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

Zuiko 50-200 II

Discussion in 'Adapted Lenses' started by elandel, Aug 12, 2013.

  1. elandel

    elandel Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 16, 2010
    Milan, Italy
    Hi all. I have a chance to buy this lens and would appreciate any feedback. I read it's a high grade lens with stellar performance. I would use it on my E-PL5 with adapter like the 14-54II with which I'm very satisfied.

    Is it worth it. By the way I'' also use it with the E-P5 or GX7, it depends on which one I'll buy. So my other question is: how do 4/3 lens perform on Panasonic bodies? Is the adapter compatible even maintaining AF on Pana?

    Thanks all.
     
  2. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    It's a great lens, but focus performance is poor with the existing M4/3 cameras.

    It does AF with current Olympus and Panasonic bodies and an adapter with electrical contacts, but it hunts, and it is slow.

    That being said, if Olympus incorporates PDAF support into the next OM-D EM-7, this lens (along with the 12-60 and the 11-22) will be the first ones to grab, because they are great lenses that fill a need for fast high quality zooms that is not presently filled in the M4/3 lineup - assuming you don't mind big lenses that are big because of their wide max apertures. And none will be more hotly sought than this lens if a future M4/3 body supports PDAF.

    BTW, the 14-54II is one of the only 4/3 lenses that actually has been optimized for CDAF use, so don't think that any other 4/3 lenses will focus as well as that one does on current m4/3 bodies.
     
  3. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    It is really an MF lens on m43. And, yes I think its value will grow with a PDAF compatible body.
     
  4. elandel

    elandel Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 16, 2010
    Milan, Italy
    Thanks. If AF is accurate I wouldn't mind if it's slow because I shoot mostly landscape and at still subjects. But if it's DEADLY slow then it would be an issue. Is there a big difference between Series I and II?
     
  5. dougjgreen

    dougjgreen Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 5, 2013
    San Diego
    Doug Green
    I can't speak for how version I compares to version II on M/43, but version II was certainly faster focusing than version 1 on 4/3, but version 1 on 4/3 was certainly much faster than version II is on m4/3. Focus hunts, but eventually is accurate.

    Optically, they are, if not identical, really close. The difference really is the internal focus motor on version II. Which I presume will make a noticeable difference as well on any PDAF-supporting future M/43 body, but presently that difference gets swamped by the general poor focus performance under CDAF.
     
  6. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    If you have sufficient DOF and contrast, focus is accurate. In certain situations you get consistent front focus. This thread pretty much sums up the issue:

    EM5 with 150mm f2.0 front focus: Micro Four Thirds Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

    I have found mine to be hit and miss. It is somewhat irritating because you can watch the focus be correct for a moment and then be "out". And the farther away and smaller the target is, the bigger the problem. I simply MF the lens and it all works.
     
  7. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    It is a fantastic lens (focus issues aside):


    P6010140 by pelicaneng, on Flickr

    50-200 @200 F5.6 1/500
     
  8. DoofClenas

    DoofClenas Who needs a Mirror!

    943
    Nov 9, 2012
    Traverse City, MI
    Clint
    It works best in manual mode...I did my latest fireworks with my epm2 and 50-200 (w/ec-14)...It's a beast of a lens and will rather unbalanced, unless you hold it by the tripod collar. I'm not sure if zooming will be an issue. on my version the zoom ring is rather stiff...perhaps the MKI version might be easier.

    P7060521-20130706-XL.
     
  9. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Yes for sure.


    The Mk1 is pretty smooth. The downside is zoom creep when the lens is pointed down. My 12-60 was fairly stiff but did not creep.
     
  10. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    The non swd is electronic ( fly by wire) focusing, where as the SWD has a true mechanical link from focus ring to elements.
     
  11. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    The fly by wire focus is fairly touchy for sure.
     
  12. elandel

    elandel Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 16, 2010
    Milan, Italy
    From what I can undestand there seems not difference in IQ between MKI and MKII, so I'm leaning towards MKI.
     
  13. elandel

    elandel Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 16, 2010
    Milan, Italy
    50-200 MKI just arrived.
     
  14. BarefootPilgrim

    BarefootPilgrim Mu-43 Top Veteran

    517
    Dec 23, 2009
    Westchester, IL
    Bob
    And so.... how do you like it? I've had one of these for several years (MkI) and love the images it captures.
     
  15. elandel

    elandel Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 16, 2010
    Milan, Italy
    I could not wait and took a couple of shots from my house and...I'm already in love with it.:cloud-9-039: