Teleconverter for m43?

Discussion in 'Accessories' started by bengtb, Nov 24, 2013.

  1. bengtb

    bengtb Mu-43 Rookie

    Jan 7, 2013
    Are there any teleconverter for micro 4/3 format? Olympus have some for the larger 4/3 format, but not for the micro 4/3 format.
  2. darosk

    darosk Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Apr 17, 2013
    Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia
    Real Name:
    I don't believe there is one, and I don't know if either oly/panny have plans for it right now. Apart from the 75 1.8, most of the tele's are slow zooms. There's the rumored 150 2.8's too, but they don't exist yet.

    Maybe if/when they start making more long, fast tele's.
  3. Ian.

    Ian. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 13, 2013
    Real Name:
    I wonder why there isnt one. It seemed standard kit in the OM days.
  4. jamespetts

    jamespetts Mu-43 Top Veteran

    May 21, 2011
    London, England
    A teleconverter with a 75mm f/1.8 would be a happy thing indeed. Imagine 105mm f/2.8 or 150mm f/4 at extremely high quality. Would be quite the thing.
  5. janneman

    janneman Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 6, 2012
    Real Name:
    Jan (John) Kusters
    For some time I used the digital converter, worked well enough with primes to make a 2 set (12mm and 45mm) quite versatile. With the 1.8 75mm out, I was expecting a converter to show up, although that would probably not be really cheap.
    Back when I used medium format, a converter was a nice way to keep my kit small, and the quality was good enough. Not sure how much better a real converter would be in he digital age though. The digital converter was good enough for reportage, but for still life and landscapes I went for lenses in the end.
  6. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Real Name:
    Sean Rastsmith
    From what I remember hearing, the flange distance makes it very very hard (read extremely expensive) for them to develop one.

    Sent from my LG-P769 using Mu-43 mobile app
    • Like Like x 2
  7. CVigilV

    CVigilV Mu-43 Regular

    Oct 14, 2013
    In 43rumors they recently said that the specs for a 1.4x teleconverter appeared from a semi-reliable source. Hoping the best!
  8. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Real Name:
    I am really hoping for a native teleconverter. This would tip the balance for me sticking with 4/3 tele lenses.

    As it stands there is no native competition for the 50-200+EC14 and EC20.
  9. humzai

    humzai Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 17, 2012
    Olympus has filed a patent for a 1.4x and panasonic has a patent for a zoom teleconvertor.
  10. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Real Name:
    Yeah, it's been discussed here before and I don't remember the details but someone here had posted a comprehensive explanation of why a TC is very difficult for m4/3. It doesn't mean one won't appear eventually but it does seem likely it's still a little ways off. Especially with Panasonic shelving the 150mm f/2.8 I'm not sure what to expect.

    That said, I would love a TC for m4/3, for use with the 75mm and 35-100mm at least. If Panasonic or Olympus ever come out with a long prime like a 300mm f/4 or f/2.8 that'd be pretty amazing reach with a TC available. If they get some truly excellent long lens glass for m4/3 I would be more than happy to use it for wildlife!

    The 100-300 has amazing reach but "ok" optics compared to the higher end 35-100 or 75, so I'd love to see both teleconverters and longer high grade lenses appearing for m4/3.
  11. ckrueger

    ckrueger Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 16, 2011
    There's no need for a system TC yet. Our telephotos are already f/5.6, and wouldn't stand up optically to the softening a TC incurs.

    There are Four Thirds TC's, which work very well on the 55-200. I was surprised how usable the 55-200 was with the 2x TC... not the norm for a zoom!

    If we ever get a fast tele zoom or prime we'll probably see a TC launch sometime shortly thereafter. A 100-300/4 and a 1.4x TC would be a killer combo, as would a 400/4 + 1.4x or 300/2.8 + 2x. But I fear those lenses are further down the priority list because Olympus and Panasonic don't seem to believe their marketing material quite yet when they say that M43 is a full system. They're still afraid to make big lenses for M43. Hopefully the GH3 and EM1 change their mind.
  12. jamespetts

    jamespetts Mu-43 Top Veteran

    May 21, 2011
    London, England
    Interesting. I am considering a teleconverter for this lens, and was leaning towards the 1.4x. How usable is it with a 2x, exactly? f/6.3 on the long end strikes me as a tad slow.
  13. Superstriker#8

    Superstriker#8 Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 24, 2013
    With the 2x teleconverter the 55-200 is f5.6-f7
    With the 1.4x it's f4-f4.8

    Sent from my iPod touch using Mu-43 mobile app
    • Like Like x 1
  14. ckrueger

    ckrueger Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 16, 2011
    I tested the 55-200 + 2x TC on an E-3, and while its AF had trouble in low light, during the day it was usable. I could track large birds with it reasonably well, and image quality wasn't bad. To my (now years old) memory I'd guess about the same as the Panasonic 100-300?

    That said, I have no idea if that experience would hold true with the EM1. I'm a bit skeptical, to be honest.

    (FWIW, the aperture read f/7.1 at 200mm.)
  15. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I had read a rumor someplace that Olympus may release a tele-converter with the "pro" long tele lens that is listed on their lens map. I can't remember where I saw it and now I can't find it. Of coarse if they come out with more good and fast long lenses would we need a tele-converter? They stop the lens down a lot and soften the image too. They add some distortion and possible chromatic aberration. I personally am not a big fan of them.

    It is hard and expensive to make a tele-converter for short registrations{distance between mount and sensor}. It was easy with SLRs because the mirror forces the registration to be large. Most mirrorless systems are 1/2 to a 1/3 of the registration distance of SLRs. It isn't impossible to do but requires a more engineering and I bet adds extra distortion.
  16. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Real Name:
    First, thanks for that - I had not seen (or at least remembered) Olympus also announced a long pro lens on their roadmap. It's rumored to be a 300mm f/4, which sounds awesome to me. Of course, I shoot Panasonic bodies so I guess I better hope the next GH body also includes an effective IBIS implementation too, since a lens that long without stabilization would be tough.

    Re: your main points... all true, and definitely more pro long lens options will help. Of course, no matter how much reach you have available, someone will want more :biggrin:
  17. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    No kidding! When I shot 135 film the longest lens I had was a 280mm, now I have more than twice that if I borrow the Panasonic 100-300mm from work. And still there are times I wish it was longer{I almost always wish it was faster!}. I am eager to see what the lens is that Olympus has coming.
  18. rklepper

    rklepper Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 19, 2012
    Iowa, USA
    Real Name:
    Not sure that is correct. I would love one to use with my 35-100.

  19. ckrueger

    ckrueger Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 16, 2011
    Would it really be worth it? How do you think a 35-100 + 2x (read: 70-200) would stand up to the 45-200, 75-300, or 100-300? 2x TC's are notoriously hard on lenses, and are usually only used with very sharp primes.

    A 1.4x TC might be a bit more feasible, but it's still not much of a long lens.

    Anyway, I'll put my money on the table: we won't see a TC until we also see a 200mm+ lens with an f/4 or larger aperture.
  20. photo_owl

    photo_owl Mu-43 Regular

    Nov 8, 2013
    the 35-100/2 can handle either of the ec's just fine and probably still edges the 50-200 on IQ IMO (but not useability), but I agree in principle that it's only when you use these with the 90-250 and 300 that they make 'sense' - even the 150/2 which works really well with them can't get close to the 300 in anything except cost and handling!