Pany 45-200mm, long end suspect.

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Dave in Wales, May 31, 2012.

  1. Dave in Wales

    Dave in Wales Mu-43 All-Pro

    Nov 5, 2011
    West Wales
    I've heard it said that the long end of the 45-200 mm is a bit iffy.

    Not my experience......

    GH2 + 45-200mm

    Focal length 200mm hand held.
    1/400 @ f11
    ISO 160

    Good enough for me.
    P1010320-RS by Dave in Wales, on Flickr
    • Like Like x 3
  2. Muntjack

    Muntjack Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 26, 2010
    My experience with this lens has been generally positive. However, you do need care I think, in low light or low contrast subjects in order to get the focus right on.

  3. dre_tech

    dre_tech Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 31, 2012
    Is this a 100% crop? I saw there's no original size on flickr. It looks reasonably sharp.

    Are these OOC JPEGs? They look similar to my GX1 JPEGs which have a little too much NR washing out some details. OR maybe the left flower details are just out of focus.
  4. Muntjack

    Muntjack Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 26, 2010
    I'd be more impressed with a real sharp pic of a rabbit on your lawn at 200mm from say 30 feet. I always have to MF to get a good shot in those shots with little contrast.

  5. MartinOcando

    MartinOcando Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 3, 2012
    200mm wide open. Sorry for the harsh flash, but it was the only way to get a decent shutter speed. It was very late afternoon, almost dark.

  6. tflovik

    tflovik Mu-43 Regular

    May 19, 2012
    Finnsnes, Norway
    Real Name:
    Tom Eirik
    This picture was taken inside a church with a Panasonic GH-2 and the 45-200mm.
    It was taken handheld, with ISO 2500 at 200mm.
    I have not used any noise removing. P1010269.
  7. MartinOcando

    MartinOcando Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 3, 2012
    Hmm, quite soft. You should have cranked the ISO up, and do the cleaning afterwards. 1/30th at 400mm is too much to ask to OIS.
  8. Redridge

    Redridge Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 17, 2012
    this lens is a bargain at $200... def a good lense on a nice sunny walkabout.
  9. inkista

    inkista Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 13, 2012
    San Diego, CA
    You were at 1/30s. And 200mm. And you're wide open at f/5.6.

    Without stabilization, the general rule of thumb to avoid camera shake blur from handholding is that your shutter speed needs to be 1/focal_length.

    A lot of folks will also throw in the crop factor. AND this assumes good handholding technique. So, if, say, the OIS is good for two stops, then you should be at 1/100s at least.

    I hate to say it, but I think it's a combination of lack of knowledge about handholding technique and minimum shutter speeds with telephoto lenses (and also possibly enforced use of the LCD for composition) that's causing most of the "issues" with the 45-200. If I stick to 1/focal_length or faster, mine's just fine.

    G3. 45-200. @158mm iso 800, f/8, 1/320s.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. sLorenzi

    sLorenzi Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 15, 2010
    Real Name:
    To me it's sharp enough.

    <a href="" title="Turdus amaurochalinus por sLorenzi, no Flickr"> 6360793173_2c4412daeb_b. "1024" height="771" alt="Turdus amaurochalinus"></a>
    f/5.6, 200 mm, and ISO 160

    <a href="" title="Moth's Dreams por sLorenzi, no Flickr"> 6352011652_62096b7af6_b. "780" height="1024" alt="Moth's Dreams"></a>
    f5.6, 200mm and ISO 200
  11. pjohngren

    pjohngren Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Oct 15, 2010
    I agree - there is nothing wrong with the long end or any part of the 45 - 200. This shot was taken at 180mm at f 5.6 and made a great 16 X 20 print which is hanging in a local bank. I love this lens and have had no problems with its ability to focus.