View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Belcanto
Joined: 17 Oct 2013 Posts: 72 Location: Karlstad, Sweden
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:21 pm Post subject: Question wich 200mm'ish walk around lens to get? |
|
|
Belcanto wrote:
I would like to hear your opinions on this. Thing is that i've been using a hexanon 135/3.2 on my Lumix G5, Wich to my mind is a very good combination for a walk around tele-lens. Now I've upped my camera to a fuji X-T1 and are looking for something similar, 300mm'ish equivalent focal length. Problem is get the hexanon features, Sharp, small, light, close focusing'ish, good colour and contrast. So What do i get instead??
I just tried a canon Fdn 200/4 on a mountain trip, and it is really hard to focus right with the short throw between infinity and 20 meters, ad to that, a very light throw.
I find around 300mm equivalent length my limit when shooting handheld. Maybe I should try something shorter??
Suggestions??
Kjell _________________ "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."
O. Wilde |
|
Back to top |
|
|
WolverineX
Joined: 19 Apr 2009 Posts: 1694 Location: Zagreb , Croatia , Europe
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WolverineX wrote:
try Olympus Zuiko 200mm/5 . it's smallest 200mm lens i know _________________ my tools:Oly E-M5 + 45mm/1.8 + Oly E-520 + 12-60 + 14-42 + 70-300 + Sigma 105mm + FL-50R + EC20 + SRF-11 ring flash
http://forum.mflenses.com/wolverinex-testing-my-lenses-series-link-list-t39524.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Belcanto
Joined: 17 Oct 2013 Posts: 72 Location: Karlstad, Sweden
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Belcanto wrote:
Thats a good start! How are the other features? Sharpness, colour, etc? I find no reason to go fast on these lenses since I need enough dof to manage to get focus right. _________________ "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."
O. Wilde |
|
Back to top |
|
|
WolverineX
Joined: 19 Apr 2009 Posts: 1694 Location: Zagreb , Croatia , Europe
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 1:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
WolverineX wrote:
here you can see samples i made with Olympus e-520 and Olympus E-M5 so judge for yourself
http://forum.mflenses.com/testing-my-lenses-part-37-olympus-200mm-5-t38525,highlight,%2Btesting+%2Blenses.html _________________ my tools:Oly E-M5 + 45mm/1.8 + Oly E-520 + 12-60 + 14-42 + 70-300 + Sigma 105mm + FL-50R + EC20 + SRF-11 ring flash
http://forum.mflenses.com/wolverinex-testing-my-lenses-series-link-list-t39524.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1
Joined: 18 Mar 2011 Posts: 15685
Expire: 2014-01-07
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
Topcon RE Auto Topcor 5.6/200. Stunning lens, sharp as a laser, supremely well built. _________________ I don't care who designed it, who made it or what country it comes from - I just enjoy using it! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Aanything
Joined: 27 Aug 2011 Posts: 2201 Location: Piacenza, Italy
Expire: 2014-05-30
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Aanything wrote:
The Tele Takumar 5.6/200 is good too, if f5.6 is not an issue _________________ C&C and editing of my pics are always welcome
Samples from my lenses
My gear
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Rick1779
Joined: 17 May 2013 Posts: 1207 Location: Italy
Expire: 2014-06-06
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rick1779 wrote:
Aanything wrote: |
The Tele Takumar 5.6/200 is good too, if f5.6 is not an issue |
+1 super sharp _________________ TELLTALE
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
visualopsins
Joined: 05 Mar 2009 Posts: 10463 Location: California
Expire: 2021-06-22
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
visualopsins wrote:
Rick1779 wrote: |
Aanything wrote: |
The Tele Takumar 5.6/200 is good too, if f5.6 is not an issue |
+1 super sharp |
+1 lightweight, small _________________ ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮ like attracts like! ☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Cameras: Sony A7Rii, Spotmatics II, F, and ESII, Nikon P4
M42 Asahi Optical Co., Lenses:
Takumar 1:4 f=35mm, 1:2 f=58mm (Sonnar), 1:2.4 f=58mm (Heliar), 1:2.2 f=55mm (Gaussian), 1:2.8 f=105mm (Model I), 1:2.8/105 (Model II), 1:5.6/200
Tele-Takumar 1:5.6/200, 1:6.3/300
Macro-Takumar 1:4/50
Auto-Takumar 1:2.3 f=35, 1:1.8 f=55mm, 1:2.2 f=55mm
Super-TAKUMAR 1:3.5/28 (fat), 1:2/35 (Fat), 1:1.4/50 (8-element),
Super-Multi-Coated Fisheye-TAKUMAR 1:4/17
Super-Multi-Coated TAKUMAR 1:4.5/20, 1:3.5/24, 1:3.5/28, 1:2/35, 1:3.5/35, 1:1.8/85, 1:1.9/85 1:2.8/105, 1:3.5/135, 1:2.5/135 (II), 1:4/150, 1:4/200, 1:4/300, 1:4.5/500
Super-Multi-Coated Macro-TAKUMAR 1:4/50, 1:4/100
Super-Multi-Coated Bellows-TAKUMAR 1:4/100
SMC TAKUMAR 1:1.4/50, 1:1.8/55
Other lenses:
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.4/35
SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:3.5 35~105mm, SMC PENTAX ZOOM 1:4 45~125mm
Nikon Micro-NIKKOR-P-C Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm, NIKKOR-P Auto 105mm f/2.5 Pre-AI (Sonnar), Micro-NIKKOR 105mm 1:4 AI, NIKKOR AI-S 35-135mm f/3,5-4,5
Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51B), Tamron SP 17mm f/3.5 (51BB), SP 500mm f/8 (55BB), SP 70-210mm f/3.5 (19AH)
Vivitar 100mm 1:2.8 MC 1:1 Macro Telephoto
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
marcusBMG
Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1301 Location: Conwy N Wales
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 4:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marcusBMG wrote:
The tamron adaptall 04B 200mm f3.5 is sharp and handles beautifully - great focus action and throw. Not particularly close focussing - 1.7m, larger than the adaptall 70/80-210mm zooms, but not bad. Only caveat - bit prone to PF. No problem getting a mount for pretty much all dslr's. The 300's are also good but this is more than a stop faster and more versatile. _________________ pentax ME super (retired)
Pentax K3-ii; pentax K-S2; Samsung NX 20; Lumix G1 + adapters;
Adaptall collection (proliferating!) inc 200-500mm 31A, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f4.
Primes: takumar 55mm; smc 28mm, 50mm; kino/komine 28mm f2's, helios 58mm, Tamron Nestar 400mm, novoflex 400mm, Vivitar 135mm close focus, 105mm macro; Jupiter 11A; CZJ 135mm.
A classic zoom or two: VS1 (komine), Kiron Zoomlock...
Last edited by marcusBMG on Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Attila
Joined: 24 Feb 2007 Posts: 57839 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-11-18
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Attila wrote:
200mm f4 - f5.6 lenses in general all light weight and good enough from any well known vendors, Meyer, Nikon, Takumar, trully no matter all good. _________________ -------------------------------
Items on sale on Ebay
Sony NEX-7 Carl Zeiss Planar 85mm f1.4, Minolta MD 35mm f1.8, Konica 135mm f2.5, Minolta MD 50mm f1.2, Minolta MD 250mm f5.6, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Belcanto
Joined: 17 Oct 2013 Posts: 72 Location: Karlstad, Sweden
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Belcanto wrote:
Thanks for all the suggestions. I will look a little further with the lenses you propose. I've done a little testing myself before going for the the canon fdn200mm. I tried the hexanon 200/3.5 and 200/4 and a vivitar 200/3.5(komine). The canon was better. Now I now that there is always sample variation that can twist things a little, but have any one compared the suggestions above with the canon?
I sometimes read about the vario-sonnar 100-200mm. Could it be an alternative? i really dont know how big they are. _________________ "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."
O. Wilde |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Belcanto
Joined: 17 Oct 2013 Posts: 72 Location: Karlstad, Sweden
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Belcanto wrote:
I have read a lot about leica 180/3.4 it beeing the ultimate. How big is it? I probably can't afford it, only dream of it. still. _________________ "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."
O. Wilde |
|
Back to top |
|
|
kido
Joined: 06 Jun 2013 Posts: 105 Location: Chile
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
kido wrote:
Having no experience with them, couldn't really advise on any of the mentioned lenses. The only MF 200 I have is the f/3.5 Sears. I love it but it's clunky and probably inferior to the FD Canon.
Since what I was going to suggest is a bit unorthodox, in order to avoid prejudice, I decided to share a few samples instead of revealing the name in advance. Let me know if these meet your expectations or you're looking for something better:
Canon 60D, 1/250, ISO250 (the results would probably be a bit sharper at ISO100), setting sun as light source on the first two
_________________ [C&C] on my pictures are most welcomed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
luisalegria
Joined: 07 Mar 2008 Posts: 6627 Location: San Francisco, USA
Expire: 2018-01-18
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 9:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
luisalegria wrote:
Am I the only fool that thinks a heavy long FL lens is a good thing ?
Steadier to handhold and dampens vibration. _________________ I like Pentax DSLR's, Exaktas, M42 bodies of all kinds, strange and cheap Japanese lenses, and am dabbling in medium format/Speed Graphic work. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3436 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
luisalegria wrote: |
Am I the only fool that thinks a heavy long FL lens is a good thing ? |
No, you are not. I even still like my old Vivitar series 1 (Kiron) for that. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Kjell: After going back and reading your post again, I've concluded that nothing I have would meet those requirements. Of the several 200mm lenses I have, there is fast, short focus, sharp, small, light, and inexpensive, but not a single lens I have is all of that. I can't speak about Canon or Nikon because I haven't had those. However, among the ones I have, I can offer the following...
Vivitar 3/200 Series 1: Fast and my sharpest, very short minimum focus and excellent build quality. Heavy and not real cheap.
Vivitar 3.5/200 Komine; Good lens, but doesn't perform on Series 1 level.
Sankyô Kôki Komura 3.5/200 Preset: Excellent colors; good sharpness; great bokeh; good build quality; heavy, long minimum focus, and not as easy to focus. Prices vary greatly. Many bladed diaphragm.
Meyer Optik Görlitz Orestegor 4/200: Very good sharpness and bokeh; decent build, sexy name, long minimum focus, inexpensive. Many bladed diaphragm.
Minolta MD Rokkor 4/200: 1st MD version. My most recent purchase. Light, good build, sharp from f/4, Minolta colors. Long focus, prices vary.
Kashimura Dianon 4.5/200: Good sharpness, bokeh, and light, but long. Long minimum focus. Rare, but fairly inexpensive. This lens is probably better than I have given credit. Many bladed diaphragm.
Topcon 5.6/200 RE Auto-Topcor: Light, small, well built, a tad sharper at wide open than Rokkor and minimal CA. Has a reputation of being the least impressive among the highly rated Topcors, but in my experience it is better than that. Long focus. Inexpensive. If it were only faster... _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
Kjell: After going back and reading your post again, I've concluded that nothing I have would meet those requirements. Of the several 200mm lenses I have, there is fast, short focus, sharp, small, light, and inexpensive, but not a single lens I have is all of that. I can't speak about Canon or Nikon because I haven't had those. However, among the ones I have, I can offer the following...
Vivitar 3/200 Series 1: Fast and my sharpest, very short minimum focus and excellent build quality. Heavy and not real cheap.
Vivitar 3.5/200 Komine; Good lens, but doesn't perform on Series 1 level.
Sankyô Kôki Komura 3.5/200 Preset: Excellent colors; good sharpness; great bokeh; good build quality; heavy, long minimum focus, and not as easy to focus. Prices vary greatly. Many bladed diaphragm.
Meyer Optik Görlitz Orestegor 4/200: Very good sharpness and bokeh; decent build, sexy name, long minimum focus, inexpensive. Many bladed diaphragm.
Minolta MD Rokkor 4/200: 1st MD version. My most recent purchase. Light, good build, sharp from f/4, Minolta colors. Long focus, prices vary.
Kashimura Dianon 4.5/200: Good sharpness, bokeh, and light, but long. Long minimum focus. Rare, but fairly inexpensive. This lens is probably better than I have given credit. Many bladed diaphragm.
Topcon 5.6/200 RE Auto-Topcor: Light, small, well built, a tad sharper at wide open than Rokkor and minimal CA. Has a reputation of being the least impressive among the highly rated Topcors, but in my experience it is better than that. Long focus. Inexpensive. If it were only faster... |
If we are taking about f4 and slower, I think we should also include any zooms that have similar size and or as good IQ.
Like the FDn 80-200/4L which has picked up some popularity thanks to [url=" Phillip Reeve"]http://www.flickr.com/photos/birnenbaumgarten/sets/72157629349634442/[/url]
I just recieved my Topcor R 200/4 & 300/5.6 lenses and am going to try them out.
I really like my Topcor R 135/3.5 as a walk around lens, no sharpness issues. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
woodrim
Joined: 14 Jan 2010 Posts: 4060 Location: Charleston
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 1:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
woodrim wrote:
Lightshow wrote: |
I just recieved my Topcor R 200/4 & 300/5.6 lenses and am going to try them out.
I really like my Topcor R 135/3.5 as a walk around lens, no sharpness issues. |
I'll be interested in seeing the Topcor 5.6/300 shots, and also hearing your opinion on it. I have one and have not fallen in love with it. _________________ Regards,
Woodrim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
woodrim wrote: |
Lightshow wrote: |
I just received my Topcor R 200/4 & 300/5.6 lenses and am going to try them out.
I really like my Topcor R 135/3.5 as a walk around lens, no sharpness issues. |
I'll be interested in seeing the Topcor 5.6/300 shots, and also hearing your opinion on it. I have one and have not fallen in love with it. |
My Topcor R 135/3.5 is my favorite 135mm lens, it's razor sharp wide open, so it will be what I compare the 200 & 300 to.
I was shooting handheld and I was a bit shaky today, but I could tell it wasn't up to the same level as the R 135/3.5 wide open, just how much? I will have to get back to you on that, and it was getting too dark to stop it down much. It felt like it was sharp, but didn't have the resolution the 135 has, oh well, I'll have to revisit the 300.
The R 200/4 was what I was hoping for, immediately I could tell it was as good as the 135, which is to say that it is very sharp from wide open, it will hard not to want it if I need 200mm.
Every time I use my better Topcor lenses, I always get a little sad, Topcon walked away from the camera business, and they were easily one of the top lens makers in the business, as good as Leica and Zeiss.
I really would have liked to have seen what they could do with multi-coated lenses and a modern bayonet mount like Minolta's MC/MD. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7547 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
Lightshow wrote: |
woodrim wrote: |
Lightshow wrote: |
I just received my Topcor R 200/4 & 300/5.6 lenses and am going to try them out.
I really like my Topcor R 135/3.5 as a walk around lens, no sharpness issues. |
I'll be interested in seeing the Topcor 5.6/300 shots, and also hearing your opinion on it. I have one and have not fallen in love with it. |
My Topcor R 135/3.5 is my favorite 135mm lens, it's razor sharp wide open, so it will be what I compare the 200 & 300 to.
I was shooting handheld and I was a bit shaky today, but I could tell it wasn't up to the same level as the R 135/3.5 wide open, just how much? I will have to get back to you on that, and it was getting too dark to stop it down much. It felt like it was sharp, but didn't have the resolution the 135 has, oh well, I'll have to revisit the 300.
The R 200/4 was what I was hoping for, immediately I could tell it was as good as the 135, which is to say that it is very sharp from wide open, it will hard not to want it if I need 200mm.
Every time I use my better Topcor lenses, I always get a little sad, Topcon walked away from the camera business, and they were easily one of the top lens makers in the business, as good as Leica and Zeiss.
I really would have liked to have seen what they could do with multi-coated lenses and a modern bayonet mount like Minolta's MC/MD. |
Hi, James. How is your Topcor 85? It will be nice to see your photos before I try my own copy. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lightshow
Joined: 04 Nov 2011 Posts: 3669 Location: Calgary
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lightshow wrote:
I haven't used it a bunch, other than to check it after getting it back from the CLA.
Yeah, it's typical Topcor, very sharp wide open, and some CA, much like the RE 58/1.4.
I will get some pics up soon. _________________ A Manual Focus Junky...
One photographers junk lens is an artists favorite tool.
My lens list
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightshow-photography/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
calvin83
Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7547 Location: Hong Kong
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
calvin83 wrote:
Lightshow wrote: |
I haven't used it a bunch, other than to check it after getting it back from the CLA.
Yeah, it's typical Topcor, very sharp wide open, and some CA, much like the RE 58/1.4.
I will get some pics up soon. |
I see. Look forward to your photos with the 85. _________________ https://lensfever.com/
https://www.instagram.com/_lens_fever/
The best lens is the one you have with you. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Langstrum
Joined: 16 Feb 2014 Posts: 351
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 5:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Langstrum wrote:
Jupiter 21M may be good for you, not very heavy and sharp wide open, the IQ is about 80-90% of my Canon EF 200/2.8 L. The only limitation is the f4, so normally I can't use this lens right before the sunset. Other choices are FD 80-200 f4L if you don't mind zoom lens. This lens actually changed my impression with zoom lenses. _________________
Camera: Sony A7 mark III, A6300
AF Lenses:
Canon EF 50/1.8; EF 200/2.8 L, EF 200/1.8 L, EF 300/4 L Sony E mount SEL 50/1.8 OSS, SEL 16/2.8 Fuji X mount XF 35/1.4 R
MF Lenses: Peleng MC 8/3.5, 17/2.8 Samyang 14/T3.1, 35/T1.5, TS 24/3.5 ED, 85/T1.5, Polar 85/1.4 Auto Revuenon 28/2.8; MC 50/1.4 Vega11U 50/2.8 Carl Zeiss Tessar 50/2.8 (exakta mount) Auto Chinon 50/1.9 Zenitar ME1 50/1.7 Sears Auto Sears 55/1.4; Sears 135/2.8 Auto Yashinon DX 50/1.4; Tomioka 50/1.2 SMC Pentax 50/1.7; 50/1.4 Canon FD 50/1.4 S.S.C; 55/1.2 S.S.C; FD 50/1.2 L; FD 85/1.2 L; 85/1.2 S.S.C Aspherical; FD 80-200/4 L 300/2.8 S.S.C Fluorite FD 300/2.8 L FD 200/1.8 LCosina-S 50/1.2 Helios Helios 44 Chrome f/22, 44-2, 44-3, 44M-4, 44M-7 (58/2), Helios-40 85/1.5 Jupiter Jupiter-9 85/2; Jupiter-37A 135/3.5; Jupiter-21M 200/4 Nikon Ai 105/2.5 Tairs-3S 300/4.5
Voigtlander 15/4.5 Aspherical; Ultron 35/1.7
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Belcanto
Joined: 17 Oct 2013 Posts: 72 Location: Karlstad, Sweden
|
Posted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Belcanto wrote:
luisalegria wrote: |
Am I the only fool that thinks a heavy long FL lens is a good thing ?
Steadier to handhold and dampens vibration. |
No, I am with you on that one. I had the Rokkor 250/5.6 mirror lens but sold it to fund another lens, reason beeing it became to unstable to
shoot handheld.
Thanks Woodrim, I did have the vivitar komine 200/4 and found it a bit lack luster. Seems to me I should try the topcor.
And how about these 80 - 200mm zooms. If I understand it correct they become bigger but minimum focus distance is shorter.
The canon FL is suggested. Anyone tested the vario-sonnar? _________________ "We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."
O. Wilde |
|
Back to top |
|
|
texsport
Joined: 12 Feb 2013 Posts: 53
|
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2014 1:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
texsport wrote:
Vivitar Series 1 200/3 is a good, compact choice.
Texsport |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|