Telephoto Lens Sell Off

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by jmrf, Mar 12, 2013.

  1. jmrf

    jmrf New to Mu-43

    Feb 2, 2013
    This is really dumb but I'm hopping some other's experience may help me make up my mind. I have purchased three telephoto zoom so far and none of them is a clear winner. I will use one for a trip this summer and I need to sell off the other two. So the question begs, which to keep. I use an Olympus body so I don't really care about lens stabilization. These are the lenses in question:

    1) Panasonic 45-200mm, Pro: Small, quiet, fast focus. Con: Slow, unremarkable IQ.

    2) Olympus 70-300mm, Pro: Most reach, cheep, ok IQ. Con: Slow, noisy, slow focus, hard to remove hood because of rotating inner barrel, unusable on a tripod.

    3) Olympus 50-200 NON-SWD, Pro: Tripod collar, Awesome IQ (so I have been told), beautifully built, FAST! Cons: Most expensive, slow to focus, big and heavy, noisy.

    So like I said I own all of these. I include the cost in the above analysis because I have sell for financial reasons. Obviously if I sell an expensive lens It will help me more financially. I also realize that lenses are always a trade off, and that's what I need your experience with. I need to guess now what will make me the happiest this summer. I am also open to to selling all of them and getting something else but from what I can tell there isn't anything better out there. I will be shooting mainly coastal scenes and wildlife. What do you guys think?
  2. madogvelkor

    madogvelkor Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 22, 2013
    I haven't used the Olympus lenses, but I agree about the Panasonic 45-200. I ended up selling it and getting the Panasonic 45-150, which is a much better lens. It's a tiny lens too -- much smaller than the 45-200, and not much bigger than the kit 14-42. Though I do miss the extra 50mm of zoom.

  3. GFFPhoto

    GFFPhoto Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 24, 2013
    45-200 is the only one I have used, and its average at best. I rarely shoot really long focal lengths, so at $99 new it was worth buying. You on the other hand seem very fond of long zooms. If you like long zooms enough to have 3 of them, You will likely be happiest keeping the one withe best image quality and selling the other 2, regardless of price.

    Edit: Just saw this. Oly has a new long zoom. Maybe wait for reviews
  4. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    I wouldn't really sell any of them off as they all fill a different niche, unless you want to replace your native m4/3 lens with one of the other options like the Lumix 100-300mm or m.Zuiko 75-300mm (in which case you could probably sell off the Zuiko Digital 70-300mm as well).

    A couple of notes about your 4/3 lenses though... With the 70-300mm, always hold the barrel of the lens when you remove the hood. Zoom out as much as you need to for a good grip prior to hood removal. Yes, it is possible to strip the focus gears in the lens if you remove the hood improperly too many times, but it should become second nature in short time to give yourself some grip and hold the barrel as you remove that hood.

    As for the 50-200mm, I suggest practicing your manual focus skills using a high-quality EVF (ie, like the VF-2, VF-3, LVF-2, E-M5, GH3, GH2, G5, G3, etc. but not the LVF-1). With a bit of practice you should be able to focus faster in MF than in AF, and more reliably to boot. The SWD lens you have is mechanically coupled, which is nice.
  5. thelaxong

    thelaxong Mu-43 user

    Jan 13, 2011
    Melbourne - Australia
    I have owned and used the following lenses:

    Pana 45-200mm, Oly 50-200mm swd with mmf3 adapter and Pana 100-300mm. For me, the Pana 45-200mm is too soft, the Oly 50-200mm swd is heavy and slow auto focus with the adapter and do not provide many advantages over the Pana 100-300mm on m.43 body. I ended up selling these two and keep the Pana 100-300mm which I am really happy with.

    You probably get the most money for the Oly 50-200mm albeit it is quite slow selling. With all the discounts for the Pana 45-200mm (99$), you will find it hard to offload it.
  6. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 2, 2012
    The 50-200 SWD is a much better lens than m4/3 can offer in long zooms. I got a 75 1.8 yesterday and compared shots @ 75mm f5.6. Shot detailed items @ 20' and +1 mile. As far as I can tell, it matches up evenly in sharpness and slightly better in contrast and color. You don't notice any significant drop in the lens as you get longer or faster. It's every bit equal to L 70-200 2.8, just with antiquated camera bodies. Having said that, the AF is worthless on m4/3, so, if you're looking for only the long end, look into a quality legacy telephoto prime. I've tried 2 of your lenses, both 4/3's. I sent back the 70-300, even though by reviews I've read, optically it's on a par with the m4/3 lenses and cost me $229 refurbished. It even focuses half way decent, but soft from 250-300. I just got a nikon 180 2.8 ED AI-s. I'm selling the 50-200 and buying a 1.4 teleconverter for the 180. When I want telephoto, I'll be out specifically for that, so size isn't as important. Now if Oly could match there wonderful pair of 12-60 ( or even 14-54 ) and 50-200 in m4/3, many folks would be happy! I suppose they'd be large, but your not putting the EM5 or GH3 with the panny zooms in your coat pocket anyway.