1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

What are you using for good reach?

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by Gary Ramey, Feb 13, 2013.

  1. Gary Ramey

    Gary Ramey Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 27, 2012
    Aurora Colorado
    I'm struggling right now. I've got the legacy 50-200mm 43 lens that is great but bulky as can be. I'm hesitant to jump on the 75-300 u43 lens because of the cost and the fact it is fairly slow. Anyone got any recommendations that aren't going to make me sell a kidney on the black market. I'd even like suggestions on adapted, manual focus lenses. Thanks,
  2. Jonathan F/2

    Jonathan F/2 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 10, 2011
    Los Angeles, USA
    I'd look into getting a 135mm 2.8 MF lens that's sharp and can be had for a decent price.
  3. Biro

    Biro Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    May 8, 2011
    Jersey Shore
    I've got the Panasonic Lumix 100-300 f/4.0-5.6. It works well even handheld on one of Panny's G-series bodies and it's faster than the Oly 70-300 at the long end as well. The Lumix's image stabilization works quite well.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. macboy001

    macboy001 Mu-43 Regular

    Jun 25, 2010
    Wairarapa, New Zealand
    I sold my 50-200 with my 43 collection when I bought my E-M5, I've bought the Panasonic 45-200 and the reach is matched but the quality difference is significant, what swayed me was the AF performance but I really miss the 50-200 quality.
  5. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    I've got the M. Zuiko 14-150 and the Lumix 45-200. 14-150 has less reach but is a much better lens - what I don't like about the 45-200 is the Chromatic Aberration....:redface:

    It's a toss-up depending on conditions....Thus, I'm saving up for the new M. Zuiko 75-300
  6. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Dec 2, 2012
    I'm looking at the 50-200 right now. Images from it look great. I'm thinking a monopod would be a must with it. How do you shoot with it? Using the AF or maybe back button focusing and dialing it in w/MF. Do you have the old one or SWD? If you're thinking of selling I'm thinking of buying...
  7. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    Yes, this is a spectacular lens with amazing quality. It remains one of my favorite workhorses in the studio.

    Personally, I use mine hand-held 99% of the time. Of course, I also did this with this lens on my DSLRs for many years before going to Micro Four-Thirds. A lens that size is nothing for me to handle... The Zuiko 90-250mm f/2.8 on the other hand - now that's a beast. When hand-holding this lens, it's best to leave the tripod collar on, turned to the side. This puts it in a place where it will "interfere" with your hand whether you're holding it in landscape or portrait orientation. I put "interfere" in quotes because it's actually supporting the lens against your hand, which frees your fingers to operate the zoom and focus rings. Without this support, all the weight will end up on your fingers and make turning the rings very difficult, and as I'm sure you realize manual focus is pretty important when using this lens on m4/3 bodies. When you do AF though, you are correct that you should be using back-button AF. Personally, I just go with MF all the time... but that's my natural method anyways and I'm more comfortable and proficient with it than most.

    I use the SWD version, myself. I don't think you'll find much difference between either when auto-focusing on m4/3, but I like that the SWD lens is mechanically linked for manual focusing.

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
  8. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    If you want the same total reach, I would go for a legacy 200mm f/4. The OM Zuiko version is very good. That format is very light and easy to handle, and is only a half stop slower than your 50-200mm at 200mm.

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    Or, for a little shorter reach at a stop faster, try one of the 135mm f/2.8 lenses. They can be super compact, and very easy to toss around on a smallest of bodies. I use the Zeiss Sonnar 135mm f/2.8. The Pentacon 135mm f/2.8 Pre-set with 15 aperture blades (aka the "Bokeh Monster") is also very well sought-after. The Konica Hexanon is another I would highly trust.

    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    Plus, with a 135mm f/2.8 you can also use a 1.4x teleconverter to make it a 200mm f/4. That gives you two lenses in one. I don't use my Zuiko 200mm f/4 anymore for this very reason. The Zeiss 135mm/2.8 with Zuiko EC-14 teleconverter packs to the same size as a group, and offers me two lenses in one.

    Since you're going prime now, you can use the small size to your advantage and go even faster. If you get a faster zoom lens (ie, like the 90-250mm for instance), the jump in size is quite daunting. However, you can still keep reasonable size while getting even faster still in primes. For instance, you could pick up a legacy 135mm f/2 or 150mm f/2. Heli-mech was just selling a Canon FD 135mm f/2 on this forum a couple days back, in fact. Being primes, these are still a manageable size.

    Since you obviously have a 4/3 adapter already, you would do well to adapt all your SLR glass to 4/3 rather than m4/3. This will allow you to use 4/3 accessories such as the fabulous Zuiko Digital teleconverters... on all your SLR glass. Pretty much the only legacy glass you can't adapt to 4/3 (the shortest of SLR mounts) are the rangefinder, cine, and Pen F lenses. Those have to be adapted straight to m4/3. You also need to adapt Konica AR lenses to m4/3 if you don't want to remove the tab off the lens itself, and if you adapt Minolta MD/MC to m4/3 that will avoid the need to use a cumbersome hex-key adapter since the 4/3 adapter is so slim it can't use the regular bayonet fittings. Those two mounts can still be adapted to 4/3 but are easier to adapt to m4/3.
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Gary Ramey

    Gary Ramey Mu-43 Veteran

    Dec 27, 2012
    Aurora Colorado
    Ned...great info...thanks so much.
    Juangrande - Well...I like it too much to part with it..haha. I was just looking for something on those 5 mile walks that's a little easier to manage. I usually take my light monopod with it because I can rest it on the ground on occasion. When shooting events indoors, its always handheld.
  10. WT21

    WT21 Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Feb 19, 2010
    P100-300 is what I use.
  11. usayit

    usayit Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    100-300mm often with a Sunpak 422D + TR-PAK w/ NiCAD RC batteries + Better beamer.

    Once in a while a Takumar 500mm on a heavy tripod w/ gimbal head.
  12. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    I've seen some great prices on the 100-300mm here on the forum recently. It really is a nice lens to use hand held. Definitely worth considering.
  13. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter Subscribing Member

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    I have a legacy Pentax M 200 f4 that it nice and sharp. I often shoot hand held so I don't try to get much longer.
  14. robertro

    robertro Mu-43 Veteran

    Apr 22, 2010
    For speed I use Minolta Rokkor 135 f2.8 or Canon FD 200 f2.8 manual focus lenses.

    For flexibility, I use a Panasonic 45-175 or 100-300.

    I agree with poster above, the 100-300 is selling for bargain prices recently. I think of it as a 100 f4 with some emergency zooming capabilities!
  15. VasManI

    VasManI Mu-43 Regular

    Jan 21, 2011
    Canon SX50.

    Sorry, I had to post it. It's the camera that pushed me over the edge and made me start selling off my m43 gear.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.