Telephoto Suggestions?

[righteous.]

So far I have been looking at the Nikon 80-200 2.8, but I would also like to hear if anyone has any other suggestions.

Requirements:
- Zoom lens, at least reaching 200mm at the long end
- Fast
- Lens collar support

I will be using it to shoot big mountiain skiing, so lighter is better. However, I also prefer vintage lenses for their full manual controls, focus ring, and build quality, so I most likely will favor those over being lightweight. Unfortunately, most of the vintage telephotos I come across don't have a lens collar, which is absolutely mandatory because I plan to use EX TELE mode (800mm effective) and need stability, and to reduce stress on the lens mounts. I would also prefer it to be parfocal as an added benefit, though I'm not getting my hopes up since that feature tends to be expensive.

Any ideas?

 

[ErikTande]

I would go with the Panasonic 45-200 considering what you just described. You don't really need a fast lens shooting snow covered mountains, they're insanely bright. I've still needed ND filters shooting at f8 on a bright snowy day. Even at night, snow is quite bright. The reach is great, and it has the Mega OIS, which makes a HUGE difference for stabilizing long shots.

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-45-200mm-4-0-5-6-Olympus-Cameras/dp/B001ISKNKA

 

[kostas]

I have a couple of M42 telephoto lenses that I will be listing on eBay, or the marketplace soon:
1) Soligor Telephoto 600mm f8.0 (preset lens with tripod mount): 250 Eur + shipping
2) Asahi Pentax Tele Takumar 300mm f 6.3 (Preset) + Asahi Pentax UV filter + Asahi hood (no tripod mount, but lens is not heavy): 200 Eur + shipping.
Both lenses are very nice and sharp, but I am selling because not using much and need the space and cash.
Just mentioning, in case this would be of interest for you.

 

[righteous.]

I would go with the Panasonic 45-200 considering what you just described. You don't really need a fast lens shooting snow covered mountains, they're insanely bright. I've still needed ND filters shooting at f8 on a bright snowy day. Even at night, snow is quite bright. The reach is great, and it has the Mega OIS, which makes a HUGE difference for stabilizing long shots.

http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-45-200mm-4-0-5-6-Olympus-Cameras/dp/B001ISKNKA

My last lens was a Canon 70-200 f4 and while the speed was fine for snow, it was too slow for anything else. I was also unhappy with the optics/build. I need it to be fast because I also prefer to shoot in rainy/foggy weather when I'm doing non-skiing stuff. Dark forest landscapes and such.

I should have clarified, I would like it to be 200mm in 35mm terms. That way I can have an effective 400mm, and use EX TELE to get 800mm. A 200mm native m4/3 just isn't long enough for my uses. Using a 70-200 on an APS-C camera wasn't nearly long enough either!

I have no use for OIS. I have a solid Sachtler/Miller tripod configuration, and when shooting at 600mm the footage is dead stable.

I have a couple of M42 telephoto lenses that I will be listing on eBay

Thanks, but I need a zoom lens. Good luck though!

 

[ErikTande]

I need it to be fast because I also prefer to shoot in rainy/foggy weather when I'm doing non-skiing stuff. Dark forest landscapes and such.

Ah, yeah then the Lumix 45-200 might not be fast enough for you. It is long enough though:

I should have clarified, I would like it to be 200mm in 35mm terms. That way I can have an effective 400mm, and use EX TELE to get 800mm.

A 200mm m4/3 lens (like the Lumix 45-200) is the equivalent of a 400mm in 35mm terms. In ETC mode that will give you an 800mm 35mm equivalent.

Cheers!

 

[righteous.]

A 200mm m4/3 lens (like the Lumix 45-200) is the equivalent of a 400mm in 35mm terms. In ETC mode that will give you an 800mm 35mm equivalent.

How is that possible if there's no crop? For instance my Canon 70-200 was an effective 112 - 320 due to the crop caused by a FF image being projected on an APS-C sensor.

 

[ErikTande]

I'm not sure of the technical specifics, but essentially you double the length of any lens you throw on a GH2, even the micro 4/3 specific lenses. The Pansonic 25mm Leica for example has the same focal length of a 50mm, the 20mm pancake has a 40mm equivalent, etc...

 

[GrahamH]

The lumix is not "effectively" 45-200 mm .... at the long end it IS 200mm, just like your Nikon.

The 100-300mm Lumix is IMHO slightly sharper and faster at 200, so worth considering also. Neither lens is bulky enough to need a tripod collar. Don't underestimate the value of AF, OIS and the smaller ND filters you can use (the smaller Lumix uses 52mm filters, the bigger one uses 67mm).

 

[righteous.]

I'm not sure of the technical specifics, but essentially you double the length of any lens you throw on a GH2, even the micro 4/3 specific lenses. The Pansonic 25mm Leica for example has the same focal length of a 50mm, the 20mm pancake has a 40mm equivalent, etc...

I'm not sure I follow. So a FF35 lens is doubled in the same way a native m4/3 lens is, despite the fact that both lenses have different sized projections? A 25mm FF lens can't possibly be the same focal length on a GH2 as a 25mm m4/3 lens...can it?

The lumix is not "effectively" 45-200 mm .... at the long end it IS 200mm, just like your Nikon.

The 100-300mm Lumix is IMHO slightly sharper and faster at 200, so worth considering also. Neither lens is bulky enough to need a tripod collar. Don't underestimate the value of AF, OIS and the smaller ND filters you can use (the smaller Lumix uses 52mm filters, the bigger one uses 67mm).

In my years of shooting, not once have I ever needed autofocus. OIS can be handy for wider lenses, but for telephoto I don't see the point unless you have cheap sticks. If the OIS is anything like the DVX/HPX OIS, it will be detrimental to the image when using a tripod that truly is stable. As for the lens collar, half the reason I need one is because it makes a huge difference in stability.

Unfortunately the 100-300 isn't constant aperture. I was more so looking for vintage lens recommendations, as they are cheaper, more durable, and look better to me.

 

[ErikTande]

Here's two screengrabs I just took to illustrate the focal length / fov. I locked my tripod down and just switched lenses. (I might have wiggled it a little). The top one is my Lumix 14-42 set at 28mm. The bottom one is my Vivitar FD 28mm with an adapter. It was fairly low light, the Lumix was at f4.6 or so and 6400 iso, the Vivitar was at 2.8 and 640 iso.



Lumix 14-42 at 28mm

Vivitar FD 28mm prime

 

[righteous.]

Here's two screengrabs

Now this is interesting... My 50mm on a 5D is noticeably wider than it is on a 7D. So by that same effect, a FF lens should be wider on a m4/3, shouldn't it?

 

[mcbob]

Larger sensors yield a wider field of view with the same lens... and crop sensors yield a narrower FOV with that same lens. The "full frame equivalent" field of view is the product of the focal length x the crop factor:

5D - full frame, Crop Factor x1: 50 x 1 = 50 full-frame equivalent FOV
7D - APS-C, CF x~1.6 = 80 full frame equivalent FOV
GH - m43, CF x~2 = 100 full frame equivalent FOV

So crop sensors make telephoto lenses more telephoto, and can make normal lenses telephoto. Focal lengths are independent of sensor size, you just have to do the approximate math when figuring what field of view you'll get. This is why 1/3" camcorders have lenses with ranges of, say, 4.2mm on the wide end, because the small sensors induce a greater crop factor (and so yield an equivalent ~28mm from that short short short end).

All that said, the Nikon 80-200/2.8 is a bitchin' lens on m43 or any other system. Good choice.

If you want a lens that yield something closer to an 80-200 equivalent vield of view on the GH, there are a number of fast ~35-100mm focal length lenses available that are far easier to tote than the Nikon 80-200.

 

[righteous.]

Larger sensors yield a wider field of view with the same lens... and crop sensors yield a narrower FOV with that same lens. The "full frame equivalent" field of view is the product of the focal length x the crop factor:

5D - full frame, Crop Factor x1: 50 x 1 = 50 full-frame equivalent FOV
7D - APS-C, CF x~1.6 = 80 full frame equivalent FOV
GH - m43, CF x~2 = 100 full frame equivalent FOV

So crop sensors make telephoto lenses more telephoto, and can make normal lenses telephoto. Focal lengths are independent of sensor size, you just have to do the approximate math when figuring what field of view you'll get. This is why 1/3" camcorders have lenses with ranges of, say, 4.2mm on the wide end, because the small sensors induce a greater crop factor (and so yield an equivalent ~28mm from that short short short end).

I fully got that (or so I thought). And here I thought I understood crop factor until I see that a FF 28mm lens and a m4/3 28mm lens are the same thing...

All that said, the Nikon 80-200/2.8 is a bitchin' lens on m43 or any other system. Good choice.

If you want a lens that yield something closer to an 80-200 equivalent vield of view on the GH, there are a number of fast ~35-100mm focal length lenses available that are far easier to tote than the Nikon 80-200.

Like I said, 80-200 (effective) is much too short. For my purposes, longer is better. I see/hear nothing but good things about the Nikon 80-200 2.8, and I especially like how the front element is recessed into the housing. Overall it seems like a much better lens than my Canon 70-200 f4L, which I was mostly unhappy with.

I am also intrigued by the Panasonic 100-300 f4-5.6. The only doubt I have is it being a non-constant aperture lens. Unlike cinema, shooting skiing tends to have zooming. I know it isn't parfocal, yet I'm somewhat worried that I will want to zoom during a shot (within my focus range) and it will change aperture on me. I love my pancake 20mm 1.7, and the optics on the 100-300mm look great. I also like how small it is; I'd like to be able to fit everything into a Pelican 1200 case. Can anyone chime in with their experience with it?

In the meantime, I think I'll use my old Canon FD 70-210 f4. I was hesitant to put it on my GH2 until I found this adapter with a tripod mount built into it.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Canon-FD-...ltDomain_0&hash=item3cbe9f4813#ht_2906wt_1413