Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

300mm suggestion for wildlife?
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess I will keep an eye on the Tair-3, but that may seem to be hard to find one within my budget. The Penetcon/Meyer also looks to be another one to keep an eye out for.

Is the Hoya any good, it looks interesting and I am warming up again to the idea of a zoom lens? What about the Olympus 50-250mm or 85-250mm?

Thank you.


PostPosted: Thu Dec 20, 2012 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dnas wrote:
An older Tokina AT-X 100-300mm F4.

I'm not sure it would fit into your budget though.

I have one of those and its exceptionally good but they go for $250+


PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

battleaxe wrote:

Is the Hoya any good, it looks interesting and I am warming up again to the idea of a zoom lens? What about the Olympus 50-250mm or 85-250mm?


Now you are down to 250, which seems cheaper, but Olympus is in general expensive.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 3:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I take you mean 250 as in MM, right? How is the general quality of those 250mm Olympus lenses? I could be perfectly fine with the 250mm range, but I found 300mm to be more common I decided to ask about that.

Edit: nvm just took a look at some of the pics taken with the Hoya, and it lacks a bit of sharpness. Not really for me.
Really the more I think about the more I think I would like a zoom, as it would allow me to more easily frame the bird more easily in the shot. Thanks.


PostPosted: Fri Dec 21, 2012 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My experience is that especially on MFT cameras, most old zooms are worse optically than prime lenses. And even a lot of prime lenses have quality issues when used on MFT cameras, e.g. if they don't have apochromatic glass. So I wonder if there is a solution for you to find a zoom lens that a) reaches 250+ mm, b) is as sharp as you'd like it to be, c) is available for below 100 quid. Thomas


PostPosted: Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I really enjoyed the Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm, as it was sharp and easy to focus with good contrast. I thought it wouldn't too hard to find something like that lens, but in the 250mm+ range. I don't think they make a Series 1 in the 300mm range do they(and not one of the newer ones that isn't suppose to be as good)?

Right now I am watching a Tamron 300mm f5.6 on eBay, but I can't tell if it's a CT variant or not. Not to mention I tested out a non SP Tamron 70-210mm F4 and I didn't like how it focused and contrast wasn't what I was use to. The image here from the CT looks really nice, with good contrast, but not sure if I will like the focusing.

I have seen the word luxurious being thrown around in the 4/3 and m4/3 forums for the Oly zooms in the 250mm range. Is that really the case?


PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 8:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Should I just go with another Series 1 since I enjoyed the last one I had, or would the Tamron SP 60-300mm be just as nice, and easy to focus with?


PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have both lenses you mention... Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm 3.5 Macro and Tamron 300mm 5.6

I do not see any difference in focusing or prefer one over other.

The Tamron is slightly more difficult to focus when hand-held but this is only due to longer focal range of 300mm and nothing else. Mounted on tripod it is the same no difference and very easy to focus due to big focusing ring which in both cases has very similar turn (around 3/4).

Tamron is lighter then Vivitar.

Tamron has integrated tripod mount.

for Vivitar you have to order adapter with tripod mount on order to use it.

Vivitar is able to focus closer then Tamron and has Macro capability.

Tamron is easier to adapt in case you use Nikon or Pentax, but not sure about Canon. It just need to be changed Adapt-A-Matic or Adaptall-2 depending on the lens (older or newer) to camera you use. In case of using on M4/3 that does not matter.

Now, you decide for yourself... Wink


PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

battleaxe wrote:
I have seen the word luxurious being thrown around in the 4/3 and m4/3 forums for the Oly zooms in the 250mm range. Is that really the case?


AFAIK, there are only two Olympus-made OM zooms that reach 250 mm, and these are the 50-250/5 and the 85-250/5. There's no longer zoom exept, of course, the third-party offerings.

Here is a list of OM Zuiko lenses, while it is German only, the list itself (scroll down) is very comprehensive and probably 100% complete:

http://olypedia.de/Kategorie:OM-Objektive


PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 9:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RAART wrote:
I have both lenses you mention... Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm 3.5 Macro and Tamron 300mm 5.6

RAART thank you for that, but as I mentioned I had a Tamron(non SP) adaptall-2 mount that went up to 210mm didn't focus as well as the Series 1. How is the contrast on the Tamron vs the S1? On a related note do you know much about the SP version of that lens, or the 60-300mm Tamron SP? Thanks.

memento wrote:

AFAIK, there are only two Olympus-made OM zooms that reach 250 mm, and these are the 50-250/5 and the 85-250/5. There's no longer zoom exept, of course, the third-party offerings.

Here is a list of OM Zuiko lenses, while it is German only, the list itself (scroll down) is very comprehensive and probably 100% complete:

http://olypedia.de/Kategorie:OM-Objektive

Yes, that was the two lenses I have seen that word been used for. If either lens is actually what I am looking for, 250mm(500mm on m4/3) would more than an acceptable for my usage. Thanks.


PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2012 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think, of these two, the 85-250 would be more interesting for you. The older 50-250 seems to be much more rare, so it today has a higher collector value, and also the optics on the newer 85-250 have a better reputation. At least that's what I have read, but most of it was referring to film cameras – anyway I guess that a lens that performs better on film cameras would also be rather better on the more demanding digital sensors. I've seen some 85-250s pop up at ebay recently and am also playing with the idea to get one for my E-M5, but somehow I dislike that you always have to reset the actual focal length to make the body stabilisation work correctly. Thomas


PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 2:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess I really don't have to worry about that since I have a Panasonic m4/3 camera. I think may want to try out the 85-250mm, unless other have something to else to say. Thanks


PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In this case (Panasonic m4/3) I will say stay lower focal length while Panasonic's do not have in-body image stabilization like Olympus and you have to use always a tripod not even a monopod unless you really have steady hand or you are marksman/sharpshooter/sniper. Razz


PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

battleaxe wrote:
RAART thank you for that, but as I mentioned I had a Tamron(non SP) adaptall-2 mount that went up to 210mm didn't focus as well as the Series 1. How is the contrast on the Tamron vs the S1? On a related note do you know much about the SP version of that lens, or the 60-300mm Tamron SP? Thanks.


Here are two links from my previous posts with samples of both lenses attached (also pictures of actual lens itself for the reference).

http://forum.mflenses.com/how-good-is-vivitar-series-1-70-210mm-macro-f3-5-kiron-t54827,highlight,%2Bvivitar+%2Bseries+%2B1.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-adapt-a-matic-300mm-f5-6-t53839,highlight,%2Btamron+%2B300mm.html

The SP version of Tamron 300mm should be better then this one I have. I never had it but I was looking for that one then I had opportunity and got older version. If I find Tamron SP 300mm I will sell this one but also in this focal range I look also for Pentax 300mm.

Hope this helps.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 4:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RAART wrote:
In this case (Panasonic m4/3) I will say stay lower focal length while Panasonic's do not have in-body image stabilization like Olympus and you have to use always a tripod not even a monopod unless you really have steady hand or you are marksman/sharpshooter/sniper. Razz

Oh I know that, and time I was deciding between having a built in EVF(and articulating screen to a lesser extent) or IBIS. I'd like to think my hands are reasonably steady when I use the the EVF(even in the focus magnification mode). So, I don't really think 300mm should be that much of an issue for me. Thank you for the suggestion though.


PostPosted: Mon Dec 24, 2012 9:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

How are the Minolta 300mm f4.5 MC Rokkor-X or F5.6 variant? I have heard good things about Minolta and really like the 58mm f1.4 lens I have, so could either one of these be good lenses, too? Or do they suffer a from contrast and CA/fringing, or a focus I wouldn't like? Thanks.


PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I take a yashica 300mm will be just as nice as the Penticon 300mm?


PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

memento wrote:
The older 50-250 seems to be much more rare, so it today has a higher collector value, and also the optics on the newer 85-250 have a better reputation.


actually , 50-250 came after 85-250


PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

battleaxe wrote:
How are the Minolta 300mm f4.5 MC Rokkor-X or F5.6 variant? I have heard good things about Minolta and really like the 58mm f1.4 lens I have, so could either one of these be good lenses, too? Or do they suffer a from contrast and CA/fringing, or a focus I wouldn't like? Thanks.


I have the 4,5/300 IF MD one.

From F/6,3 is good and very usuable. Not so prone to flare and CA as wide open.

At F/9,5 is really very good. At F/ 11 I found is CA free.

Very light, nice to use and very fast to focus. Good to follow animals in movements.

Not APO lens. You can find that the FL is something short for some natural objects (like birds)