I Want a 75-200mm f/2.8 or f/4.0 "Pro" Zoom!

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by jnewell, Jan 4, 2013.

  1. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    We need some serious telephoto glass - zoom and prime, though I'd prefer starting with the zoom, personally. A longer companion to the 12-35/2.8 and 35-100/2.8 Panasonic zooms would be a great complement to the existing range. Throw in a 150/2.8 and 300/4.0 Oly prime and we'd be in lens heaven! :2thumbs:
     
  2. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Vassilios
    Well, Panasonic already announced the development of a 150mm f/2.8. Olympus may be interested in telephoto primes for that matter; perhaps a 300mm f/2.8 or f/4 is not out of the question.

    But a 75-200mm f/2.8 or f/4.0 is not that probable, IMHO. I see a port of the Four Thirds 50-200 being desirable for more people, to tell you the truth, but it would too be large.
     
  3. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    The 50-200mm would be nice, if translated to m4/3. We'll see. The vacuum at the tele end is, I hope, too obvious for Oly and Panny to ignore, and a random prime or two (like a 150/2.8) does not begin to plug that hole. :)
     
  4. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Vassilios
    I hear you. I was talking with a nature photographer friend of mine; his first "good" camera was a Panasonic superzoom and he has a soft spot for Panny. He currently shoots a Canon 7D. I've directed him to the bird photo-gallery in our forum, that some forumite made with the Panny 100-300 and his jaw dropped. For people like him, a rugged :43: body plus a fast 300mm prime would be godsent.

    That said, I guess success with these (bigger) lenses will have a lot to do with bigger/pro future :43: models. The GH3 already fits the bill and the future Oly will be larger too. People using larger primes and or zooms (FT zooms also) will most certainly mate them with said cameras. Still lighter and smaller than carrying around DSLR equivalents plus, let's not forget arguably better video potential.
     
  5. harry_s

    harry_s Mu-43 Regular

    180
    Jul 19, 2011
    Wiltshire, UK
    There are very, very few fast constant zoom lenses at those equivalent lengths, even on CaNikon. The nearest would be the Nikon 200-400 f4 ($7000!) which is incredibly niche even on a system full of pro users, Canon still haven't got their equivalent to market.

    The Panasonic 35-100 2.8 covers the most used FF telephoto zoom range, the 150mm 2.8 will cover the most common prime telephoto (300mm), the Panasonic 100-300 comfortably covers all the variable aperture 'consumer' zooms in one hit, so in my opinion they are fairly rapidly covering the most common, marketable/sellable telephoto options. Far from a vacuum.

    As a motorsport shooter they are quickly meeting my wants, between the 35-100, 75mm 1.8 and 100-300 we are incredibly spoilt on such a new system. I would struggle to think what would be useful next to be honest, I guess 100-200 f4 would be interesting, but I really can't see it happening.

    Personally I think a teleconvertor would be an interesting addition although I'm not sure of the technicalities of one of those on Micro 4/3.
     
  6. uci2ci

    uci2ci Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 22, 2012
    Los Angeles, CA
    Sam
    There are credible rumors going around that Oly is making a hybrid-AF 4/3 camera that can take take both m4/3 and 4/3rds lenses (via adapter). It will be bigger than the E-M5 but will not as big as say an E-5

    If these are true, and the AF on the this rumored body is fast with 4/3 lenses, I think those of us who are already invested in m4/3 but want even faster and longer telephotos than the 150 2.8 will have a nice compromise on our hands. I know we really want smaller native m4/3 versions of those super-duper Olympus teles , but just being able to use both m4/3 and 4/3 lenses on one system and not have to sacrifice on AF speed would be heavenly IMHO
     
  7. ~tc~

    ~tc~ Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 22, 2010
    Houston, TX
    This is what everyone said about the 12-35 and 35-100 options too, and the actual size using modern lens design came out OK.

    I would buy the 35-100, but just can't handle the loss of long end compared to my 45-200. Panny (because this lens will require stabilization) needs to come out with either a 2X TC or something like a fast 50-200 to get my money.
     
  8. marcl

    marcl Mu-43 Regular

    184
    Jul 8, 2012
    I wonder what the size of a 100-200mm f/4 with integrated 1.4x TC zoom (a la Canon) would be in m43? And the price? But it could be a very interesting lens for those who need one. It would probably provide great portability for serious borders and convert many from Canikon.
     
  9. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    My sports interest is crew (rowing), which is probably not quite as demanding as motorsports, and I wouldn't really complain about the 100-300mm, but I would like something a little faster, especially at the long end, and some improvement in IQ, and I'd be willing to trade cost, size and weight to get that. Whether there's a market for it...dunno. :)

    My experiences with very high quality TCs over the years has been so-so, so I'm not holding my breath for an m4/3 TC. :redface:
     
  10. kevwilfoto

    kevwilfoto Mu-43 Veteran

    294
    Sep 23, 2011
    Colorado
    I have to disagree on that point. If you compare the Olympus 35-100mm f/2.0 for Four Thirds to the Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 for µ43, the drop in size is quite dramatic. Olympus could make a port of the 50-200 SWD and have it closer in size to the Pany 35-100 than the Pany 100-300.
     
  11. Kiwi Paul

    Kiwi Paul Mu-43 Top Veteran

    729
    Aug 15, 2011
    Aberdeen Scotland
    As the focal length increases the size advantage of m4/3 decreases. I think a 100-200 f4.0 lens would still be fairly compact compared to other formats but a 300 f2.8 would not be significantly smaller, possibly a 300 f4.0 would be compact enough to make it worth while.

    Paul
     
  12. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Vassilios
    Perhaps so, and I'd be glad if this turns out to be the case eventually. :wink:
     
  13. kissel

    kissel Mu-43 Rookie

    11
    Sep 5, 2012
    Memphis, TN
    Kostya
    Owning a Nikkor AF-I 300/2.8, I rarely take it out, even at occasions I'd love to take it with me I usually don't. Guess why? :)
    I'd love to have a 150/2.8, or even 200/2.8 in m4/3 line-up. If it ever comes, I'd switch to it from monster nikkor without a second thought. Or - wait - may be 300/2.8 mega OIS? No bird would escape unpictured!
     
  14. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    M43 should really focus on bringing some exotic long lenses. Either that or just make a good adapter that works properly with standard 4/3rds!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Gillymaru

    Gillymaru Mu-43 Veteran

    The Olympus 1.4x TC for 4/3 glass is very very good, I use it with the 50-200 SWD and the results are outstanding.
    If Olympus can get 4/3 glass to work properly on micro 4/3 body's then we will have some affordable options.
     
  16. With_Eyes_Unclouded

    With_Eyes_Unclouded Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 17, 2012
    Vassilios
    :thumbup:

    The way I see it, when really expensive :43: lenses first came out (meaning, close or over 1000 dollars/euro), it was a good market experiment, before all else. User acceptance went on to prove that people invested in :43: are willing to pay for high quality glass. This was the point, I think, that :43: got rid of the "compact camera upgrade" persona.

    This means, IMHO, that both Olympus and Panasonic, and, who knows, even third parties, will be less shy in introducing high quality and expensive glass in the future, whether it's primes or zooms. Having a good adapter and/or camera capable of using fast FT glass will also help, even if it's only to buy time for further development.
     
  17. MAubrey

    MAubrey Photographer

    Jul 9, 2012
    Bellingham, WA
    Mike Aubrey
    The size advantage is gone before 100mm. The Olympus 75mm f/1.8 is already essentially identical to other comparable 75mm lenses in terms of size:

    Leica APO-Summicron-M 75mm f/2 ASPH
    Weight: 430g
    Length: 67mm

    Leica Summarit-M 75mm f/2.5
    Weight: 345g
    Length: 61mm

    Voigtlander 75mm f/1.8 Heliar Classic
    Weight: 427g
    Length: 74mm

    Voigtlander 75mm f/2.5 Color Heliar
    Weight: 230g
    Length: 65mm

    Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm f/1.8
    Weight: 305g
    Length: 69mm
     
  18. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, CA
    If you're going to compare lenses, compare the 75/1.8 to equivalent FF focal lengths. The 75/1.8 would be smallest 150mm equivalent lens. :rolleyes::wink:
     
  19. arentol

    arentol Mu-43 Veteran

    269
    Jun 29, 2012
    The "Size advantage" of m4/3rds, especially at longer focal lengths, is mostly based on the fact that you get the same AOV at half the focal length.

    So the proper comparison is more like this:

    Sigma 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM APO Macro Lens
    Weight: 1180g
    Length: 150mm
    Rough volume: 118cm^2

    Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm f/1.8
    Weight: 305g
    Length: 69mm
    Rough volume: 44cm^2

    About 1/4 the weight, less than half the length, and about 1/3rd the volume (and $200 less with better IQ too). That is a huge size advantage for m4/3rds.

    The value of this is most obvious with very long lenses. For instance, imagine going birding in the woods for a day and you have to choose between carrying a 5d3 and the Canon 600mm f/4 l IS II that weights almost 9lbs (and a correspondingly large and heavy monopod or tripod) and a E-M5 and a notional Olympus 300 f/4 that would weight under 2.5lbs (and therefore needs only a very lightweight monopod, if any).