1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

Thinking about picking up a 150-500 for dslr. Should I go m43 super Tele instead?

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by gdourado, Jun 10, 2012.

  1. gdourado

    gdourado Mu-43 Regular

    117
    Feb 23, 2012
    Lisbon - Portugal
    Hello.
    How are you?

    So... Lately I am kind of dreaming about picking up a Sigma 150-500 OS HSM.

    I've been getting more and more interested in getting into wild life photography and a bit of plane spoting...

    I've been browsing these kind of pictures in flickr and other forums and it looks really fun.

    So, the Sigma costs 750 euros... And I have a old and trusty 350d here to use it with...

    I am really thinking about it... And the sigma on the crop body is almost a 750mm... Now that is serious telephoto...

    On the other hand, I feel I should same some money and weight of the 2kg Sigma and go with either a Panasonic 100-300 for 450 euros or an olympus 75-300 for 550 euros...
    And just keep it all m43...

    Now I know this is a m43 forum, but I also know some of you use more than knew system...

    So, given what I said, what are your thoughs?

    Thanks.
    Cheers

    Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
     
  2. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    Nikon 1 system offers a 2.7 crop factor but the Sigma 150-500 doesn't work on it. The FT1 adapter gives you auto-focus (center point only) for any AF Nikon lens. (I know a guy who used the 300mm f/2.8 & the Nikon TC-20E III and turned is V1 into a 1620mm equivalent!)

    The downside is that you will have manually focus non-Nikon lenses.

    However, if you keep it all Micro Four Thirds, you will save money for other goodies (like the Panasonic 35-100 ƒ2.8) :smile:
     
  3. Biro

    Biro Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 8, 2011
    Jersey Shore
    Steve
    All I can tell you is that I went for the Panasonic 100-300 and have never regretted the decision. Here's the very first shot I took with the lens. It was mounted on a Panasonic G1 and the image was taken handheld at 300mm. You may be able to make the jpg larger by clicking or tapping on it.

    https://www.mu-43.com/attachments/f38/4255d1305603143-panasonic-100-300-performance-p1010240a.jpg

    By the way, I also have a Pentax DSLR kit and had been considering a Sigma 150-500. The Sigma is a fine lens but it's heavy and costs $1000 new. The Panasonic 100-300 was half the money and much easier to carry around.
     
  4. gdourado

    gdourado Mu-43 Regular

    117
    Feb 23, 2012
    Lisbon - Portugal
    Hello.

    Thank you for your reply.
    The 100-300 is a good option in my book, but I guess I am scared of it to be to slow to focus, especially on my E-PL2. Are my concerns valid?
    Another option I thought about was picking up a Tamron 70-300 VC USD for my 350d. The 300 would be equivalent to 430mm. Might not be enough for wild life, but could start me there, as well as on plane spotting. The tamron cost 300 euros.

    What's your input?

    Cheers

    Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
     
  5. Crdome

    Crdome Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 11, 2011
    West Central Indiana
    Chrome
    CROP FACTOR: Gross misunderstanding of principle.

    No matter what format lens you use on native or adaptive equipment the len's FOCAL LENGTH will always remain the same. Putting any lens onto a m4/3 WILL NOT double it focal length. A 100mm lens, remains a 100mm lens. The 2x crop factor refers to the portion of the projected image circle that strikes the sensor, half. Thus the Angle of View is narrowed by half. The portion of the circle 100mm has the same angle of view on m4/3 a 200 mm will have on a 35mm camera. The magnification level remains the same as a 100mm len on a 35mm lens. You do not see twice as far!

    If you want to see twice as far, get a 2x telephoto converter adapter. Be aware that some are front mounts and must be the same diameter as the camera's filter ring. However, many fit behind the lens with the male and female mounts of the camera/lens system. It has an aperture ring which will be used rather than the lens' aperture ring.

    If you do this on a m4/3 get an m4/3 lens with image stabilization. Long lenses will probably will require a tripod.

     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Gordon
    ?????

    Where did he mention seeing twice as far? Which is incorrect any way. All lenses see the same distance from the same position. Point a camera at the moon and all lenses will see it. The longer lens gives more magnification, that is all. As does adding a tele-converter. That affects the angle of view, just like using a smaller sensor does. But you can still only see the same distance.

    The OP used the term crop factor to compare the end result produced by two different sensor sizes. I though he was quite articulate in describing his needs.

    As for the original question, I've owned both. If I did it again I'd personally choose the Panasonic or Oly. Optically they're close. But with the difference in price you could almost add a GH2 or G3 to the mix, although the focusing at distance with the EPL2 is just fine. Of course the ratio is different so if you're looking for 3:2 then you'll need an APSC camera or a GH2.

    Gordon
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. gdourado

    gdourado Mu-43 Regular

    117
    Feb 23, 2012
    Lisbon - Portugal
    Hello,

    Thanks for the reply.
    When you mean you've owned both, do you mean a DSLR setup and a m43 setup for wildlife and general long tele work?

    Do you prefer the m43 setup?
    Yes, for the price of the sigma 150-500, i could buy a G3 and a pany 100-300.
    Does the G3 autofocus noticeable faster than the E-PL2?

    Cheers!
     
  8. flash

    flash Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Apr 29, 2010
    1 hour from Sydney Australia.
    Gordon
    I used the 50-500 with a Canon 50D, so similar in focal length to what you describe. I used the 100-300 with a GH2, G2 and EP2.

    With the GH2 and G2, the 100-300 focused just as fast as the 50-500 on the 50D, in fact maybe a bit faster, so the G3 would be at least as good. The sharpness was about the same. Personally I thought the 50D had more dynamic range, but that's the camera, not the lens. I have limited experience with the G3 but I have used it a bit and I prefer the files from it to the GH2. The OMD with a 300mm would be a killer combo.

    The Bigma is a fine lens, but it's usability can't compare to the m4/3 lenses. It is huge. It is heavy and it is cumbersome. The filters are ridiculous sizees. If you're working off a tripod then the heavier lens is a good thing. If you're hiking with it, not so much. I loved my Bigma but I don't miss it now it's gone. The usability of the mirrorless cameras is too good.

    I just feel that a G3/100-300 combo is going to out perform a 350d with the Sigma in every way. If you had a 7D or a D7000 that decision would be more difficult. As it stands now, if I were doing an extended trip or serious wildlife work a G3 or OMD with a 100-300 would be at the top of my list and an easy winner over a 350D and Sigma combo.

    Just keep in mind, that although it's relatively small it's still a huge magnification, so even with IS, you'll need good technique to get the best out of it.

    Gordon
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. GaryAyala

    GaryAyala Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    SoCal
    I have the Sigma 50-500 (aka Bigma) which I've used with my dSLRs. I think the resolution between the 150-500 and 50-500 are pretty close. I found the 50-500 to be barely acceptable in the sharpness category. I also own the Pany 100-300, I've only used it once, but I think it is a sharper lens. Right now you're sorta in at the fork in the road ... now is as good a time as any to choose between mirror-less or dSLR.

    OM-D w/Pany 100-300:

    P6050046-L.

    P6050040.

    P6050003.

    1DsMKII w/Bigma:

    63273734_aqwBG-O-2.

    59740875_Yhjh4-O-4.

    63273898_Wm5St-O-1.

    Gary
     
  10. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Bob
    I have both the 100-300 and an E-PL2 - it focuses fast and produces beautiful photos, great contrast and bright colors. I recently shot a disc golf tournament with this combo and got some great shots. The lens is rather large and heavy, but I imagine the Sigma is even larger.
     
  11. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    836
    Feb 29, 2012
    I have the older Sigma 50-500 with a variety of Canon DSLR's and the Panny 100-300 on a GH2.

    There's no perfect solution here, a long tele works best on a camera with a EVF and the 100-300 doesn't have a tripod mount either, so it's going to be a bit awkward for wildlife on the EPL2 unless you get the VF.

    The 350D isn't all that fast in the AF dept, but you'll at least be able to track a subject in AI-Servo. A EF400/5.6 would be a better solution, very fast on AF, and superb IQ. My two 50-500's have been pretty good to me, but they are heavy and sample variance has been an issue with these lenses.
     
  12. Crdome

    Crdome Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 11, 2011
    West Central Indiana
    Chrome
    Wow Gary! I will have to rethink what can be done with telephotos.
     
  13. GaryAyala

    GaryAyala Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    SoCal
    Thanks Chrome:

    I like going long and tight:

    OM-D w/Pany 100-300
    GA10020.

    G
     
  14. GRID

    GRID Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 22, 2011
    I use a FD canon 300mm on my GH1, and at F2.8 it works great even handheld in good light.
    But i really need the viewfinder to get the manual focus right.

    So i think you should think about the F-value also for wildlifephoto, since you will not have perfect light all the time.

    Tarangire_18__.
    Lake_Manyara_08__.

    More safari-images with the 300mm on my site.
     
  15. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    The 150-500 is a beast of a lens - large, heavy, ungainly and I was less than impressed with focus speed and optical quality at 500mm in my admittedly brief tests. I ended up getting the Canon 100-400, which is a great lens, smaller and I prefer the handling. But it's still nowhere near the sharpest in the stable, and it's still big and heavy.

    I would get the 100-300 - you will get more pixels on your subject (the whole focal length equivalence thing is somewhat academic - yes, perspective and compression are different than on a true 600mm lens, but you're still getting more pixels on your subject with the 100-300 on a 12mpix cam than with the 350D)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. gdourado

    gdourado Mu-43 Regular

    117
    Feb 23, 2012
    Lisbon - Portugal
    Hello,

    Thank you all for the replies!
    I've been browsing flickr and some other forums and blogs, and I am almost set for the 100-300 panasonic.
    It's easy to get on the gear hype bandwagon again... And think about buying this and that and in the future buy that and upgrade that...
    But in the end of the day, it is all about the basics... It is all about taking pictures. About picking up the camera and go out there to take pictures and have fun!
    So, I must not forget why I sold my 5D in the first place...
    It doesn't matter how good the camera or lenses are if they stay on the shelf... :)

    Cheers!