Olympus PEN E-PL1 as second camera for Canon FD 400mm F4.5

[gabriel_gerena]

<p>Hello!<br>

So I have a Sony A7ii which I love of course. I mostly shoot Canon FD lenses at least right now. My longest is a 400mm F4.5 but when it comes to moon shots or trying to get extremely close to stuff 400mm is not enough. While I can get an adapter, those degrade the image normally and saving for a longer focal range is not in my plans specially since I wont use that extra range that often.<br />So...I started thinking, at crop factor of 2 a 4/3 will be a nice way of getting an 800mm on the cheap without having to go with a Super Zoom camera (my wife is likely getting a Canon SX50 for her) with those tiny sensors. With 4/3 I will still be getting better quality than any bridge camera plus the IBS so it seems to me like a great addition to my gear.<br>

So I saw the Olympus PEN E-PL1 which can be found used very cheap and well, now its on my radar. Of course, I wont have an EVF by going with the cheapest option but it may still be enough for the times I will actually use it.<br>

Anyone using it with long lenses like these...what is your experience?</p>

<p> </p>

<h1 id="title" > </h1>

[SCL]

<p>I occasionally use my E-PL2 with my 400/6.3 and it works great - a little noisy at higher ISOs if I'm doing night landscapes. But honestly, I wouldn't even think about usinng it without the accessory EVF (it is the same one used on Leicas, only rebranded). And to be specific...the camera you are looking at is a micro 4/3, not a 4/3.</p>

[AlanKlein]

<p>What's the difference between cropping the Sony A7II image and using an E-PL1? Although nthe latter has 2x crop factor, there is less resolution. What are you really gaining with the E-PL1?</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<p>+1 Alan. You will gain nothing from using an E-PL1, just crop your A7 images.</p>

[Ken Katz]

Since an M43 sensor is about 1/4 the size of FF (surface area), cropping your 24mp FF image to match the field of view provided by the m43 sensor would result in about a 6mp file. So the 12mp file of an E-PL1 would still provide a more resolution. I can't imagine hand holding such a rig without an EVF, but may work OK locked down tight onto a tripod. Also, the IBIS in these older cameras is not as effective as IS built into modern Canon lenses. If you can find any Olympus with a 16mp sensor, not only would you get more resolution, the high ISO and DR performance is far, far better. Picking up a used NEX may also be a solution, since while it only has a 1.5x crop factor, you would not need a new adapter and operationally, it should be closer to your A series camera than any Olympus.

[Jochen_S]

<p>In case the 400mm FD compares to the contemporary L lenses performance wise, it might make sense to use the Pen's additional pixels behind it. I agree with everybody else that an EVFless MILC is kind of the nastiest camera choice for this and personally I'd also love a higher usable ISO range than 400. - I know little about astro photography - might you already need a motorized tripod head with your rig at ISO 400 to shoot the moon?<br>

My personal guess is you'll end doing 66% of your potential Pen shots with the A7 and crop those, just for convenience's sake but maybe you are really using your tripod a lot?</p>

[SCL]

<p>Jochen - no motorized head needed to shoot the moon with this rig...typically ISO 400-800 gives you sufficiently short exposure to avoid motion blur. Howver, you definitely do need a rock solid tripod. I've done a lot of these shots with my gear.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

<blockquote>

<p>So the 12mp file of an E-PL1 would still provide a more resolution.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, the E-PL1 will give more pixels... but much poorer pixels. If it was all about pixels we'd all use a Nokia 41-megapixel camera phone.</p>

[mike_hitchen]

<p>For moon shots the poorer pixel quality of the E-PL1 will not really so much an issue because the moon is quite bright which will reduce visible noise but for other situations I would recommend the Sony wholeheartedly even where cropping is needed.<br>

I photograph small birds a lot (particularly the elusive kingfisher) and even my E-M5 does not stand up to cropping as well as my Canon 7D (original version) despite the pixel count advantage.<br>

I agree with Stephen regards the moon - it is bright enough to get shutter speeds that will obviate the need for tracking gear but I would not recommend doing it without a tripod. </p>

<p> </p>

[Ken Katz]

"If it was all about pixels we'd all use a Nokia 41-megapixel camera phone"

 

While the Nokia 1020 has an enormous sensor compared with other smartphones, I believe its about 60 sq mm, or 1/4 the size of m43 or a 2x cropped FF.

 

FF cropped by 2x and m43 would both produce a file that utilized the light which falls upon approximately 225 sq mm sensor area (a full m43 sensor and about 1/4 of a FF sensor). The m43 12mp sensor is of a much older design but used within reasonable ISO limits, it can produce a very high quality image. As I described above, the shooting envelope of the 16mp sensor currently used in Olympus m43 cameras is far wider than the previous generation of sensors. For the reasons I described above, a Sony NEX would probably make more practical sense than m43, or as Jochen suggested, just crop your A7 images.

[gabriel_gerena]

<p>Cropping it is.<br>

Thanks</p>