Any teleconverters yet for Panasonic m4/3 systems? (1 Viewer)

Hobbes2 · Feb 4, 2012

After a wonderful morning watching 2 Bitterns on the ice of a local reservoir, I have come home again with a need to extend the reach of the Panasonic m4/3 100-300mm zoom lens. For those occassion when the great bird is more than 50 metres away, 600mm just doesn't cut it!!

I see that Olympus have a range of teleconverters with the appropriate adapter for the m4/3 system (http://www.four-thirds.org/en/fourthirds/accessories.html). Are there any options yet for the Panasonic systems?!

Are there any easy alternatives using an adapter perhaps?
Thanks
Hobbes

njlarsen · Feb 4, 2012

The short answer to the best of my knowledge is no. Unfortunately, the link you provided is for a Four/thirds TC, not for a m4/3 TC (the actual attachment is different), otherwise an Olympus accessory would have worked for Panasonic.

I have seen a description somewhere of someone linking their Panasonic up with a P&S TC, but cannot comment on the ease of use.

It should also be possible to put on a small lens and take a photo through your telescope, if you did bring one.

Niels

John Cantelo · Feb 4, 2012

Given the relatively limited number of lenses available for Panasonic 4/3 cameras and the undoubted appeal the system has for those who want to travel light, I'm surprised that they've not produced a teleconverter. I've looked several times throughvarious fora and haven't been able to find anything that does the job,

Hobbes2 · Feb 4, 2012

Thank you Niels and John. Ah, I'd mis-read the Olympus site - thanks for correcting me :t:. I keep trying to think of low cost solutions for greater reach but they all involve some investment (I'd need a new eyepiece (£250) for my scope if I were to digiscope - my current set-up is useless). A teleconverter would be ideal. I briefly thought about buying the FZ150 essentially as a long lens because I already have the 1.7x teleconverter for that. But, it's not a great solution! I wish they'd bring out a 400mm prime lens or something. Very frustrating, lol.
Hobbes

njlarsen · Feb 5, 2012

Hobbes, do you shoot jpg? If yes, have you explored the extended tele settings in camera?

Niels

Hor Kee · Feb 5, 2012

Thus far, I've known that only afocal teleconverters can be mounted on the front of m 4/3 lenses. For instance, my friend's setup has a huge Raynox 2.2x TC mounted to the front element of his 100-300. Look at post #98 here http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=2233145#post2233145. It needs a long bar to support it though, something like a Manfrotto Telephoto Lens Support here http://www.manfrotto.com/telephoto-lens-support.

As per the characteristics of afocal teleconverters, no light is lost and the f-stop remains the same. However, they do magnify the flaws of the glass used in the lens. That said, my friend does get rather good photos with the above setup.

Adey Baker · Feb 5, 2012

Any behind-the-lens converter on any system can only magnify the details gathered by the lens itself. At 50 metres or more distance a 300mm will struggle to resolve the finest details in a bird's plumage so a converter will only show up its limitations. The advantage over just increasing the image in software is that it will spread the detail that it does resolve over more pixels.

Alternatives - far from perfect (or cheap)! - are: use the above-mentioned Olympus converters with a standard 4/3rd lens (such as the Olympus 70-300mm) and fit it to a m4/3rd camera with the appropriate adapter; buy a high quality second-hand 400mm manual focus lens and fit that via the appropriate adapter (something for which the m4/3rds system is very good); use it on a 'scope which has a dedicated photo adapter as part of its system.

All of the above compromise the whole concept of the m4/3rds system somewhat so a 1.4x converter would at least be a convenient accessory, especially if the lens itself has a bit of quality 'in reserve.'

Hobbes2 · Feb 5, 2012

Niels - thanks, yes, I use the in-built teleconverters. They're great for getting the focus right and metering, but the lens remains a 600mm and ultimately you don't get any further reach.

Hor Kee - thank you, I remember your post about your friend's set up. I think it's probably a bit too heavy/bulky for me to manouver. It's also a little too complicated. It would require commitment and investment that I can't really spare. I don't feel confident enough to go in that direction. I guess I'd feel like I needed some practical help with it all.

Adey - thank you for your response and the helpful alternative solutions. On the face of it, the olympus 70-300mm with teleconverter is a promising way forward..... However, I guess I'd loose the autofocus system and image stabilisation, which I'm not sure I could deal with. Mmm....tricky....If only I had loads of money, lol.

Thanks again everyone. If I come up with a solution I'll let you know!
Hobbes

ammadoux · Feb 5, 2012

Hello Hobbes, i do agree with you that the 300mm (600mm equi. to full frame) is a bit limited in bird photography.

here is a link to a reasonably priced scope, SLR Magic 12-36x50 ED Spotting Scope

http://photorumors.com/2011/12/19/s...otting-scope-for-micro-four-thirds-announced/

and also a newly released 400mm mirror lens

http://www.theverge.com/2012/1/31/2762598/kenko-tokina-400mm-f-8-mirror-lens-nex-micro-four-thirds

Hope this helps, although i wished they made the mirror lens 500mm, and also one wish Sigma will release more options for longer reach lenses.

Hor Kee · Feb 5, 2012

Perhaps the reason that there are no teleconverters for their lenses is that most, if not all m 4/3 cameras have electronic teleconverters built into their system that enlarge the image by cropping and extrapolating.

Hobbes2 · Feb 6, 2012

Hi Doux, thank you for your links. I remembered the scope you mentioned but as I already have the Nikon ED50, it would probably be as cost effective to buy the new eyepiece and lens adapater. I'm just not sure what image quality will be like with 50mm objective.

Thank you too for the link to the 400mm f/8 lens. I did look at the Sony 500mm f/8 (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sony-DSLR-Lens-500mm-Reflex/dp/B000GWSVEY) but I'm not sure how good it would be (and it's not easy to get hold of) and there's this http://www.overstock.com/Electronic...or-Sony-Alpha/3863126/product.html?cid=133635...

....more thinking to do

.

Thanks Hor Kee - you may be right but, as I say, the lens remains a 600mm even if you can crop and extrapolate.

Not to worry...I shall keep my eye out.
All the best
Hobbes

njlarsen · Feb 6, 2012

I don't think the Rokinon has gotten much good press where I have looked ...

With Kenko/tokina/tamron (or whatever the mix actually is) on board, there might be a chance that a TC for behind the lens will pop up -- just remember that if it does come, it will cost light and magnify any flaws your lens might have.

Niels

Hor Kee · Feb 6, 2012

IMHO rear-mounted TCs work best with primes. There are less elements which have flaws that could be exposed. For instance, coming from Canon world, many regard a 70-200mm F2.8L II premier zoom & 2x TC III as inferior to the venerable 100-400mm L zoom as the TC coupled with the lens's multiple elements brings out many flaws therein.

jimthomson · Feb 6, 2012

I think there is a need to wait for long primes before we will see a teleconverter for m43.

teleconverters work best on 200mm and longer lenses.

With regards to mirror lenses I've played around with an old t-mount lens on my g3. Its a 500mm f6.3.I found i needed a tripod to be able to line it up on the subject. I would also have benefited from a cable release as just touching the shutter release caused visible motion. My tripod is a manfrotto 055XDB with a manfrotto 498 head, not the best on the market, but its a solid performer and works fine with my ususal 400mm and 500mm DSLR lenses.

I think the light weight of the camera and lens amplifies the vibration. I'm curious to see if the 300mm mirror lens will be handholdable without IBIS.

Spotting scopes, I've use my Celestron Ultima 80 with my G3. The standard eyepiece has threads for a T-mount, you just have to remove the rubber cover. It has issues with purple fringing, (which presumably ED glass would resolve), and the image in the camera viewfinder is kind of dark. I think the SLRmagic scope is probably kind of small and will give a very dark image in the view finder. I think like lense, the bigger the front element the better. I'd look for a 100mm ED spotting scope if I was going to take digiscoping seriously.

Jim M. · Feb 6, 2012

Hobbes2 said:
Niels - thanks, yes, I use the in-built teleconverters. They're great for getting the focus right and metering, but the lens remains a 600mm and ultimately you don't get any further reach.

Hi Hobbes,

I think I helped convince you that the teleconverter setting on the panasonics was not equivalent to a physical teleconverter, so I thought I should say that I'm no longer sure about that. My thought now is that since the setting requires a smaller photo size (4mp) it might operate similar to an increase in "crop factor". So I'm thinking it might give you more "reach" the same way the smaller sensor of the micro 4/3rd camera does with its 2x crop factor. I wish there was a definitive technical explanation of what the setting does, but haven't found one I consider definitive yet.

In any event, I agree with others that a physical TC with this camera would come with a price. What I'd like to see is something like a fast, lightweight 100-400mm zoom lens.

Jim

njlarsen · Feb 6, 2012

Fast and lightweight are usually each others worst enemies :-O

But off course, I would like to see a 100-400 too.

Still: when I started birding, I had a film SLR with a 450 mm lens. That lens was usually considered excessive by other bird photographers, the most popular item at the time was 400mm f5.6 (except for the 1-2 that could afford the canon 300mm lens). The only longer lens I saw was at an exhibition where the centerpiece was an 800 mm from Leica that had been used to photograph food items for white-tailed eagle in Greenland: that lens cost about the same as a family house.

The current situation where a 600 mm equivalent reach is considered "not enough" is very different, and to some extent unreal to me. I still think that except in exceptional weather situations, the best photos are taken of subjects no more than 15m/45ft away.

Niels

Jim M. · Feb 6, 2012

njlarsen said:
Fast and lightweight are usually each others worst enemies :-O

* * * *

The current situation where a 600 mm equivalent reach is considered "not enough" is very different, and to some extent unreal to me.

Hey, at least I didn't say the 100-400 had to be inexpensive too.

Regarding changing standards, the problem for me is I got used to the FZ18 with the physical teleconverter (with no light loss since it's a fixed lens camera) and the teleconverter setting, plus the increased crop factor of the point and shoot. Basically gave me a handheld portable telescope. Still much prefer my G3, but would like to have similar reach to get frame filling shots--or record shots of distant birds--when I need it.

Jim

Hobbes2 · Feb 6, 2012

J. Moore said:
Hey, at least I didn't say the 100-400 had to be inexpensive too.

Regarding changing standards, the problem for me is I got used to the FZ18 with the physical teleconverter (with no light loss since it's a fixed lens camera) and the teleconverter setting, plus the increased crop factor of the point and shoot. Basically gave me a handheld portable telescope. Still much prefer my G3, but would like to have similar reach to get frame filling shots--or record shots of distant birds--when I need it.

Jim

Thanks everyone for your input. It's a helpful discussion even if there aren't any solutions yet

. Your points above, Jim, are similar to my feelings. I really like the IQ of the G3 but miss the reach of the FZ + front-mounted teleconverter. Incidentally, the Bitterns I was wanting to photograph the other day were approx 120 metres (~400ft) away, shooting into the sun. I guess I can't complain that my results were pretty rubbish, lol. Those are the occassions (when I can't walk on water) that I'd like that extra reach....
Hobbes

Adey Baker · Feb 6, 2012

Hobbes2 said:
Incidentally, the Bitterns I was wanting to photograph the other day were approx 120 metres (~400ft) away, shooting into the sun. I guess I can't complain that my results were pretty rubbish, lol. Those are the occasions (when I can't walk on water) that I'd like that extra reach....
Hobbes

Even with digiscoping, you're going to struggle to get a decent image at that sort of distance! As Niels intimates, to get high quality shots, there's nothing like getting close to the subject.

Incidentally, a 400mm F5.6 lens must have a maximum aperture opening of almost 72mm when viewed from the front of the lens, so the m4/3rds system is being pushed to the limits to accommodate such a lens if you want to keep its portability and balance. Even a lens of F6.3 needs a 63.5mm aperture. F8 brings it down to 50mm - it's starting to get a bit slow at that aperture, but it is the equivalent of 800mm so when viewed like that it's not so bad...

jimthomson · Feb 7, 2012

Adey Baker said:
Incidentally, a 400mm F5.6 lens must have a maximum aperture opening of almost 72mm when viewed from the front of the lens, so the m4/3rds system is being pushed to the limits to accommodate such a lens if you want to keep its portability and balance. Even a lens of F6.3 needs a 63.5mm aperture. F8 brings it down to 50mm - it's starting to get a bit slow at that aperture, but it is the equivalent of 800mm so when viewed like that it's not so bad...

Are these based on full frame sensors? My Sigma 400 f5.6 FD lens has a 72mm front. I would have thought that the smaller sensor on the m43 would allow a smaller front element.

Portability is relative compare a 400mm m43 lense with a 500mm Canikon, I know which one I'd rather carry.

I don't see why balance should be a problem, you hold a long lens at the tripod mount with your left hand. while your right hand works the controls. This would be no different from using my 400mm lens on my Canon T1i

Any teleconverters yet for Panasonic m4/3 systems? (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Gallery Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Gallery Moderator

Penang birder

Member

Well-known member

Registered doux

Penang birder

Well-known member

Gallery Moderator

Penang birder

Well-known member

Member since 2007

Gallery Moderator

Member since 2007

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread