A cheap, fast 300mm equivalent?

[Jamus]

Hey all, I've been thinking about getting a 70-300mm Nikon zoom for a while now, but after getting the GF1, I thought about possibly getting a legacy lens...
Maybe a 130mm f2 or something?

I have an 18-200mm lens, but when I'm out and about, it just isn't enough to get the portraits I want.
Any suggestions? I'm low on money, but I could spend 100/200ish to get a good zoom lens.
I was specifically thinking a fixed lens, because I want that short depth of field.
I thought about maybe getting a used Nikkor 180mm f2.8, which would give me 320mm in the 4/3ds system, and be multi-purpose for my Nikons, but that be too expensive.

However, I can't imagine using the GF1 with a telephoto and not having to use a EVF, of which I have none. That's the pickle I'm in right now, and I'm not sure how to go about doing it! Any suggestions would be appreciated :]

 

[Brian S]

A Vivitar Series 1 135mm F2.3 is nice, will focus to 3ft.

The Nikkor 180/2.8 is also a good choice.

I have both, got a beater of a 180/2.8 for $75.

 

[tam]

Hang on, you have a d300 and d5000 - are they not both DX sensors?

So a 130mm on the GF1 is not as much of a zoom as your 18-200 on the nikons. And that'll be easier to use.

Do you want 300mm in 35mm frame equivalent? Or in DX format equivalent (like your nikons)?

You need a 240mm lens on the GF1 to get the same FOV as a 300mm on the nikons.

 

[photoSmart42]

The old Canon FD 135/2.5 or 135/2 have nice bokeh if you're looking at something in that FL.

 

[Brian S]

With the Nikkor-P 180mm F2.8, wide-open on the EP2.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[Jamus]

Wow, absolutely awesome shot, Brian. The lighting is as gentle as the creature itself

Hang on, you have a d300 and d5000 - are they not both DX sensors?

So a 130mm on the GF1 is not as much of a zoom as your 18-200 on the nikons. And that'll be easier to use.

Do you want 300mm in 35mm frame equivalent? Or in DX format equivalent (like your nikons)?

You need a 240mm lens on the GF1 to get the same FOV as a 300mm on the nikons.

I want about 100mm more, really. I thought the 180mm Nikon would be nice, because I can use the autofocus on my Nikons as well as have a 360mm on the GF1. However, I don't really have 600ish dollars. :/

The old Canon FD 135/2.5 or 135/2 have nice bokeh if you're looking at something in that FL.

That would equal to what... 270mm? I wonder if that would be enough...

 

[qball]

I have a Pentax/Ashai Super Takumar 135mm/f3.5 that is as near-mint as you an get.

Includes the original front and rear cap, and lens hood. I migt even have the case too!

No haze/fungus/dust, etc.

$100 Paypal. Can send photos tomorrow evening.

PM if interested

 

[Jamus]

Well, like I said, I don't know if 135 would be enough, because with the DX sensor on my Nikon's, it became about 240. I think I still want more zoom.

 

[tam]

Hang on, just to clarify: you want more zoom than your current 200mm on the nikons?

(i'm confused as you're considering 135mm lenses, which give you less zoom than you currently have. And 135mm on a dx nikon is 216mm in FX equivalent, not 240. From your current kit your 18-200 gives you 320mm in FX equivalent)

 

[Brian S]

I just tried out my Nikkor-H 300/4.5 on the EP2 using an inexpensive $20 F-Mount adapter.

Winning combination. I'll upload some later, basically got the "deer Family" grazing in the backyard. The stand-off permitted shooting without frightening them.

 

[simonclivehughes]

Are you not considering the 45-200mm Panny lens? No, it's not fast, but wide open, racked out, you'll get both the combination of OOF background and the natural isolation of the subject that a telephoto produces. Together, you get a pretty good DOF effect. It can be a remarkably sharp lens. The bokeh is not as pleasing, but it's also a cheaper and lighter combo, especially for a GF1.

As to not having an EVF, use a tripod or some other support. Your keep rate for handholding a long lens (out in front of you) on the GF1 is certainly going to be reduced.

Cheers,

 

[Jamus]

Hang on, just to clarify: you want more zoom than your current 200mm on the nikons?

(i'm confused as you're considering 135mm lenses, which give you less zoom than you currently have. And 135mm on a dx nikon is 216mm in FX equivalent, not 240. From your current kit your 18-200 gives you 320mm in FX equivalent)

I want more zoom WITH the 4/3rds system, then what I have currently with my Nikon system. However, I would prefer getting something in Nikon mount, so it can serve two purposes. However, if there is a cheap alternative for the 4/3rds system, using legacy glass or whatever, I'd go for that.

Are you not considering the 45-200mm Panny lens? No, it's not fast, but wide open, racked out, you'll get both the combination of OOF background and the natural isolation of the subject that a telephoto produces. Together, you get a pretty good DOF effect. It can be a remarkably sharp lens. The bokeh is not as pleasing, but it's also a cheaper and lighter combo, especially for a GF1.

As to not having an EVF, use a tripod or some other support. Your keep rate for handholding a long lens (out in front of you) on the GF1 is certainly going to be reduced.

Yeah, I realized that having a fast telephoto is not essential, because of the zoom. But I still want that short depth of field, if possible.

I just tried out my Nikkor-H 300/4.5 on the EP2 using an inexpensive $20 F-Mount adapter.

Winning combination. I'll upload some later, basically got the "deer Family" grazing in the backyard. The stand-off permitted shooting without frightening them.

Very cool, I'd love to see it. How is the depth of field with the 4.5? I plan on using this telephoto mostly for portrait snipes when I'm downtown. Also for birds and other such skiddish nature creatures.

 

[tam]

I want more zoom WITH the 4/3rds system, then what I have currently with my Nikon system

Right. So you want a nikon-fit lens with a focal length greater than 160mm. (160 would give you exactly the same zoom as the 200mm currently does on the nikon).

 

[Brian S]

300mm F4.5 Nikkor-H, 1967 vintage.

Wide-Open at 1/160th second, ISO 800, hand held.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

IS1 image stabilization, no time to mess with FL on the IS, left it set to ~25mm.

1/200th

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

No time for a tripod, either.

 

[Jamus]

Right. So you want a nikon-fit lens with a focal length greater than 160mm. (160 would give you exactly the same zoom as the 200mm currently does on the nikon).

Yup! So was I right on with the 180mm, guys? I'm not sure if I should go cheap with the older, manual focus version, or save up and get the auto focus. My thought is on the later, as I can really use that low f-stop if I do things that way.

 

[Brian S]

You could always get the manual focus for now, and sell it when you have the money saved toward the AF version.

The original Nikkor-P 180/2.8 is very sharp, and is what I used on the first picture shown.

 

[Jamus]

Is it hard to focus it at low f-stops?

 

[Brian S]

The 180/2.8? No- no problems using the EVF on the EP2. I used the 7x setting for critical focus. The 300/4.5 shots, about the same. It was late in the day, heavy shadow- so the pictures were hand-held at 1/200th, but the lens was in focus. Focus on a telephoto is much more critical when used at minimum focus. Distance shots, 20ft and greater, are not too hard. The pictures shown in this thread are the first done with these lenses on the EP2, using the EVF. I have used these lenses on my Nikon film cameras, mostly on a Nikon F and F2. I have had the lenses for more than 20 years.

 

[Jamus]

Yeah. It seems definitely like a winner to me. My other thought was to get the Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 180mm F2.8. I've heard great things about that lens.
I was really impressed by the images on the flick group... moreso then that of the Nikon. It's also cheaper.

It would be lacking autofocus, though...
Would it be worth it? Is it that much better quality of a lens? Are there other 180mm on up lenses that easily trump the Nikon 180mm? Argh... so many questions.

 

[iliakoltsov]

It really depends on the length the price and the aperture

Insane aperture and price
sigma xq 135 1.8
porst 135 1.8
Carl zeiss 180 f2.8 ( similar to the Nikon ) Pentacon Six mount

More reasonable lense that can offer you quite a good tele.

Pentacon 200 f4 (try to get the preset version it is a bokeh monster)
Pentacon 135 f2.8 (same try to get the preset one )
Makinon 200 f3.3 not highly regarded lense but from personal experience i can tell you that the best pictures i have done were from the makinon lenses
Chinon 200 f3.5 an all the copies are very good
Sigma Minitel 200 f4 great sharpness insane depth of field sooooo hard to focus without an AF confirm