Olympus MC-14 and MC-20 - [Image Quality?]

Подписаться 75 тыс.

Просмотров 19 тыс.

50% 1

How much do MC-14 and MC-20 affect the image quality? What about the AF speed?
👉 MC-14 on Amazon: amzn.to/3JkD61F
👉 MC-14 on B&H: bhpho.to/3EEvzYX
👉 MC-20 on Amazon: amzn.to/3BLESav
👉 MC-20 on B&H: bhpho.to/3AqXF7i
⭐️📷 My photography course: peterforsgard.retrieve.com/store
⭐️📷 More about the courses: www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
⭐️📷 1on1 sessions: www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
👉 Buy Me a Coffee: buymeacoff.ee/PeterForsgard
👉paypal.me/peterforsgard
👉 One-on-One sessions: www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
👉 Join my Facebook Group: / peterforsgardyoutube
My Channel membership is now open!
👉 Join: / @forsgardpeter
Get a Hoodie!
👉 peter-forsgard.creator-spring...
⏱Timestamps
00:00 Intro
00:08 Teleconverters MC-14 and MC-20
00:43 What tests were used?
01:15 Comparing
01:35 Lab-test results
01:40 Lab-test results with Olympus 40-150mm F2.8 Pro
02:36 Lab-test results with Olympus 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 IS
03:26 AF Performance Test
03:34 Test images
04:48 Real Life test results with Olympus 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 IS + MC-20
06:36 Real Life test results: Which one was which?
06:55 My Thoughts
09:20 Watch Next
🎼Music and SFX from
www.artlist.io
Not Crazy (instrumental version by Roni Bar Hadas
► Affiliate programs I am in:
► Cameras and Lenses:
👉 My Amazon Store: www.amazon.com/shop/peterfors...
👉 B&H Photo: bhpho.to/36rubIY
👉 Laowa lenses: www.venuslens.net/ref/602/
👉 Mitakon lenses: zyoptics.net/?ref=PeterF
► Filters:
👉 H&Y Filters: hyfilters.net/?ref=PeterF
► Software:
👉 Excire: excireeu.pxf.io/P069xe
👉 Pixlr: shareasale.com/r.cfm?b=180387...
👉 Luminar: skylum.evyy.net/c/2239822/710...
👉 Aurora HDR: skylum.evyy.net/c/2239822/309...
👉 Topaz Labs:topazlabs.com/ref/644/
👉 DxOLab: tidd.ly/3l31ho8
► Other:
👉 Smallrig DE: www.smallrig.com.de/?ref=da5F...
👉 Smallrig: www.smallrig.com?afmc=4a5
👉 Skillshare: skillshare.eqcm.net/c/2239822...
👉 EpidemicSound: www.epidemicsound.com/referra... something from these links supports my channel. I will get a small commission.
You do not pay anything extra. Win-win.
► Want to learn more about photography or use your Olympus or OM SYSTEM camera. I have coaching sessions available in my Webstore:
👉 www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
Disclaimer: I am an OM SYSTEM Ambassador. I make all my content with mirrorless OM SYSTEM and Olympus micro four-thirds gear.
Links to my Olympus gear (disclaimer: using these links when making purchases, you support this channel. You pay the same price, and I get a few bucks to finance this channel.)
📷 www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
👉 www.amazon.com/shop/peterfors...
► Any professional inquires please email: peter@peterforsgard.com
Links to my accounts all around the web:
My portfolio: www.peterforsgard.com
My blog (eng): bit.ly/peterfblog
My Instagram: / jpeterf
My Olympus page: my.olympus-consumer.com/membe...
My Olympus gear: www.ajatuksiavalokuvauksesta....
My kit.co store: kit.co/PeterF
#Olympus #OMSystem #PeterForsgard
(disclaimer: Some of the links above are affiliate links. Using these links when making purchases, you support this channel. You pay the same price, and I get a few bucks to finance this channel.)

Опубликовано:

13 июл 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 114

@kittyclerico18 Год назад

Interesting information. I have wondered how these extenders affect image quality. Thanks for this.

@WhoIsSerafin Год назад

Perfect timing getting into photography surfing and trying to decide between the two

@AlpacoFilms Год назад

Thanks for the test!!! I’ve been wanting to do this with the 40-150 specifically for sports! I’d love to see a test to show the auto focus speed difference.

@bmiller025 Год назад

I have the 300 f4 and the mc-14, for birding. I only very rarely use the 300 without it.

@truewarrior1980 6 месяцев назад

very good content. was looking exactly for this 2x2 comparison. thanks a lot!

@ForsgardPeter 6 месяцев назад

Thanks. Glad it was helpful!

@Hugo-TX Год назад

I've been tempted to get the MC-20, but giving up 2 EV steps was a deal breaker. Yes I know you can't get something for nothing, but I'm not always shooting in bright light conditions. Thanks for the tests.

@ridealongwithrandy Год назад

My standard setup is using the MC-14 on the 40-150, never on the 300 pro because it does not need it. However, when shooting the moon or the sun, I use the MC-20 on the 300 pro for max mags. Cheers!

@wadelapan5756 Год назад

Thanks Peter. I've been shooting thousands of photos of the horse races at Saratoga with the 40-150, E-M1 II and 1.4x, shooting .jpg only. I wanted a smidge more contrast, so upped that on the camera. Now, based on what you said, I'll also try bumping up the sharpness and color, just by one. Results are very very good for me, and, at about 3.5 pounds, it is easy to carry in the heat we've been having.

@wadelapan5756 Год назад

Part two of my comment is that, wondering how my Sony A7 III would do at the races, but not having a long zoom, I got the Sigma 150-600. Camera and lens weigh 6.06 pounds (which really pulls on your neck), and the lens is so long that stealth shooting is out the window. But WOW!, what spectacular photos: perfect contrast, sharpness and colors on just the most basic of settings. They are the best digital photos I've ever seen. Autofocus works just great.

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

I made all the corrections in post. I need to test the settings and see how the images come out.

@sounderdavis5446 Год назад

Potential MFT buyers of MC-14 and MC-20 should know that at this time these 2 teleconverters **only** work with the three lenses Peter mentioned as well as the 300mm f/4 from Oly--not with other Oly lenses or Panasonic gear. I did rent the Oly 150-400mm f/4.5 for a week for bird photography. That lens comes with a built-in and easily-toggled 1.25x teleconverter. You can also add an MC-20 to the built-in tele to take that lens up to 35-mm-equivalent 2000mm handheld! But after trying it for an hour with both teles at 2000mm in good light with all IS on and fast-enough shutter speeds, I took the MC-20 off. That combo wasn't sharp enough for me handheld with distant subjects--maybe due to my technique or to heat wave distortion. Also it's very hard to locate moving small wildlife at 2000mm because the field-of-view is so narrow. Think of it like trying to handhold very powerful binoculars or a telescope without image stabilization; what you see through the glass is wobbling badly. On a tripod with the MC-20 on a cooler day, or using the MC-14 instead, and a near-stationary subject, you may do better with the 150-400mm plus built-in tele and an additional teleconverter; I didn't test that. But the built-in 1.25x tele on the 150-400mm will get you up to 35-mm-equivalent 1000mm without MC-14 or MC-20 and is all you need for sharp images handheld with good technique on reasonably close subjects, some cropping allowed. DxO PhotoLab Elite DeepPrime and Topaz Sharpen AI do allow shooting at high ISO and getting sharp images with the 300mm f/4 and 40-150mm f/2.8 mounted with the MC-20, so you can hit 35-mm-equivalent 1200mm or 600mm handheld with those two lenses at ISO 6400 or more and still crop into the image a bit. The 40-150mm f/2.8 and MC-20 IMO is not a great combo for sharpness with small songbirds that are, say, 100+ feet away. With frame-filling wildlife including birds, that combo does quite well; but with distant wildlife that doesn't come close to filling the frame, the 300mm f/4 with MC-20 does notably better than the 40-150 with MC-20, although at more than 2x the price. For many wildlife photographers who like me are not able to afford to buy the 150-400mm lens, either of these two options represent a very good value. I haven't tried the newer 100-400 f/5-6.3 lens Peter tests here, but I am not surprised that it is not as sharp with the MC-20 or as easy to use in low light as the three bigger-aperture lenses above. In Oly glass, the PRO designation those three lenses have does mean better optical quality and performance in my experience.

@davidcoote8395 Год назад

I have the 40-150 with both MC14&20 all of which I find very useable. I’ve been thinking about a longer lens as I do like my birds. Still not sure about the cheaper 100-400 over the much more expensive 300.

@TITAOSTEIN Год назад

I use the 300f4 + TC2 frequently and I am very happy with the results! I cannot say the same about the use of the TC2 with the 40-150f2.8. Im getting very poor results with this set!

@dwightjones3305 Год назад

I use the 300/4 for birding. Both teleconverters work well with this lens. I have had less experience with the 100-400, but it seems to work best without a converter. I live in a foggy coastal area where light levels can be rather low at the times when I'm birding. The 300/4 has much better IS than the 100-400. The zoom lens might be OK with a converter when light is better. In my location, the 300/4 with converter is the best combination. I only use the zoom when I might get too close for the 300/4. I have both lenses on two separate cameras when shooting from my car.

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

My mistake that I did not mention the 300mm F4.

@rpdee7344 Год назад

8/4/22 I think it goes without saying that adding additional glass between the lens and the camera body will affect what you showed in the video of less sharpness, contrast, and less light using a 1.4 x, 2x converter. When shooting in the film days it was a balance of the same issues or trade-offs to image quality, but with digital post-processing AI software and computer-developed today lenses some of it has improved from shooting with film days.

@tdunster2011 Год назад

I shot Ice Hockey games with the old 50mm F2 Macro lens on an E410 using manual focus. The pics were good enough to get picked up. Anything is possible - never think the gear you own is holding you back. You just need to be innovative and accept the challenge. Far more rewarding than using a camera or lens so high tech that you almost don't even need to be there. The fixation people have with shooting wide open I find hilarious as well - especially considering that ISO increases these days come at a very small cost given noise reduction software. Besides - even f8 gets you a nice bokeh at the long end with the background far way - or you can simply manual adjust the focus limiter to suit.

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

I agree. Thanks for sharing.

@ofmetalphilosophy4837 Год назад

I wanted to test the mc14 for the Red Arrows in an air show as it'll work well in daylight on my 40-150. It's only F4 and that's fine for daylight. But we know the Achilles heel of MFT, that is the high ISO. Any indoor action even with 2.8 is already a problem. I shoot gigs often. Primes are all I use and even with my1.4 Sigmas the photos are average at best.

@stevebonn3463 Год назад

I frequently use the 2x TC on my 40-150mm lens, and the 1.4x TC on my 100-400mm lens. They yield sharp enough results for my purposes. Capturing birds-in-flight at 560mm can be challenging for me, however, sometimes even when the bird is in the frame. The Olympus dot sight helps somewhat. Probably a pro lens would yield more accurate autofocus for BIF than the 100-400.

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

It is very hard to find the bird with long lenses. Dot sight really helps.

@robynaldridge8304 Год назад

Peter, I'm definitely not adding anything onto the 100-400mm lens. I've had the MC-20 on the 300mm lens since I bought it and the MC-14 on the 40-150mm lens so I'll stick with that. Of course if I had one of the monsters then I wouldn't have to carry everything else! Still, that's life and we have to be thankful for what we have and make the most of it.

@tonvanbruchem142 Год назад

Dear Peter Can you advice to set the contrast and saturation in the camera on +1 with the mc 14 and/or mc 20 with the 100-400 mm Ton

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

You can try that and see how it works. I did everything in post.

@artistjoh Год назад

I would have loved to see some testing with macro subjects, for while most people seem to think teleconverters are all about extending the reach of lenses, the most useful thing to use them for, (for us macro shooters) is to get tele-macro shots. The longer tele lengths mean being able to shoot critters from enough distance that they are not alarmed by the camera, and behave more naturally. The 100-400mm lens is particularly good for macro, and combining teleconverters and extension rings can give greater than 1:1 magnification. MFT is an excellent format for macro because it gives greater depth of field at any given aperture and focal length, and my G9 is really good with focus stacking, and I am sure your Olympus cameras probably do the same. In many ways cropping in post can do as well as using a teleconverter when it comes to reach, but tele-macro work cannot be replicated by anything other than a tele lens plus teleconverters.

@rogermuggleton8127 Год назад

I use the 40-150 f2.8 with and MC-20 for shooting flying insects. Everything works against this! A smallish aperture is needed to get a decent amount of the insect in focus, and a fast shutter speed because their perch is swaying in the wind, and the long lens magnifies this. A tripod is no help because there's no time to set it up and insects are sensitive to movement so easily frightened away. Insects are off after a second or two so there's no time for manual focus and no time to set the focus point for autofocus. I don't like the look of shots using flash, and the flash will probably frighten the insect away too. A small aperture usually mean a fussy background, although it's fine if you want to show the insect in its environment. A higher than usual ISO is not such a worry - it's nothing compared to my pushed Ektachromes of 50 years ago! I think these long lenses are optimised for long shots and not ideal for subject a metre away, one day I might investigate this.

@artistjoh Год назад

@@rogermuggleton8127 I am also an old time guy, although almost exclusively Kodachrome once I went to 35mm in the late 70's. Started with Speed Graphic in 1962 and then to Autocord shooting 6x6 and no color work back then. 25ASA was normal for me back then :) Tele-macro is not good for a lot of movement, but if photographing something relatively stationary it is great to be a couple of meters away from a shy subject. Focus stacking is also not so good for moving subjects, but when the subject is suitable, it can give you both the insect or spider in full focus with a nice blurred background. There is no perfect macro solution, but I do like being able to put distance between me and the subject if I can. In my Canon days I adored my EF 180 3.5L and really disliked using the 100 in comparison.

@keithholland4322 Год назад

I don't have a 100-400mm lens to test, but I've taken some excellent tele macro shots with my 40-150mm f/2.8 + MC-20. It's only .42x magnification, but that's .84x full frame equivalent, so it's pretty impressive. The focus is fast and you can use the Pro Capture mode to capture a series of shots of a butterfly flying away from a flower, for instance. Keep in mind that they usually take off facing into the wind, so you'll want to be at a 90 degree angle to the wind direction in order to keep them in the plane of focus and their wings beat so fast that you'll want to use Pro Cap Hi to capture the moment.

@oneeyedphotographer Год назад

@@artistjoh I surveyed the market and choose the Sigma 180mm because it's stabilised. It's also F2.8, quite a big, heavy lens. Distance, and DOF were my concerns.

@stephenfinch4534 2 месяца назад

I appreciate sharpness is subjective but I am impressed with the performance of these 2 converters.. Ok I am a tripod user for extreme range shots but keeping the camera steady will be always paramount (Even with IBIS). Just a thought have any of you tried the in camera Teleconverter(OM1)? you should, I was taken back by the images. (You get a JPG but set it to Fine jpg + Raw and you get the best of both worlds if you dont like the jpg!) Its all down to what you are shooting.

@Rdavis6593 4 месяца назад

Thanks for the video. For birds in flight, if I don't care about shooting beyond a 300mm range, would the images from the 40-150 with 2x converter be equal to or better than the 100-400 at 300mm?

@ForsgardPeter 4 месяца назад

That is really hard to say for sure. I would guess that 100-400mm at 300mm is better. 2x tele converter makes the image a bit soft.

@stephenelderphoto Год назад

Really good info Peter. It should be helpful for anyone thinking about buying the TCs. I have both MC-14 and MC-20 and they also work well on the Olympus 300mm, which I don’t think you mentioned. I found that I was getting a lot of blurry images using the MC-20 on the 40-150mm until I tried it with a monopod. That made a big difference for me. The light loss is definitely a pain though. I’m in Scotland and bright sunny days are not something we can count on for most of the year but I decided to keep the MC-20 as it will be good as a tool to employ in the right situations. Thanks again Peter!

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

Thanks. Yes I did not mention the 300mm F4. My mistake.

@disjenmgn 16 дней назад

Indoor sport with f8.0 ???? I wish you all the luck! Did you manage it already?

@Centauri27 Год назад

Thanks for the comparisons, Peter. The results are pretty much in line with expectations. I have the 40-150 f/2.8 and both MC 14 & 20. I shoot still life. My results with the MC14 is very good: virtually indistinguishable from the base zoom lens. With the MC20, I notice a distinct drop-off in sharpness, though Topaz Sharpen AI restores a lot of the details. For fun, I picked up a Tokina 400mm f/8 mirror lens. You want low contrast images? Look no further than a mirror lens! But the Tokina also has its own look that is markedly different from the Olympus PRO zooms.

@JRESHOW 8 месяцев назад

Does the MC-20 work with the Tokina 400mm?? 😁

@Centauri27 8 месяцев назад

@@JRESHOW In your dreams (or perhaps, nightmare).... 😆

@JRESHOW 8 месяцев назад

@@Centauri27 🤣🤣 I’d try it! Thanks for the reply.

@JRESHOW 8 месяцев назад

@@Centauri27 maybe a silly question, but have you ever tried to combine the mc20 and the mc14? Like on a tripod for moon photos? Would they work together?

@Centauri27 8 месяцев назад

@@JRESHOW I never considered that, because I didn't think it would work. I just tried it now and confirmed that it's physically impossible to connect both teleconverters together--the shapes of the optical elements sticking out prevents it.

@iliaskps Год назад

Hi Peter, What about 40-150/2.8 + MC14 VS Zuiko 50-200SWD/2.8-3.5 ? I know that you've tested the old Zuiko !

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

That would be interesting. The AF is most likely better when using 40-150mm F2.8 + MC-14. Image quality? I cannot say for sure.

@Lordvader330 Год назад

I use the MC-20 with the the two lens you presented. I totally agree. For wildlife the MC-20 and the 100-400 just isn’t that great.

@formermpc10 Год назад

For wildlife, the 1.4 isn't that great, either.

@mjsmith8741 Год назад

The only surprising thing is that the 100-400mm is focussing with the MC20 given it is effectively F13 wide open at 400mm so a dark image is projected onto the sensor, AF is going to suffer compared to effective F5.6 of the 40-150mm wide open. Technology certainly is fantastic now, a few years ago unless you had an F4 pro spec telephoto lens or faster it was impossible to use Autofocus and 2x converters!

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

That is absolutely true. That is one reason, the image is just too dark for the sensor.

@keithholland4322 Год назад

Would you say that the image quality and focus speed of the 40-150 with the MC-20 is better than that of the 100-400 without a teleconverter?

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

No, if you need a long lens the 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 is a better choice than 40-150mm F2.8 Pro. 40-150mm F2.8 Pro and MC-14 is about the same if not slightly better than 100-400mm.

@mmadmic Год назад

My remark could seem stupid but I don't want to use TC with pro lenses, I buy pro/premium lenses not only for the aperture but for their contrast and sharpness, and using a TC reduce dramatically all of these and especially contrast and sharpness. And using a pro lense and the converter to get the same result as kit lenses, It isn't a good chose IMHO. To reduce weight on holidays for traveling, I prefer to have only 2 lenses on 2 cameras 12-100 on one and the 100-400 on the other. And I use pro lenses when weight is not an issue. PP is indeed an option, but PP affects the overall image quality.

@joanantonim.p.2400 Год назад

👌👍👍🙏 👋🙋 Thanks

@tonigenes5816 Год назад

Now there are inteligent softwares which can upscale the image and probably render similar output as an optical teleconverter. But it's a pleasure to have the subject larger in the viewfinder and for recording movies optical TCs will still ofer an advantage.

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

Yes. You are right and that is actually something I will test in the near future.

@tonigenes5816 Год назад

Wow, that would be great, Peter.

@giuseppescialla54 Год назад

What do you think of the 150-400 f4.5 to photograph football? Have you tried it? How does the autofocus look like?

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

Have not tested the lens photographing soccer. It has very fast AF, so I would assume that it is very good.

@giuseppescialla54 Год назад

@@ForsgardPeter Thanks

@RobShootPhotos Год назад

My curiosity is putting the 2x teleconverter on the 40-150mm and how it compares to the 75-300mm. However I think I will get the 1.4x for the 40-150mm because I could see this would be good for the 300mm f/4 if I would ever get that lens.

@Lordvader330 Год назад

I do that all the time. The advantage to the combo you stated it the Aperture is fixed at 5.6 for the entire zoom range. That extra bit of light is very helpful at 300mm

@rossthefiddler5890 Год назад

I used the MC20 + 40-150 lens combo as soon as the MC20 was available & it is definitely better than the 75-300 lens, but I've still got some nice photos with the 75-300 lens though. You're welcome to check out my Flickr page to see photos using those lenses & combinations (under the same name).

@RobShootPhotos Год назад

@@rossthefiddler5890 thank you for that insight.

@keithholland4322 Год назад

The 75-300 is an older lens and it's not a Pro lens and I think you will find that the image quality is a big step down from the 40-150 + MC-20. I haven't tested it, but that's my expectation based on the lab test from imaging-resource.com, which indicates that it is not very sharp at 300mm and at that focal length, it is sharpest at f/11, so you have to choose between sharpness and bokeh. I have used the Panasonic 100-300mm lens and I was shocked at how much sharper my images were when I switched to the 40-150 + MC-20. From what I've heard, the 75-300 is not even as good as the 100-300. Just to be clear, the 100-300 is not a bad lens and I still have it and occasionally take it with me on long hikes when I can't justify the size and weight of the 40-150, but there's a big difference in sharpness!

@chrish8968 Год назад

Hi. Watching this vid today after getting the MC-20 to add to my 40-150. I've also got the Mk2 75-300 which I've decided today to sell. That 75-300ii is an absolute marval for the price and weight - the images at f8 are really very good however 1) f6.7 in the woods is just unusable. 2.8 40-150 with a 2x in my pocket is worth the extra weight. 2) no weather sealing. I take my dog up the woods every lunchtime without fail since 2020 moved me to WFH. I get very wet quite often and I really worry about that 75-300 as it does feel cheaply made (in comparison). Images at 300mm on the 75-300 are possibly, ever so slightly better than the 40-150 @ 5.6 but if I stop down to 7.1 I can't tell. I think if you were taking landscapes etc/travelling the 75-300 is the one to have.

@florianschfr 10 месяцев назад

The MC-20 was the only MFT buy I really regretted. Baught it to extend the 40-150. But it ruined the image quality. To a point where I even found a digital crop on par if nor better. Not sure if this was the lenses or converters fault. The lens itself performs stellar though. So from my own not representitive experience I cannot recommend it.

@ForsgardPeter 10 месяцев назад

Yes the MC-20 is not perfect and as you say the results might be better cropping and upscaling with AI. Photo AI is great for that.

@supercatsimon Год назад

I have the 40-150 2.8 and recently purchased the mc20 2xtc. My question was, would that combination give me a better result than simply cropping the image by 100% or buying the 75-300mm which would cost about the same as the 2xtc..

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

Cropping will of course make the image smaller. If you do not beed the pixels then yes. I have not compared the extender against the 75-300mm. I have used the 75-300mm and it might not have as good AF as the 40-150mm F2.8 Pro.

@mikoajolbrych9879 Год назад

Absolutely 40-150 + mc20 gives better result, especially stopped down 1 step.

@supercatsimon Год назад

@@ForsgardPeter thank you. i feel a bit better about my purchase now 😊

@oneeyedphotographer Год назад

Lens plus TC gives you 20 megapixels, cropping throws some away. You can, of course, us the TC and then crop, just as you suggest.

@bogdantimiras7305 Год назад

Hello everybody! Help me!!! When I put my my converter 2x on Zuiko 40-150, 2.8 on OM-1 , the camera does not react. On the display it appears "check up a lens"!!! What to do??? Thank you in advance! It works OK on 1.4 converter

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

and you made sure it was properly attached? There was the clicking sound?

@photohounds Год назад

I sold my 1.4 . It was quite good, but I really wanted what the 300 can do.

@TheDeliveryDoctor Год назад

I have both converters, both bought new. The 1.4 works fine but the 2.0 brings up a lens error on both my 40-150mm and 300mm. Anyone else have this issue? Is it an update thing on the camera or lens? I’ve tried it on an em5.2 and an em1.2 with no success.

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

Could be a firmware issue. Updating the firmware might help.

@TheDeliveryDoctor Год назад

@@ForsgardPeter thanks Peter - will give that a go. Is this something that I can attach the converter on its own to one of my cameras for the update or will I need to have one of the lens attached as well? SD card in or out? I haven’t done an update for quite some time but recall the last one was through the Olympus app??

@ronaldangelini7983 Год назад

Not compatible. Do you know when They will come out with new MC14 and MC20's converters that are compatible.

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

I have no idea if they will make a MC-14 or MC-20 that is compatible with the 40-150mm F4 Pro. You can still but the the 40-150mm F2.8 Pro. It was not replaced by the new one. It is a different lens.

@ronaldangelini7983 Год назад

This is the older 40-150 lens, which is compatible with the new OM 1and you can use the MC 14 and MC 20. The new 40-150 lens that came out at the same time as the new OM 1 is not

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

Yes, the 40-150mm F2.8 Pro is compatible, but the 40-150mm F4 Pro is not.

@heikkivalkonen1075 Год назад

Did you try to compare 2x cropped native vs. 2x Teleconverter? That would have been interesting.

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

I did not. Cropping looses some pixels so it is not the same thing.

@heikkivalkonen1075 Год назад

@@ForsgardPeter cropping you lose pixels, with TC you lose sharpness. If you get same amount of details on cropped image and TC image, then TC is doing only harm…

@keithhider2170 Год назад

The 300mm f4 Pro lens is also supported

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

Yes, my mistake that I did not mention it.

@ThePNWRiderWA Год назад

This was very helpful. I have both of the teleconverters but I seldom use The mc 20. With the 100 to 400. The issue is at the far end a combination of the image too soft because of the Tele converter as well as atmospheric anomalies

@formermpc10 Год назад

Thank you, Peter. This video confirms what I thought: teleconverters are not worth it. Us consumers need to be mindful that corporations care about your money, not your satisfaction with the end result. I have the 1.4 and use it on the 100-400 and 300. The image degradation is too much for me. Every time I've used the 1.4 I ask myself why I haven't sold it yet. I need to get busy with that.

@keithholland4322 Год назад

Do Olympus teleconverters work on Panasonic lenses and do Panasonic teleconverters work on Olympus lenses?

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

Unfortunately no.

@morallyambiguousnet Год назад

I used my OM-D EM-1 Mk I and Mk II, along with the 40-150mm F2.8 Pro, for motorsports (primarily motorcycle racing). I also bought the MC14 to extend my reach a bit, however, I was so dissatisfied with the results that I stopped even putting it in my bag for events. Maybe I just got a bad copy, but the lack of sharpness and what seemed to be a loss of focus speed just didn't work with my use case.

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

MC-14 is quite ok with the 40-150mm F2.8 in my opinion.

@morallyambiguousnet Год назад

@@ForsgardPeter - Though perhaps not for 160 Kmh motorcycles, coming towards you. At least not in my experience.

@SalisburyPlainAviation 3 месяца назад

I have the 40-150mm f2.8 Pro and the MC14 and the results are excellent, can't really tell the difference on or off. I have read you can get a bad copy of these TCs.

@dangreenberg8983 Год назад

Peter - they also support the 300f4

@ForsgardPeter Год назад

Yes, my mistake that I did not mention that.

@EugeneMaynard Год назад

👍🏾🙏🏾

@machintelligence Год назад

The decorative woodworking you have is called marquetry.

@photohounds Год назад

Beat me to it 😉

@oneeyedphotographer Год назад

"Football" is a different sport in different countries. Soccer is always Association Football. Australian football (please, not AFL - that's a competition, not a sport) is played on a cricket oval. I think they're larger in Australia than in England. I have tried shooting football with a 75-300, it's way too short. I think that, with four photographers, you could cover all the action.

@palash.biswas Год назад

I didn't enjoy MC-20 with 300mm - images were too soft compared to 300mm.

@mikoajolbrych9879 Год назад

I have 75-300, 40-150, 100-400 and mc-20. I did hundreds of test. My conclusion: 1. Mc20 is great for 40-150. It brings a lot of new details, image is sharp, colours are superior to 100-400. 2. Mc20 with 100-400 is a bad combo. Image is blurred, it is better just to crop. It is useless with 100-400, both handheld or with a tripod. 3. Comparision 40-150+mc20 vs 100-400 is difficult. In low light 40-150+mc20 is better, in sunny days 100-400 image can be perfect. Colours straight from camera are always better with 40-150+mc20. Lack of IS is not a real problem even in wildlife cropped small birds. 100-400 IS is not perfect... It is not dual IS....Maybe a new firmware could improve this. It is still 1.0. 5. 75-300 is surprisingly sharp, but colours are the worst. I have not used it for a long time having another options.

@davelock3166 Год назад

Teleconverters only magnify the image from the back of whatever lens you are using. Technically they do not increase the focal length of the lens themselves. Straight prime non zoom lenses are always superior over zoom lenses. This is why, particularly with full frame cameras in wildlife photography the boys with big lenses have to use converters. They should swap to M4/3rds! Better off just cropping as you say.

@rossthefiddler5890 Год назад

I would agree with that, as I have stopped using the MC20 + 40-150 in favour of the 100-400 lens, simply because it has more reach & lovely image quality, but I don't see value in using any TC with it though. I've tried the MC14 with the 100-400 but that brings it down to f9.5 at 400mm. The MC14 came with the 40-150 lens & I added the MC20 as soon as it became available, but both rarely gets used now (I'll still keep them).

@davelock3166 Год назад

@@rossthefiddler5890 Keep on snapping!

@oneeyedphotographer Год назад

@@davelock3166 Effectively they become part of the lens. Camera lenses are not one piece of glass, they contain several, commonly arranged in groups. The TC is another group.

@davelock3166 Год назад

@@oneeyedphotographer Yes they are a group of lenses, but they do not increase the focal length, they just magnify the image.