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

Zoom For Alaska Inside Passage Cruise

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by Troiks, Feb 10, 2013.

  1. Troiks

    Troiks Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Nov 28, 2012
    Australia
    Andrew
    Hi all, first post however have been spending a bit of time on here of late

    We will be going on a Inside Passage cruise later on in the year. I had been planning on buying the Panasonic 35 - 100 (currently own primes & the 40 - 150) but wanted to see if any members had better ideas.

    Should I go for something with more reach like the Olympus 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5? This seems to be a good lens that is a bit cheaper even with the adapter however it looks to be a lot heavier. I am not sure that using a tripod on the ship will be an option due to vibrations.

    Thanks in advance
    Troiks
     
  2. elavon

    elavon Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 1, 2012
    Tel Aviv Israel
    Ehud
    For wild life you need to get something with long reach the Panasonic 100-300 or the Olympus 75-300. Both are priced around 500$ the Panasonic 35-100 and the 40-150 are just too short.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Troiks

    Troiks Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Nov 28, 2012
    Australia
    Andrew
    Thought so

    Cheers Elavon. Just looked at B&H and the new Olympus 75 - 300 should be released soon.

    Does anyone here have any experience with the 50 - 200 on the OMD? I have read somewhere that AF is very slow.
     
  4. elavon

    elavon Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 1, 2012
    Tel Aviv Israel
    Ehud
    If you talk about the 4/3 50-200 then in general the 4/3 lenses on :43: suffer from slow to unusable AF. My suggestion is to get a :43: slow zooms that are relatively cheap and wait for the release of the fast zoom or primes that will come. I have done this by getting the P45-200 for 220$. The advantages are you get the :43: small factor with a decent IQ. The disadvantage are that the :43: long tele lenses are slow.
     
  5. Troiks

    Troiks Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Nov 28, 2012
    Australia
    Andrew
    Good avice

    Thanks Elavon. That sounds like good advice. I can use a monopod to mitigate the 'slowness'. Some one suggested resting it on your foot so it absorbs some of the vibrations.

    Cheers
    Andrew
     
  6. elavon

    elavon Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 1, 2012
    Tel Aviv Israel
    Ehud
    Since you have OMD you can increase the ISO to 1600 or 3200 and trust the IBIS to do the rest. I am sure that if you get the shutter speed to get to 250 or even 125 IBIS will take care of the rest.
     
  7. digitaldan1

    digitaldan1 Mu-43 Regular

    78
    Mar 22, 2010
    The 4/3 lenses on the E-M5 and other MFT cameras are useable, but slow when it comes to AF performance. I'd say even a mid-price zoom such as the Panasonic 45-175 would be a better choice plus would save you space and weight in your luggage.

    I guest lectured on an inside passage cruise back in 2005 and was shooting with Canon back then. Even with a 1D and 300 f/4L I found photographing whales to be very challenging since you have so little reaction time. My feeling is that even an E-5 with the 50-200 2.8/3.5 would not be very effective (I have the pair and would rate the AF performance to be similar to the Canon 40D with the 70-200 2.8L with the Canon a winner by a whisker). I also have the 150 f/2 prime and even that lens on the E-M5 is a modest AF performer.

    The vibration on the cruise ship won't be a big deal. If you take an excursion that includes boat travel, then it may be an issue. Even then, a monopod will be worthwhile simply for handling the weight of the camera and lens if you do go with the 50-200 2.8/3.5.

    Personally, I'd go with MFT lenses and do what I could to maximize my opportunities (local excursions). If your trip stops in Ketchikan, you'll get plenty of opportunities for Bald Eagles. In fact, just hang out at the salmon cannery around 4 or 5 pm and you'll see the trees across the street dotted with them. We saw beautiful scenery in Skagway (and rented a car to explore the region) but not a lot of wildlife. In Juneau we got on the water and saw eagles, whales and seals.

    Have a great trip!
     
  8. Troiks

    Troiks Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Nov 28, 2012
    Australia
    Andrew
    Thanks for the feedback guys. A cheaper option would be best I think as I tend to shoot wide rather than long. Native mft it is.

    Cheers
    Troiks
     
  9. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Pop up the ISO, and get the longest lens you can. Shooting wildlife in Antarctica I found my 100-400 on Canon FF was a little on the short side relatively often. The Panny 100-300 is a great lens, so is the Oly by all accounts, just see which one you can get cheaper. Shooting handheld should not be a problem.
     
  10. Troiks

    Troiks Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Nov 28, 2012
    Australia
    Andrew
    Thanks mattia, I think will wait for some reviews on the new Olympus zoom to come out. We are not going until later in the year so I have some time. Once again thanks to all who replied

    Cheers
    Troiks
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. gs94121

    gs94121 Mu-43 Regular

    98
    Sep 6, 2011
    If I were pretending you for preparing on Alaska cruise, I'd bring EM-5 with Panny-X 12-35, Oly 14-150 and Rokinon 7.5mm fisheye lens. So, I'll have stable & fixed 58mm filter size for both Panny-X 12-35 and Oly 14-150 zoom lens with ND and polarizer filters for better picture quality & effects as well as Oly MCON-01 macro adapter for close-up. This will be a lightweight to carry. Yes, Alaska is wonderful place to go and take lots of photographs.

    In turn, I'm heading to Norwegian Fjords and Arctic Circle cruise this summer with same items as outlined above to carry.
     
  12. Troiks

    Troiks Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Nov 28, 2012
    Australia
    Andrew
    Filters

    Good point re filters. I have just checked B&H for the Lee Seven5 system and will probably buy that first as we are going to kangaroo Island next month & there will be some great landscape opportunities.

    Might check out the fisheye as well
     
  13. McBob

    McBob Mu-43 Regular

    111
    Apr 22, 2012
    While I don't own the 100-300 any more, it kicks butt for its combination of quality and OIS in a (relatively for a long lens) small package and reasonable price.
     
  14. jloden

    jloden Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 15, 2012
    Hunterdon County, NJ
    Jay
    I did an Alaska trip (driving & hiking, not a cruise, though we did do a whale watching boat trip) last summer, and my advice is longer is better. oldracer here on the forum and others suggested I get a 100-300 before the trip and I'm glad I did. Nearly all my shots were with the 14-140mm and 100-300mm, with a tiny handful on the Olympus 12mm and PL 25mm.

    For anything wildlife, you'll probably want the 300mm reach. I got shots of Dahl sheep, Arctic Ground Squirrel, Caribou, Moose, Grizzly Bear, Orca whales, Steller Sea Lion, Sea Otter etc. in Alaska, and there were plenty of times even 300mm on m4/3 felt short! So I definitely would recommend the 100-300 or 75-300, even if you resell it when you get home. Pair that with something to cover the wide-normal end and you should be in good shape.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. speedandstyle

    speedandstyle Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    If I were to go on a trip like this I would bring my 14-150 and buy the 75-300mm. I would also bring at least one fast prime for low light shooting.
     
  16. Troiks

    Troiks Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Nov 28, 2012
    Australia
    Andrew
    Zoom

    That's a good idea re reselling as i would rarely use it after the trip as prefer to use the 12mm, 20mm & 60mm. Might keep an eye out on ebay for a used one
     
  17. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    I did the land/sea with a Nikon D200 DX body and Nikon's 80-400, there were times I would have liked something longer. For my trip I picked up the 80-400 about a month before, sold it about a month after. Cost me about 100-150 for the 2 months, but at the time that was an $1100 lens. So 2 months rental for $100-150 wasn't bad.

    The current 75-300 is pricey and the price of the new one will kill resale. So my pick would be the P100-300. Much better if you intended to do the buy sell option. So far I'm impressed with the lens OIS on my E-PM1.
     
  18. Troiks

    Troiks Mu-43 Regular

    27
    Nov 28, 2012
    Australia
    Andrew
    The Panasonic seems a likely contender at this stage. Do people here use the grip for added stability
     
  19. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Opinions differ on grips; personally, I've never felt the need for a grip to add 'stability' when shooting long glass. The weight/stability is provided by the hand holding the lens, and you maintain a light, delicate grip on the body and shutter, keeping your elbows close to the body and resting the camera against your fact (use the EVF, NOT the rear screen for shooting long).

    But let's put things in perspective here. The E-M5 with the 100-300 is still lighter than a full frame DSLR with an F4-ish normal zoom. Heck, it's lighter than an 80-400 or 100-400 for DSLR.
     
  20. Orkstomper

    Orkstomper New to Mu-43

    1
    Feb 11, 2013
    Perth
    We did the inside passage on our honeymoon a few years back. The more reach the better, now have the Panny 100-300 & it would be ideal for that trip.