A good, small, cheap super-telephoto lens?

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by MSnap, Apr 28, 2013.

  1. MSnap

    MSnap Mu-43 Regular

    31
    Apr 27, 2013
    I thought it might be fun to try something like this, but the m43 options are way more than I'd want to spend. I don't have much use for one, but I thought it might be fun to take out into a national park and photograph some wildlife close-up :)

    I don't think there'll be anything that fits the brief. Maybe one of those mirror lenses would be well suited?

    Thanks
     
  2. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    What about the 40-150 from Olympus? $150 now from the Olympus store and it's very light.
     
  3. Droogie

    Droogie Mu-43 Veteran

    297
    Feb 23, 2013
    Washington State
    Possibly a legacy lens?
     
  4. fuSi0n

    fuSi0n Mu-43 Regular

    37
    Jan 11, 2013
    Bavaria, Germany
    Small and cheap does not fit to the term super-telephoto. Either you go for an heavy and bulky legacy lense or invest some more bugs in one of the two superteles available from Pana (100-300) or Oly (75-300).
     
  5. MSnap

    MSnap Mu-43 Regular

    31
    Apr 27, 2013
    I am considering that lens, but a chap I spoke to recently (about that lens) said he uses extremely cheap 3rd party lenses for super-telephoto. As there aren't any native ones, I think he must have meant legacy lenses.

    Lol, yes that's why I posted in the Adapted Lenses forum ;-)
     
  6. MajorMagee

    MajorMagee Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 24, 2011
    Dayton, OH
    I picked up an OM mount Vivitar 75-300mm f/5.6 that is not too large (58mm filter mount) for $10. It really does a fairly nice job.
     
  7. madogvelkor

    madogvelkor Mu-43 Top Veteran

    937
    Feb 22, 2013
    Connecticut
    Yeah, a legacy manual focus lens with an adapter is the way to go for cheap telephoto. You can also try a mirror lens, which are usually 500+ and can be had used for under $50. Though I haven't found one I like yet.
     
  8. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    To remain within the "small and cheap" designation you generally two choices: a slow zoom or a slightly faster prime (only in the range of a stop faster, otherwise you start getting comparatively larger in size). If you're going for slow zoom then you can buy native. You will have AF and sharp performance (not high-grade lens sharp, but digital-spec sharp), but will have a particularly small aperture and will probably pay more for it. If you buy a legacy prime you will have no AF but your performance could be just as good or better with the right lens, build quality will probably be great, aperture can be faster, and you'll probably pay less for it. Keep in mind that what lets you have a faster aperture in the same size lens is the choice of prime over zoom, not the choice of legacy over native. It just so happens that we don't yet have native super-tele primes, and as such this advantage is only seen in legacy glass. When we get longer native primes, expect them to be smaller and sharper than legacy alternatives, and just as fast... though likely not cheap.

    So all that said... probably your biggest question should be, do you need AF or not? Without the presence of high-grade super-teles yet to the native lineup, the legacy options (assuming you know how to pick them) are pretty much just as good, but cheaper and faster. So the biggest reason to stick with native should be AF.
     
  9. lawa222

    lawa222 Mu-43 Rookie

    16
    Mar 3, 2013
    No matter what, a super telephoto is not going to be small relative to other lenses, especially if you're looking to shoot animals in the wild where you need lots of range (with the exception of mirror lenses). As far as cheap, you can find the Olympus 4/3rds 70-300/4-5.6 for about $200. The adapter costs about $50-100 and it'll still have autofocus.

    The downside of doing this is that it'll be pretty big compared to all but a pro, fast super-telephoto. My personal opinion is that size doesn't really matter that much, though, because all super tele's are going to be big enough to be a hassle.
     
  10. Mellow

    Mellow Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 27, 2010
    Florida or Idaho
    Tom
    In line with what others have said, "small and light" won't work for legacy telephoto. Unless you mean a mirror lens.

    300mm mirror lenses can be had for less than $100 these days, but not often . . . prices have crept up in the last year. They're small and light, but have several compromises that make them difficult to work with: (a) contrast is low; (b) they are never very fast; and (c) they're wicked difficult to focus.

    IMO the best way to go is with a x-150/175/200mm native lens, then crop out the part you want. The IQ won't be great, but these lenses will be relatively cheap, as compact as you're going to get (much morfeso than legacy lenses), and will AF which is really important with lenses this long.
     
  11. Parallelcircuit

    Parallelcircuit New to Mu-43

    9
    Sep 18, 2012
    Portland, OR
    I've got an old Canon FD 70-210mm F/4, it's not SUPER light, but they can be had very cheaply for the quality of the lens. We're talking <$60 for lens and adapter shipped to you. That's amazing!

    Just, like I said, not really light weight; and I'm not sure if 210mm was long enough for you.
     
  12. chipbutty

    chipbutty Mu-43 Veteran

    I use one of these. Tokina 80-200mm f4.5. Paid £5 for it! It's nice if you have the patience to manual focus it.

    [​IMG]
     
  13. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    How about a SMC Takumar 200mm f5.6? Its cheap and smaller than most legacy lenses mentioned. There is also a Tele-takumar f5.6 preset that is even smaller but it doesnt have the SMC coatings. I have both in my collection and can post photos of their size if you wish.

    The m42 to m43 adapter is cheap too via ebay sellers.
     
  14. Cruzan80

    Cruzan80 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 23, 2012
    Denver, Co
    Sean Rastsmith
    I have a JCPenny special that is the same look as the Tokina above, but is 3.9. Most 70/80-200/300 can be found as constant apertures in the f4-5.6 range, depending on exactly which one you want. Most of them also have the benefit of running $50USD and under.
     
  15. slothead

    slothead Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 14, 2012
    Frederick, MD
    Those terms (good, small, cheap) are all relative and I think the 100-300 fits all those categories.
     
  16. MSnap

    MSnap Mu-43 Regular

    31
    Apr 27, 2013
    Hi, some pictures would be great thanks. These look like solid choices. I'm not familiar with SMC coatings but I will look it up :)
     
  17. MSnap

    MSnap Mu-43 Regular

    31
    Apr 27, 2013
    F3.9 would be a significant upgrade. Do you have more details of the lens so I can find it on eBay?

    Thanks
     
  18. Narnian

    Narnian Nobody in particular ...

    Aug 6, 2010
    Midlothian, VA
    Richard Elliott
  19. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    ^^ yup.. that's the same as mine.

    I will post a photo of the other when I get home from work. You can see with the attached adapter for M43, the lens itself is fairly compact (skinny)



    Later Takumars (Pentax) lenses use a more complex lens coating for improved performance.... they refer to this coating as SuperMultiCoated.