Dear Moose thank you so much :-)
Cameras: OM-D10 and presumably pana GX 80
I'll translate your report and advice for my friend and will leave it
for him to decide with the help of your kind and enlighting message.
Thanks a zilion again
Amities
Philippe
2017-03-08 6:50 UTC+01:00, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On 3/7/2017 1:18 PM, Philippe Amard wrote:
>> A friend of mine is planning a safari in Africa and owns a MFT Pana.
>> His daughter has an OM-D, is it 10?
>>
>> They would like to buy a long lens to match. A zoom should do.
>
> I have a lot of experience, and, surprise, surprise, some opinions, But you
> have provided insufficient camera body
> information for a full answer.
>
> IS is a BIG deal with the long lenses. Most Panny bodies don't have IBIS.
> OTOH the GX8 and variants have IBIS that acts
> cooperatively with the IS in most of their OIS lenses.
>
> Oly bodies all have IBIS, but the quality varies with age, and the ability
> to sync with lens IS in the the 300/4 and
> 12-100/4 is limited to the E-M1, I & II and the E-M5 II.
>
> My choice would be simple, the (Panny)Leica 100-400. It's an amazingly good
> lens, with fabulous reach. Also very good at
> close-ups of nearer things with great working distance.
>
> I also suggested an extender in support.
>
>
> For a safari, well for anyplace where there is blowing dust and/or lens
> changing is an awkward juggling act, I prefer an
> achromatic C-U lens on the front.
>
> I have used extension tubes on several Oly lenses, with good results.
> <http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=4514>
>
> There are some caveats, though, especially with big, heavy, long lenses. The
> mounts are just like OM mounts, with
> springs behind the 'ears' that pull the lens back against the mount. I have
> µ4/3 extension tubes from three different
> makers. None have springs strong enough to completely hold the mounts
> together with the 75-300 when extended. There is a
> tiny gap at the top, through which I can see light. I didn't have any actual
> trouble, but I wouldn't use one of these
> with the much larger, heaver 100-400, unless perhaps carrying the weight in
> my left hand.
>
> There is also a connection problem. There are 11 electrical connections
> 'tween body and lens. I've very, very seldom had
> a problem with them using just body and lens, less than I had with Canon.
> Add a tube, though, and you've got two
> additional pieces of brass, not gold plated on mine, with a spring between
> them, to each current path. You've just added
> 22 contacts to the original 11. When using them, I did have to occasionally
> uncouple, wipe and remount. Stack them, as
> the makers suggest, and, at least in my case, it gets annoyingly
> troublesome.
>
> Third is logistics. In a bouncing vehicle, in blowing dust conditions and/or
> in places where there is no safe, clean
> place to put lenses down for a moment, and the whole enterprise gets ugly.
>
> As an alternative, I tried using achromatic Close-Up lenses. This is hands
> down my solution to closer focus. With a Xume
> magnetic filter adapter set, I can have the C-U lens on the camera, take the
> shot(s) and back in a belt case in seconds.
> The Xumes seem expensive, until you use them, then they seem only
> indispensable. A good C-U lens and the magnetic, quick
> change adapters eliminate all the above problems with extension tubes.*
>
> My choice for a single one to use with the 100-400 would be the Nikon 5T. It
> has been discontinued, but isn't hard to
> find used. As it happens, I already had one.
>
> John Shaw used to use the Nikons, too. In his latest book he switches to the
> Canon 500Ds, saying they are as good and
> still available new.
> So I bought one, and carefully tested it against the Nikon. I don't know
> about other lenses, but on the PLeica 100-400,
> it was no contest. The 500D magnifies more (which is not necessarily good,
> anyway.) Even when I upsample the Nikon, or
> downsample the Canon, so the subject is the same size, the Nikon 5T simply
> captures more, cleaner detail. The Canon went
> promptly back to B&H.
>
> The thing with C-U lenses is that the more powerful they are, the shorter
> the maximum focusing distance, not unlike
> extension tubes. The 1.5 diopters of the Nikon 5T is a pretty good
> compromise. If I were focused primarily on
> flutterbys, like Mike, I would probably prefer a weaker lens. The 0.76
> diopter Pentax T132 also works very well for me
> with the PLeica 100-400, giving longer close focus and smaller
> magnification, to fit larger things in the frame. Mike
> has acquired one, but I've heard no reports as yet. The problem is that they
> are MUCH scarcer than the 5T.
>
> I have lots and lots of really first class IQ images with Pleica 100-400 and
> 5T.
>
> I also recently found the even rarer 0.44 d. Pentax T226, but haven't tested
> it yet. I have also tried other C-U lenses,
> including a Minolta No 0 and a single element B&W, and they are not good
> with this primary lens. I've had the Oly IS/L
> C-U lenses for many years; the B-Macro works beautifully on the Panny 14-140
> zoom.
>
> But again, there's a rub; it seems it is not possible to predict which C-U
> lens will work best with which primary lens
> Thus, the contemporary Oly MCON-P02 works beautifully on the small, shortish
> primes it was designed for, and on the
> Panny 12-32, but poorly on the 14-140, which is happiest with the ancient
> B-Macro.
>
> As a result, I seem to have slipped into C-U lens slut status, with 14
> different ones in residence. Yowsa! It does make
> finding the right one easier, though. ;-)
>
>> Has any of you first hand experience of the current Pana/Oly offerings?
>> And which brand/lens would you recommend?
>
> OH, yes. I've taken over 11,000 shots with the old long champion, the Oly
> 75-300, many each on E-M5, E-M5 II and GX7.
> This is a good lens, smaller, lighter and less $ than the new 100-400. It is
> somewhat soft at the long end. As it
> happens, it's a sort of softness that is easily corrected using NeatImage
> deconvolution software. I have many, many
> excellent images I love taken with it. Useless with Panny bodies without
> IBIS.
>
> My shot count on the 100-400 is 4,500, but that's is misleading. Every time
> I take a focus bracket, that's at least 12
> exposures, of slightly different focal planes of the same subject. So the
> 'real' count is less than that. Still, we are
> talking a lot of shots. In addition to the longer range, it's optically
> better than the 75-300. The build quality is
> also far superior. Not that I ever had any trouble with the 75-300, but the
> PLeica is a real cut above in build. It has
> a nice, removable tripod mount, both built-in, sliding hood and larger,
> bayonet hood, and a zoom lock. On the 75-300, I
> have one of those rubber wrist things across where back and zoom ring
> connect, to control zoom creep. So far, the PLeica
> has none, and has a lock if it ever needs one.
>
> I have no experience of the Oly 300/4 PRO, which is supposed to be fabulous,
> but for me, a range of focal lengths is not
> negotiable.
>
>> Price doesn't really matter, just first hand experience of AF long focals
>> on MFT.
>
> That, I've got.
>
> If I were going on safari, I'd break down and buy an E-M1 II, PLeica 10-400,
> Oly 12-100/4.0 or Pleica 12-60/2.8-4.0 and
> 2-3 fast primes, wide, normal and long. I'll bet I'd find lots of dawn, dusk
> and night shots where super IBIS, fast lens
> and great high ISO make it happen, but now I've really strayed off topic.
>
> Un Extended Moose
>
> * It seems that the position of the exit pupil relative to the sensor stack,
> which is quite thick on µ4/3, is quite
> important to lens/body performance. So there is theoretical reason to
> believe that extension tubes may not be the best
> choice to adapt these lens/body combinations for closer focus.
>
> --
> What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|