Which inexpensive Legacy tele 200mm+ (OM fit)

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by ashatron, May 17, 2010.

  1. ashatron

    ashatron Mu-43 Rookie

    20
    May 16, 2010
    G'day chaps!
    im after a 200mm or longer with OM fit, the more compact the better, i dont want those crazy heavy ones! :p

    any suggestions?

    i have a 135mm OM f3.5, but after a longer reach.

    Options are (at this moment) -

    a 2x teleconverter to get 270mm.
    examples -
    Telephoto beauty on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
    Roof on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

    The Tokina 70-210 3.5
    examples -
    Flickr Photo Download: Samurai X sheep
    Flickr Photo Download: Resting Duck
    Flickr Photo Download: Swan at Mote Park, Maidstone
    Flickr Photo Download: scruffy bird

    The Tamron 80-210 3.8
    examples -
    Flickr Photo Download: Swan
    Flickr Photo Download: Pioneer Butterfly
    Flickr Photo Download: Tamron 80-210/f3.8-4.0
    Flickr Photo Download: Tiger @ Auckland Zoo
    IMGP6486w on Flickr - Photo Sharing!
    Flickr Photo Download: a little bit more to the right .
    Flickr Photo Download: bf1

    They all cost the same price! so im not sure.

    What do you think?
    recommendations welcome.

    Thanks :)
     
  2. Brian S

    Brian S Mu-43 Top Veteran Charter Member

    714
    Apr 11, 2009
    For a cheap lens- I would go for a Vivitar 200mm F3.5. Get a fixed focal length to save weight, and you have a 135 already.
     
  3. Hi all,

    Came across this post after going thru my Flickr stats, thought I'd contribute.

    My pic linked is Flickr Photo Download: Swan at Mote Park, Maidstone.

    The Tokina lens used for that photo is the Tokina SZ-X210 or (Tokina MF 70-210mm f/4-5.6 SD) as the Tokina Flickr group would have it tagged. It's an old manual focus Nikon AI fit zoom lens, which I picked up to £25 in a charity shop in Horsham (along with the Tokina 28-70 at the same time for the same price, but I don't use that much).

    f4-5.6 may seem pretty slow for some, but you can achieve some nice DoF on the long end of the lens.

    It can feel a little cold and clinical, especially compared to my old Nikon and Vivitar lenses, but can still give some nice images. I use this lens a LOT, in fact my Nikon D80 probably has this lens attached most of the time and I'm probably going to use it with my Canon 7D when I go to Vegas in a couple of weeks.

    For 25 quid, a great find!

    My other photos from this lens.

    Hope this helps.

    Matt
     
  4. sebastel

    sebastel Mu-43 Regular Charter Member

    85
    Jan 18, 2010
    not your business
    try to find the 200mm f/5 olympus OM. should be the most compact 200mm that you can find.

    Olympus 200mm lenses - Part II

    whether it can be inexpensive? i don't know ...
     
  5. OzRay

    OzRay Mu-43 Legend Charter Member

    Jan 29, 2010
    South Gippsland, Australia
    Real Name:
    Ray, not Oz
  6. sinophilia

    sinophilia Mu-43 Regular Charter Member

    135
    Jan 22, 2010
    Verona, Italy
    For maximum reach an minimum bulk, I chose a Tokina 500mm mirror lens (mine has a Canon FD mount, but there are several different mounts - and other brands too, like Tamron, Nikon, Sigma etc.). It weighs 500 grams and is very usable hand-held - of course the quality is not comparable to refractive lenses. As soon as I receive my EVF I'm sure I will be able to use it more effectively. Oh well, it's f8...
     
  7. arpoador

    arpoador Mu-43 Regular Charter Member

    Since you specifically asked for more compact, I would echo Sebastel.

    I have both the OM 200 f/4 and the OM 200 f/5, and I prefer the f/5. It's really small and light, with a 49mm filter thread (the f/5 has 55m), very easy to handle on the E-P2, and has a really nice feel to the focusing and aperture rings. I tend to shoot both of them at around f/8, and at least my copy of the f/5 is cleaner.
     
  8. ashatron

    ashatron Mu-43 Rookie

    20
    May 16, 2010
    Ha thats your pic! its good one! Thanks a lot for the help matt.

    Yeah thats the problem. The OM zuikos are just great quality though, maybe i should up my budget...

    Yeh but the adapters cost around £30 and that money could be put toward the lens. There is a world of aweosme lenses out there though...
    Thanks dude

    yeah im thinking this may be the case great quality too.
     
  9. ashatron

    ashatron Mu-43 Rookie

    20
    May 16, 2010
    As im using this on my GF1 - with no IS and manual focus with no EVF, what would you lot say is the focal limit i can go to before it gets very hard to manual focus. I would like to be able to use the lens both hand held and tripod mounted.

    After seeing this -
    http://www.nikonusa.com/Assets/Lens-Finder/Images/focal_pop.jpg
    im worried the difference between 135mm and 200mm isnt very much, and if i go for a cheap 200mm i might as well crop an image form the sharper 135mm.

    maybe a 2x tele converter to get 270mm is the best option...any recommendations on a 2x tele? the Tamron looks great thanks to sinophilia.

    However the versatility of a 70-210/80-210 lens would be very convenient.

    hello again! :D

    Ive seen those about, they look crazy!, but do get you very close. ill check out some pics of them, thanks for the advice.

    THANKS SO MUCH EVERYONE!! very very helpful, really appreciate it.
     
  10. PeterB666

    PeterB666 Mu-43 Top Veteran Charter Member

    780
    Jan 14, 2010
    Tura Beach, Australia
    Real Name:
    Peter
    I have the Olympus OM 200mm f/4 and quite frankly am a little dissapointed by it. It is a little low on contrast, isn't particulary sharp (especially at infinity) and is a bit heavy for the Olympus E-P1. It really needs a collar as the base of the E-P1 is just an aluminium pressing and will bend if a long lens is knocked.

    I no longer use the OM 200mm f/4 and am just keeping it until the rumoured 0.5 converter comes out to see if it is better with that. The lens didn't cost much and is in fabulous condition, just not the performer I need.
     
  11. Please allow some attempt defending the OM 4/200 :) - liked it very much in film days for shots like this http://picasaweb.google.com/HertzEichenrode/GreeceKretaCreteRhodos#5064652217027897026
    My sample doesn´t look that bad on the E-P2 either IMO, same impression as Peter as far as contrast goes, but no problem to adjust in pp and can turn out as an advantage in high contrast scenery IMO; asks for tripod. Curiosity forced to me to make a short test:
    Scenery seen by 28mm, crop-area lightened up
    [​IMG]

    Thumbs:
    seen by the OM 200, wide open, default Lightzone raw-conversion settings, no sharpening etc.
    [​IMG]

    crop sharpened f4 100%, no other adjustments
    [​IMG]

    crop sharpened f8 100%, no other adjustments
    [​IMG]
    Sharp enough to show the advantage of higher magnification compared with the pretty good Zeiss 2,8/135mm.
    My 5/200 sample is just on par with the f4 from around 5,6-8 on.

    Best
    Hans-Jürgen