New member hello and advice request

Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
34
Hi, just joined the Forum as I've just ordered an EM1 M.3. I'm coming from Pentax, where I currently own a KP and a 645z. I'll be keeping the 645 for tripod-based landscape work where I'm not worried about size/weight. I'm hoping the Mark III can replace the KP as my travel/wildlife/hiking/backpacking camera. The KP image quality is great, but I've never been thrilled with the ergonomics, and the selection of modern longer lenses for Pentax is pretty limited. The Mark III seemed like the best choice to keep the strong weather resistance typical of Pentax, get better ergonomics, smaller size/weight, better AF, and a better lens selection.
I've initially grabbed the Oly 14-150 lens as a general lightweight option for travel and when I just want to take a single lens while hiking. Any advice on what other lenses would be the best options for higher quality wildlife work (the new 150-400 is probably out of my budget).
A couple I'm considering would be the 40-150+TC, or the older 4/3 50-200SWD plus adapter and TC. Any general thoughts on those or others? Recommendations for accessories or settings for the Mark III? Anyone that's come from Pentax with any specific advice?

Thanks, appreciate the help. Looking forward to getting the new body out in the wild.
 

ektar

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 8, 2017
Messages
1,323
Location
Western NC
Real Name
Don
First, welcome.

I can recommend the 40-150 without reservation. I had the SWD 50-200, and while it's a good lens, it's kind of a beast. Others can opine as to how well it works adapted to M43, because mine went away when I made the switch from 4/3 to M4/3. You've probably discovered there are both 1.4x and 2.0x TCs. They're both very good. I have the 1.4 and am on an ongoing search for the 2.0.

One aspect of M4/3 you may not have considered is adapting older lenses. It's easy, cheap, and opens up an unbelievable range of options.

Again, welcome.
 

c12402

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Aug 19, 2012
Messages
62
Location
Madrid
Real Name
Juan Guerrero
Welcome to this Community. Regarding your question, my advice is to buy new lenses, 40-150mm is a very good one that can be extended easily with 1.4 teleconverter if needed. My experience with other lenses after 7 years with Olympus has not been very positive, as you will find limitations (slower autofocus, no bracketing, etc...) always ending in double buying...
 

retiredfromlife

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
4,734
Location
Sydney, Australia
Welcome to the forum.
I own the 40-150 pro and it is a good lens. You loose a bit of quality with the TC's but overall not too bad. I only own the 1.4 TC so cant comment on the 2.0 but reviews and user experience seem to indicate it is on par with the 1.4
The 12-100 f4 pro lens is also very good for a walk around general lens.
I have stayed away from the older lenses so cant comment there. With the sale of Olympus to JIP not sure about getting the older lenses serviced, so depending on funds it may pay to wait and see what happens.
 

Phocal

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
6,027
Location
Mars
If you are looking for the best IQ get the 300/4. If you want great IQ on a budget get the 50-200 SWD with both EC-14 and EC-20. If you want a good lens that is light for hiking get the 75-300. If you want the most amazing lens get the 150/2 and pair with the EC-14 and EC-20.

Here are a few of the lens comparison threads I have done. FYI, all my comparison are done in the field shooting my typical subjects................I don't shoot targets or brick walls to evaluate lenses.

75-300 vs 300/4

75-300 vs 50-200 SWD w/ EC-14 vs 300/4

300/4 vs 150/2 w/ EC-20

300/4 w/ MC-14 vs 50-200 SWD w/ EC-20

Any questions don't hesitate to ask,

Phocal
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2013
Messages
337
Location
Western North Carolina
Welcome to the forum.

I have the even older older 50-200 non-SWD with the EC-14 and find the glass is really good. One thing to note while it's great bang for the buck, the burst rates with C-AF can't keep up with the m43 lenses or with the advertised rates for the EM1.3. This may or may not be a point of emphasis for you. https://www.mu-43.com/threads/e-m1-vs-e-m1-mk-ii-burst-rates-with-four-thirds-lenses.89602/

Another thing that the 4/3 lenses will give up is the Pro Capture Low (the one with CAF).
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
34
Thanks all, appreciate the help. I took it as a sign, and jumped on that 40-150 being sold here. Phocal, thanks for posting those links to comparisons. Any thoughts from you or others how the 100-400 would stack up comparatively?
 

Robstar1963

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jun 10, 2011
Messages
3,452
Location
Isle of Wight England UK
Real Name
Robert (Rob)
Hi @Steveinslc and welcome :thumbup:
My favourite long telephoto is the Panasonic Leica 200mm f2.8 which comes with a 1.4 TC in the box to give you 400mm and 560mm equivalent and you can also get a 2.0 x TC from Panasonic to give 400mm / 800mm
The 2.0 TC is very expensive but would give you a very good choice of focal lengths from one lens
Here in the U.K. the PL200 is often on offer and is available at very much reduced cost on eBay
Very good lens - very sharp with very good contrast and with the 1.4 x TC supplied gives you more versatility compared to the Olympus 300mm f4.0 albeit that there are 1.4 x and 2.0 x TCs also available for the 300 too to give similar versatility (but neither are included in the box)
The downside is no Sync I.S with the PL 200 with your EM1/3 but that is not in my opinion a deal breaker
Often overlooked it is a stunning high quality and very well built Lens
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
3,287
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
I see a few alternatives:
  • 40-150/2.8 + MC20
  • 75-300
  • 100-400
The 40-150/2.8 + MC20 will get you to 80-300, but at f/5.6.

The 75-300 is another alternative to get out to 300mm, at a lower cost than the 100-400 or 300/4. To me, the 75-300 being a non-pro lens, is lighter, and more suited to where you have to walk a LONG distance. I use it to shoot baseball and softball, and this old man appreciates the lighter weight. I have not had any issues with mine.
A common complaint on the 75-300 and the Panasonic 100-400, is that the IQ at the long end is not so good. Here are my comments about that, and other LONG lenses:​
  • Air is NOT optically clear.
  • The longer the distance to the subject, the more air is between you and the subject.
  • Air has a lot of "stuff" in it; dust, smoke, pollen, smog, water, etc, etc. The more air you have between you and the subject, the more "stuff" you also have between you and the subject, which degrades the image.
  • At longer distances, you also have thermal distortion. AKA mirage. This will also degrade the image.
So I wonder how much of the complaints are really valid to the lens, and how many are really as a result of atmospherics.​

The 100-400 seems like a great lens, and has good reviews.
I think, optically the 100-400 is better than the 75-300.

If you are going to get the 40-150/2.8 anyway, the MC20 is a cheaper alternative to the 100-400.
If it is going to be an either 40-150 + MC20 or 100-400, that becomes a more difficult decision.

When I want to really reach out there, I use a 500mm mirror lens on the Olympus.
The only issue is that it is manual focus, so the subject has to be stationary or SLOW moving. I can't focus on fast moving subjects like I used to.
The 500 mirror fits into my camera bag, so is easily carried, unlike a stovepipe refractor lens. Plus it was comparatively inexpensive.

The longer the lens the more you really have to stabilize the camera, either good hand holding technique, or a monopod/tripod. With a 500mm lens, at 20x magnification, even with IBIS there is image movement. Note you have to input the FL of the manual lens into the camera for the IBIS to correctly compensate.
Environment: On a windy day, I cannot hold the 75-300 steady, as I am being blown around myself.
 

Darmok N Jalad

Temba, his aperture wide
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
1,494
Location
Tanagra (not really)
The 75-300ii is great if you want something really light with a lot of range. You have to work at it a bit to get the best out of it, but it can be rewarding. It took me 3 tries to get along with one, but I’m liking it now. It has a very high value proposition. The 40-150 pro is an awesome lens, though it should be for the price, size and weight (in M43 terms).

:Welcome:
 

John King

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 20, 2020
Messages
2,671
Location
Beaumaris, Melbourne, Australia
Real Name
John ...
:Welcome: , Steve.

I find that the 75-300 MkII is the equal of my 50-200 MkI in terms of IQ, and better than it if I use my EC-14 on the 50-200.

Of course, it is optically slower by around 2+ stops. It is also half the weight. No lens hood supplied, so you need to buy a JJC hood for it.
 

Darmok N Jalad

Temba, his aperture wide
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
1,494
Location
Tanagra (not really)
:Welcome: , Steve.

I find that the 75-300 MkII is the equal of my 50-200 MkI in terms of IQ, and better than it if I use my EC-14 on the 50-200.

Of course, it is optically slower by around 2+ stops. It is also half the weight. No lens hood supplied, so you need to buy a JJC hood for it.
I don’t have a hood for mine yet! Guess I should fix that. :hmmm:
 

Carbonman

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
2,642
Location
Vancouver BC
Real Name
Graham
@Steveinslc , I have the 40-150 and both the 1.4 and 2.0 TCs. The MC-14 provides a large maximum aperture zoom with quite a bit of reach. It's as easy to use as the zoom on its own. The MC-20 is something I carry with the zoom fairly often if it's the only equipment I'm hauling - you end up with everything from short 1.6x to 12x magnification telephoto. The downside is the maximum aperture of f5.6 and no OIS in the lens, so camera handling becomes more critical.
I find results quite sharp with either TC on both the 40-150mm f2.8 and 300mm f4. As @ac12 has noted, longer distances with any optics are problematic due to various atmospheric issues.
 

Phocal

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
6,027
Location
Mars
Thanks all, appreciate the help. I took it as a sign, and jumped on that 40-150 being sold here. Phocal, thanks for posting those links to comparisons. Any thoughts from you or others how the 100-400 would stack up comparatively?

You are welcome. From what I can tell based on photos I have seen from the Oly 100-400 is it is somewhere between the 75-300 and 300/4. It is a bit better than the Panny 100-400 and up to 300mm is probably pretty close to the 50-200 w/ EC-14.
 

ac12

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Apr 24, 2018
Messages
3,287
Location
SF Bay Area, California, USA
Thanks all, appreciate the help. I took it as a sign, and jumped on that 40-150 being sold here. Phocal, thanks for posting those links to comparisons. Any thoughts from you or others how the 100-400 would stack up comparatively?

oops, did not notice that you made your decision.

N-Joy the new toy.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom