Olympus 2.0x teleconverter up for pre-sale soon

Carbonman

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
2,431
Location
Vancouver BC
Real Name
Graham
I'll wait until I see some tests and user reports; I'm getting almost 17x magnification from my 300mm f4 and 1.4x TC. 24x at a maximum aperture of f8 would be less usable hand held. Heat shimmer is a factor in wildlife photography at long distances, too. This would really show it when you consider the typical long range of targets with this combo.
With the 40-150mm f2.8 I'd end up with an 80-300mm f5.6. Hmmm, that has possibilities.
 

whumber

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
595
True, but that's the entire bulk of an additional lens and probably not quite as sharp as the 40-150 Pro and 2x TC.
I would actually expect the 100-300 to be sharper than the 40-150. The 40-150 already loses a large amount of resolution with the MC-14, it's not going to get any better with the MC-20.
 

Carbonman

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
2,431
Location
Vancouver BC
Real Name
Graham
I would actually expect the 100-300 to be sharper than the 40-150. The 40-150 already loses a large amount of resolution with the MC-14, it's not going to get any better with the MC-20.
The 40-150 Pro is really sharp at all focal lengths; I don't find noticeable degradation with the 1.4 TC at any focal length. Lenstip tests the 40-150 + 1.4TC at 48lpmm at f4/210mm, 52lpmm at f5.6/210mm. That's a favorable result compared to most m43 lenses.
 

whumber

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
595
The 40-150 Pro is really sharp at all focal lengths; I don't find noticeable degradation with the 1.4 TC at any focal length. Lenstip tests the 40-150 + 1.4TC at 48lpmm at f4/210mm, 52lpmm at f5.6/210mm. That's a favorable result compared to most m43 lenses.
I'm surprised you interpret the Lenstip results as favorable for the combo, the 48lp/mm result is just barely at the "decency level" in lens tip terminology. They show around a 30% loss in resolution when attaching the teleconverter at f/4, compared to the bare lens at f/2.8, and nearly a 40% loss comparing them both stopped down by one stop which is pretty consistent with my experience. Compare that to something like the Canon 70-200 which only sees a ~5-12% reduction in resolution with a 1.4x TC attached and it doesn't look good at all.
 

Carbonman

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 10, 2014
Messages
2,431
Location
Vancouver BC
Real Name
Graham
I'm surprised you interpret the Lenstip results as favorable for the combo, the 48lp/mm result is just barely at the "decency level" in lens tip terminology. They show around a 30% loss in resolution when attaching the teleconverter at f/4, compared to the bare lens at f/2.8, and nearly a 40% loss comparing them both stopped down by one stop which is pretty consistent with my experience. Compare that to something like the Canon 70-200 which only sees a ~5-12% reduction in resolution with a 1.4x TC attached and it doesn't look good at all.
I find my combination is quite sharp at all focal lengths and maintains good contrast. I've adjusted my camera focus settings with the 1.4TC mounted on both the 40-150 and 300. It would probably improve the Lenstip measurements by several lpmm across the board if they did the same.
 

RAH

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
739
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
Does this mean there will be a glut of 1.4x TCs on a certain auction site, I wonder?
Other manufacturers' formats (e.g. Canon) have 1.4x and 2x TCs in their lineups and they seem to both thrive. Myself, I would never get a 2x because of the poor IQ, at least in my experience. I'm not all that crazy about how 1.4s perform, so a 2x would be out of the question.
 

whumber

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2017
Messages
595
I find my combination is quite sharp at all focal lengths and maintains good contrast. I've adjusted my camera focus settings with the 1.4TC mounted on both the 40-150 and 300. It would probably improve the Lenstip measurements by several lpmm across the board if they did the same.
That's not very likely as they use manual focus for the test charts.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2014
Messages
1,962
Location
Maryland
Real Name
Loren
I am very dubious that I would find the MC-20 worth buying, both for the IQ degradation as well as feeling (for my shooting anyway) that µ4/3 doesn't really need that much extra reach. But, I'll keep an open mind.

I agree with @whumber that the IQ degradation on the 40-150mm Pro and MC-14 combo is pretty severe. It works acceptably well when I use it to zoom-in on smaller birds at a closer distance, but at further distances, I don't find the images usable. That said, while I don't doubt the Lenstips findings, it's hard to say if I am even getting 48 lines per mm with my combo, so calibration is still a good idea. I don't even like using the MC-14 with the 300mm Pro, though it is better.

I also don't think I would ever need that much reach with the 300mm Pro, and am far more interested in the 150-400mm Pro. As mentioned, air visibility becomes a factor at some point, so I try not to use a TC for getting further distance so much as filling the frame with smaller-sized birds.
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2017
Messages
179
Location
Wisconsin, USA
I'm hoping one of the early users will do a 40-150 + MC20 vs 75-300 vs 40-150 + DTC vs 100-300 on both a close and a far subject at 300mm.

I presume there must be a benefit of using optical teleconverters or they wouldn't be made. It can't just be marketing fluff, even black out tape for shiny parts at least results in conveyance of a message about the car owner.
 

tkbslc

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 6, 2015
Messages
7,554
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
I would actually expect the 100-300 to be sharper than the 40-150. The 40-150 already loses a large amount of resolution with the MC-14, it's not going to get any better with the MC-20.
Using currently available examples, here's Canon's $2000 latest model f2.8 telephoto with their newest $430 2x TC III stopped down losing to a $600 plastic Tamron at max aperture. So I would agree with you.

Tamron 100-400mm f/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD Lens Image Quality

Now on the telephoto primes, vs a super-tele zoom, it is a different story:

Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM C Lens Image Quality

So maybe there's hope for 300mm f4 owners. But keep in mind you'll be at f8 wide open with a 2x TC, which is going to be rough outside of mid-day.
 

Phocal

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
5,367
Location
Anchorage
I'm hoping one of the early users will do a 40-150 + MC20 vs 75-300 vs 40-150 + DTC vs 100-300 on both a close and a far subject at 300mm.

I presume there must be a benefit of using optical teleconverters or they wouldn't be made. It can't just be marketing fluff, even black out tape for shiny parts at least results in conveyance of a message about the car owner.
Since my switch to Olympus I have been a big user of TCs. My main wildlife lens/setup for a very long time was the ZD 150mm f2.0 with the EC-14 and EC-20. My take on TC's is if you are using a high quality lens (not some cheap consumer zoom) they are worth using if you are printing. If you are just posting photos to the internet in most cases you are better off just cropping. But if you want to print and print large, the TC is worth using.

Here are a few post I did.

First is a comparison of the 150/2 vs the 300/4. In this one I shot the same subject with both lenses getting close to identical framing, moved much closer for the 150/2 shots - Shootout - Little Tuna vs Micro Tuna - A Look at Resolution

This one is the 150/2 w/ EC-20 vs the 300/4 - Shootout - Lens Comparison - Olympus MZ 300mm f4.0 IS Pro & Olympus ZD 150mm f2.0 w/ EC-20

Last is a shootout of my 300/4 vs 50-200 SWD w/ EC-14 vs MZ 75-300mm - Shootout - Olympus 75-300 vs 50-200 SWD w/ EC-14 vs 300/4 Shoot Out

I will have to dig out the phots I shot of a bullfrog using the 150/2. In that session I shot the bullfrog from the same spot swapping out TC's and looked at cropping the 150/2 vs using the EC-14 and EC-20. In that one I determined for internet cropping was just as good but for printing the TC was better.

my 2 copper pieces,

Phocal
 
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
Copyright © 2009-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom