I remebered the Olympus teleconverters used for bridge and compact cameras. TCON17 and things like that.

    Would it be madness to use TCON on the Pana100-300?
    Should I just go for legacy primes if I want lengh and quality?

    I read that people worry about autofocus. I never really used it, neither for following birds. I did lose a lot of shots and many of them where out of focus when looked closer on the screen (and I think that I need glasses too). Ok... I am starting to worry now... I just thought it wasn't that bad to manual focus in "action" pictures.

    I have been searching the forum and internet for tele lenses, native and legacy, and now I just have a list of brands and names and I'm really confused. I know that cheap lightweight and good is not always possible but...

    :eek:
     
  2. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    You would have to get a m4/3 to 4/3 adapter, which I'm pretty sure they don't make, to mount the tele converter to a m4/3 lens. Then a 4/3 to m4/3 adapter to mount the teleconverter. What we need is a good m4/3 teleconverter (2x) for the 75mm 1.8 to make a 150 (f3.5).
     
  3. threebees

    threebees Mu-43 Regular

    37
    Mar 13, 2013
    I read somewhere, probably in this forum, that it is not possible to make m4/3 teleconverters, it's a pity.
     
  4. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nothing is impossible, it is just impractical. If they did make one it would be very expensive and have some serious limitations. This is especially true for a full 2x tele-converter.

    There is an option for you however, a screw on tele-conversion lens. They degrade the IQ a little but do give the extra reach without loosing aperture. The thread of the 100-300mm is 67mm which is a little bit of an odd size so you may have to get a 72mm and a step-down ring.
     
  5. threebees

    threebees Mu-43 Regular

    37
    Mar 13, 2013
    I've been thinking about m43 chances and my previous system. I used Olympus E300, which was really slow with autofocus with zuiko 70-300. Most of my pictures were handheld with manual focus, and I never get many good results when cropping.

    In all these years cameras have advanced a lot. I'll be able to get much better pictures with a m43 with 100-300. And if I pay attention to avoid shaking the camera, I could get better images that for some occasions I could crop. It's not the best, but I'll get better results than before.

    And for the rest, I'll borrow a friend's mirror tele lens and see what I can do with it for specific images. Knowing to avoid some backgrounds, I have seen some nice pictures made with them.

    And I think that I'll have for a long time with this... until some teleconverter or other solution appears... someday.

    Thank you very much!
     
  6. Gary Ramey

    Gary Ramey Mu-43 Veteran

    240
    Dec 27, 2012
    Aurora Colorado
    I have also been wanting to do this with some trepidation. I want a prime lens, that is 300mm. I don't mind adapted lens but there's a lot to choose from. My budget is around $400
     
  7. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    If your patient, a Canon 300 F4L could be had for $400. The Nikon 300 f4 ED AF seems to be a $100 more.
     
  8. Gary Ramey

    Gary Ramey Mu-43 Veteran

    240
    Dec 27, 2012
    Aurora Colorado
  9. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    Gary,

    Canon made (at least) two FD 300mm f/4's: the "L" version and the regular version. I'm not that familiar with these lenses, but I think the primary difference is that the "L" version uses rare earth glass elements which help to minimize distortions. The L version is definitely more sought after and more valuable.

    The one in the auction you linked to is the non-L regular version. Those can be found for $200 or less pretty regularly, so that does not appear to be a bargain.
     
  10. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    No, this is a non L but basically the same optically. The L had more advanced coatings which gave it better contrast and less chromatic aberration. like this
    Canon FD 300mm F4 L Lens Perfect for 4 NEX Micro 4 3 Cameras 082966213380 | eBay

    There is a big difference by all accounts. This one and the Nikon ED AF are supposedly significantly better than the other 300 legacies.
     
  11. Gary Ramey

    Gary Ramey Mu-43 Veteran

    240
    Dec 27, 2012
    Aurora Colorado
    Thanks...given the others are $300...I would definitely go up a couple hundred to get a much better lens.
     
  12. edmsnap

    edmsnap Mu-43 Veteran

    430
    Dec 20, 2011
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Backwards unfortunately. All the nFD lenses used the same SSC coatings except for the 50 f/1.8 which was just SC. The 300mm L lens was a 7 element/7 group optical formula and used 2 UD glass elements. The 300mm non-L lens was a 6 element/6 group design with no particularly special glass. As others have said, the L lens was a significantly better performer with its superior optical formula and materials.
     
  13. Gary Ramey

    Gary Ramey Mu-43 Veteran

    240
    Dec 27, 2012
    Aurora Colorado
    Okay, if I sell my oly 1.4 tele converter for $275, it'll give me about $700 to spend on a long reach lens. I have an opportunity to pick up a Tokina ATX 150-500mm for about $465. Reviews look pretty good. Part of me wants to wait for a prime with a TC....what would you guys suggest
     
  14. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Honestly? The 100-300 on its own gives you pretty massive reach. Sometimes you just can't get a whole lot closer. I really dislike manual focussing zooms, particularly zooms that are unnecessarily large and heavy for the image circle they cast.

    I figure you should be able to get plenty close to crocs and get good close-ups with a 600mm equivalent lens ;)
     
  15. Gary Ramey

    Gary Ramey Mu-43 Veteran

    240
    Dec 27, 2012
    Aurora Colorado
  16. DeeJayK

    DeeJayK Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 8, 2011
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Keith
    Maybe you need to pick up the Olympus 300mm f/2.8 (for 4/3) and a 2x teleconverter.
     
  17. Gary Ramey

    Gary Ramey Mu-43 Veteran

    240
    Dec 27, 2012
    Aurora Colorado
    Yes...that lens would be awesome indeed but I'm fond of my kidneys and don't want to part with one at the moment. :)
     
  18. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    I must have misread or misremembered! Or was mis-informed...
     
  19. ivoire

    ivoire Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 6, 2011
    Naperville, IL
    mike
    I wanted a longer lens and then i saw a post on another forum for this:

    Canon TC-DC52B 1.6x Tele End Conversion Lens 3 Groups 5 Elements

    http://www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=TC-DC52B

    The results posted results looked decent so for $38.50 I bought one and attached it to my P45-175mm with a 46 to 52mm step-up ring. Today i got a chance to use it. Heres the original and a 100% crop, shot handheld, iso320, in raw, converted to jpg, no sharpening. I think this combo shows some promise.
     

    Attached Files:

  20. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    This lens that you mentioned: -> Tokina ATX 150-500mm on a Pentax Q :wink: