1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

45-200 vs 100-300 vs FT 75-300 or ???

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by jgmankos, May 17, 2012.

  1. jgmankos

    jgmankos Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 9, 2012
    Slatington, PA
    Currently have the Olympus 40-150 but I find it a bit short sometimes. Looking to upgrade for some more reach.

    Obviously the natural choices are the 45-200 or the 100-300. Basically this lens is going to be my only zoom lens as 50mm and below I cover with primes. I know the 100-300 seems to be more popular choice (also larger and more expensive), and the 45-200 seems like a nice compromise between size, reach an price.

    Also what about the Four-Thirds Olympus 75-300? I don't see alot of mention about this particular lens. Is it any good as an adapted lens? Are there other four thirds lenses that are good 200mm + telephotos? I saw a listing of lenses that mentions that there were Sigma 135-400 and 50-500 in Four Thirds mount....are they hard to find?

    Just trying to make up my mind and looking for a nudge in some direction :smile:
  2. iGonzoid

    iGonzoid Mu-43 Veteran

    Feb 6, 2011
    Tasmania, Australia
    Hi, This is a repeat of what I just posted on another thread, but it is relevant....
    Regarding the Oly 75-300 — I had the Four Thirds version and used it with an Oly 4/3-to-m4/3 adaptor on my EP-2. Good optical performance wide open at a Leonard Cohen concert but long-distance focus problems. It did a lot of searching in low light conditions, especially at long focal distances. Occasionally at 300mm it would get totally lost and you would have to "reboot". Ended up depending on manual focus for critical light. In January I sold it and upgraded to the Lumix 100-300 m4/3, to go with my new GH2. Decision was made on the basis of the Lumix lens having Mega OIS, which the GH2 body lacks. The EP-2 body does a good OIS job. Very happy with the Lumix 100-300 — much faster and surer auto focus and nice smooth zoom and manual focus rings. The Oly was less than smooth and had a kind of "grind" feeling in it's manual focus ring. The Lumix is now my chief rock concert and wild bird lens. Beautifully sharp wide open. Handy with larger insects too, but a pity that the closest focus is 1.5m. I have just ordered a set of Kenko auto extension rings and hope that will help remedy that a bit. I believe in having at least one lens to goes "that far", though I tend to do most of my work at 14mm, 25mm and 45mm [macro] with prime [non-zoom] lenses. The Lumix 100-300 is now my only zoom, but at that distance, you do need the ability to reframe easily without having to move about. Go long, it will be useful in some circumstances. All the best with your decision. iGonzoid.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.