EM1 with Oly 50-200mm SWD lens and MMF-3

I've recently picked up a 50-200 non-SWD (+ MMF3) for my E-M1. I'm extremely impressed. IQ is superb and AF is more than adequate - fast enough and accurate. I'm sure the SWD version will be even better. It's a lens with an excellent reputation and now owning one, I can see why.

 

Yes, I have the non SWD version. I tried with EC-20, gets softer and slower as expected but it is not bad. The lens is same size as new 40-150mm and has more reach. It was also much cheaper used at Keh... I think below are af shots w EC-20 on EM1:

E-M1    OLYMPUS 50-200mm Lens    400mm    f/7.0    1/400s    ISO 2500

E-M1    OLYMPUS 50-200mm Lens    400mm    f/7.1    1/400s    ISO 3200

E-M1    OLYMPUS 50-200mm Lens    400mm    f/7.0    1/400s    ISO 2000

 

I used to own the non-SWD 50-200mm and it was excellent, and it worked very well with the EC-14. I don't think that you could go wrong owning this lens. The E-M1 PDAF will work fine, it certainly does with all my other 4/3 lenses.

 

The difference in size and weight between the 40-150mm f/2.8 and 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 is really negligible with a slight edge to the new lens. Add the MC-14 to the new lens and the MMF3 to the 50-200 and the 50-200mm is slightly lighter and smaller but still negligible.

I've been using the 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 on the E-M1 and it is very worthy. Focus is quick (but not real quick) and very accurate. IQ is excellent. Highly recommended.

Here is what I wrote in thinking about getting the 40-150mm f/2.8 lens -

For personal use, even if I did not already have the 20-200mm SWD f/2.8-3.5, the 40-150mm and MC-14 cost would probably coax me to the 50-200mm and MMF3 adapter. Even at new cost that is a USD 470 difference! And there are quite a few very good used 50-200mm and MMF3 deals out there making them very sweet in comparison.

I may very well keep the 50-200mm for another year or so. The 40-150mm lens will have to produce significantly better IQ with the MC-14 than the 50-200mm is capable of (highly unlikely considering the IQ of the 50-200mm), or Olympus needs to offer an extremely good deal on the 40-150mm/TC before I would likely purchase one soon.

 

The 50-200 SWD, with or without 1.4x TC, works very well on the E-M1. It is slower than the native glass (I had the 100-300 panasonic to compare it with), but AF performance is at the very least acceptable. It's not an optimal lens for birds on flight or tracking fast moving objects, but that's more of a camera weak spot (relatively speaking) than an issue with the lens.

It is a fantastically sharp lens, and sifting through my Safari shots, I actually have very, very few out-of-focus shots in the whole lot, and most of those were camera shake (shutter speed too low) or misfocus because of a blade of grass/plant between me and my desired subject. I'll be posting a few sample images this weekend since I'm still processing the lot..

 

The internal zoom mech is driving me towards the 40-150. Fixed aperture of 2.8 in 40-150 is another plus as the aperture changes quite quickly off the 50mm mark in the SWD lens.
Great prices for the 50-200 currently!!!

Decisions!!!

 

There is no doubt that the 40-150mm will be a very fast focussing and very high quality lens, but if really fast focussing isn't an absolute imperative, the 50-200mm with it's extra reach and high quality is a very close contender and at a considerable price advantage. If I was looking for another lens, somewhat smaller lens with more reach than my 35-100mm f2 (in lieu of my 90-250mm), I'd seriously consider the 50-200mm once again.

 

That's my wildlife setup, and really love. Only down side, is the focus hunt a bit in some situation.

You myth find this thread usefull
https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=64939

Here is a sample handheld....
OM-D EM-1, 50-200mm SWD with EC-20, ISO 1250

View attachment 385436

 

There's one for sale on the Buy-Sell forums right now: https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=69156

 

I have the 50-200 SWD with the 1.4 TC and the 75-300 II as well. While the 50-200 is better as far a IQ, not as much as you might think. The 75-300 really impresses me as far as IQ goes.I think it focuses faster and more accurately than the 50-200 in bright light. Coming from Canon, I would rate the 75-300 IQ as good as or better than the Canon 100-400 and the 50-200 very close to the Canon 70-200 II with the exception of rather odd and non-pleasing bokeh. Having said that, I do intend to get the 40-150. If it's as good as the 12-40, it will be killer.

 

Too easy, send it over to me and i'll look after it.....

Seriously though you are now a fully fledged pro with the really big long lens and the giant hood

Actually serious now, I'm hunting one of these to buy at a reasonable price but still plan to buy the 40-150 2.8 at some point, hopefully can convince the mrs that it would be a good xmas present  

 

I have the 50-200 non- SWD and tried it with the E-M1. I found the A/F to be pretty good in most cases with the "hunting" issue appearing while shooting close-up under low light. However, the IQ is excellent. I have not tried it outside yet for wildlife, but inside under low light (artificial light), it produced some very nice photos. I posted these elsewhere, but here you go for example.... I shot these over a black piece of cloth on my dining room table one night... The lighting was very challenging, you can see the reflection of the chandelier on the watch....

 

Had one and sold it to MarkoPolo ^^^ (a few posts up). I sold mine before the latest firmware release. It was usable then for me, and the IQ was great, but I was finding that it was just too big of combo for that body. It really was meant for for the 4/3 body. I now have the hld-7, so that may change my mind on the balance of that combo.