Out of curiosity: MFT - Oly 300mm F4

[DickyOZ]

There's no perfect rig really!

The m43 stuff is great for weight/size and the crop size of m43 quite possibly helps with the wildlife as it's more forgiving on DOF

But the downside to that DOF is that as the aperture goes up, things get darker quicker and ISO needs to go up to match

Then there's APSC which will (in practical terms) give back about a stop of light, but the lenses will get bigger, and DOF will get shallower, plus unless you go DSLR, imHo the APSC mirrorless rigs can't yet match the m43 ones on AF or lens choice for that matter

The perfect solution, is probably FF, great ISO performance, capable of very, very sharp details... But it's not that perfect, because you'll need to cart around a lot of weight, weight that's only offset by the hole in your wallet from paying for it!!! Not to mention that FF can be a merciless bugger for showing up any issues in acquiring focus etc

(Not suggesting you'd struggle with FF Dicky, pls don't think that's what I mean, we all know you're a superb tog, but my point stands as FF can be a cruel b**tard when viewed at 100% if things weren't 100% right at the point if image capture)

Thanks Adam. How are you enjoying Porto?

Yes, I'm looking for help from my gear not a challenge. I love MFT and I'm sure in time prosumer lenses will appear for the 'long end'. E-M2 is most probably coming in November and I will be first in line for that; I do feel vulnerable with only one camera body. So I think this year that is where my hard earned dollars will go. Pricey glass may well be a little cheaper in time.

[Adzman808]

Porto's had about 10 days of non stop heavy rain, so not that much right now!!

I don't know about OZ, but the UK has manufacturer refurb shops, the Fuji one is very good offering the glass as well as the bodies.

You get a year OEM warranty (which is all you get new) as well as approx. 25-30% off the rrp. I haven't bought a new camera since I discovered this!

Both refurb cameras I've bought (XT1 and a LX100) came with all the accessories, zero shutter count, although possibly that was reset by them, and not a mark on the bodies/screens etc.

It's the way forward!

[Manfred M]

Leica have some of the closest element/sensor distances in the market.

This is certainly the case on the M series cameras and they also have the thinnest stack in front of the sensor (< 1mm) and do not use AA filters (which is part of the stack).

Panasonic and Olympus (for mFT) have the thickest stack - around 4mm.

[Adzman808]

This is certainly the case on the M series cameras and they also have the thinnest stack in front of the sensor (< 1mm) and do not use AA filters (which is part of the stack).

Panasonic and Olympus (for mFT) have the thickest stack - around 4mm.

Thanks for the info Manfred.

[Greg Lehey]

That's not physically possible.

Leica have some of the closest element/sensor distances in the market.

So a) sticking one of their lenses on camera with a greater distance and b) adding the height of the adaptor that you're using will never equate to the same element/sensor distance as the original Leica/lens combination

OK, we're talking Oly micro Four Thirds here. For a given focus distance, you need to keep the lens the same distance from the sensor (and, to repeat, not the filter in front of it), regardless of the camera. Adapters make up the difference in what what Wikipedia calls the "flange focal distance". Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance. If it's positive (the lens is designed for a larger flange distance than the camera has), then you can make up the difference with an adapter. That's what you're talking about when you say:

The adapted lens/adaptor route works ok when you stick a (say) Pentax lens on your Sony A7 because the adaptor can replicate the space that the mirror sits in on the original SLR that's not present in the Sony

Looking at the Wikipedia page, micro Four Thirds has a distance of 19.25 mm. Leica M has a distance of 27.8 mm, and M39 (Leica screw mount) has a distance of 28.8 mm. So there's no difficulty in putting a Leica lens on a micro Four Thirds camera. And there's no difficulty finding the adapters; just search for "leica mft adapter" on eBay.

Four Thirds has a flange distance of 38.67 mm, so you can't use Leica lenses on FT cameras. Theoretically you could build as thin an adapter as you want and put, say, an M39 lens onto an FT camera (flange distance difference -9.87 mm). That would even work, but with a 50 mm lens you wouldn't be able to focus further away than about 30 cm. That's why you won't find any adapters of that kind.

Greg

[Greg Lehey]

This is certainly the case on the M series cameras and they also have the thinnest stack in front of the sensor (< 1mm) and do not use AA filters (which is part of the stack).

Panasonic and Olympus (for mFT) have the thickest stack - around 4mm.

Check my other reply. Leica flange distances are round 8 mm larger than mFT.

Do you have any information about the stack in front of the E-M1 sensor? If I understand correctly, it doesn't have an AA filter.

Greg

[Adzman808]

Putting a wide angle FF M lens via an adaptor on <FF sensored camera makes no problem because you're not really using the corners!

Putting a wide angle FF M lens on a FF camera tends to make the corners soft, there's a lot of info about this on the net.

The whole adapted lens thing is good, but not all adaptors are created equal.. And tolerances are pretty critcial

[Manfred M]

Check my other reply. Leica flange distances are round 8 mm larger than mFT.

Do you have any information about the stack in front of the E-M1 sensor? If I understand correctly, it doesn't have an AA filter.

Greg

Greg - the flange distance affects focus and nothing else. The sensor stack is an optical element and needs to be considered by the lens designer for optimal performance as the stack does reflect and refract light. As long as the manufacturing tolerances are as good as or better than those used by the lens manufacturer, this element should perform as advertised as it contains no optical elements.

As for info on the E-M1 sensor, the only source I've found on this type of information comes from Roger Cicala and the information he has posted on his blog (see post 14 on this thread). I saw a chart he was starting to compile, but this meant he was removing the stack elements from a (broken) sensor and making measurements, so it was far from complete. In the absence of other information, I would suspect that Olympus likely used the same kind of kludge that Nikon did with the D800E; i.e. adding an additional element to reverse the effect of the AA filter.

[inkista]

Here are the Cicala blog entries on the sensor stack issue:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014...adapted-lenses
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014...does-it-matter
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2014...ii-the-summary
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015...r-sensor-stack

Generally, as I read it, the largest effect of a thick sensor stack comes if you're adapting Leica rangefinder wide angle fast lenses. Less so with other lenses, (e.g., SLR lenses). Basically, it all came up when some A7 folks were testing 24mm M lenses and getting less than optimal results.

[jcuknz]

Richard ... I have been using MFT Panasonic G3 then GH2 for about two years now and once I got the 014140 lens and found my olympus TCON worked with it I have near 500mm reach, admittedly at f/10 approx but that is no problem with CD focusing, so I have little interest in another 100mm of reach when I rarely need even 500

[Iconoscope]

I own the Olympus EM5 AND the OM 300mm F4 lens. I use the lens with an adapter for MFT cameras. Superb photos with crisp edge to edge sharpness and excellent contrast.

[Greg Lehey]

I own the Olympus EM5 AND the OM 300mm F4 lens. I use the lens with an adapter for MFT cameras. Superb photos with crisp edge to edge sharpness and excellent contrast.

And a fraction of the price.