Not really is you need this focal length and are married to the 4/3 format already.But expensive...
Compared to ~ 1500 gm for the Canon 70-200 2.8L IS II that is so amazing for me!You are right Asher.
The lens will be available some time soon and I just may get one, to use on my Panasonic GX7 or on my recently bought Olympus 5 Mark II.
What made - better: What is making me - to consider this lens instead of the Olympus M Zuiko Digital 40-150 f/2.8 lens are a couple of reasons and among them is the weight !
Olympus M Zuiko Digital 40-150 f/2.8 lens weights 760 gr / 880 gr with colar, while the
Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 50-200 mm f/2.8-4.0 is just 655 g.
Yours or that of the system?Weight - The reason why I am selling all my Canon equipment !
Almost forgot: it is not the only reason. The other reason is age !
Compared to ~ 1500 gm for the Canon 70-200 2.8L IS II that is so amazing for me!
Guys like Robert Watcher who use the 4/3 system day in, day out for serious photography will benefit. But the price may be a significant game changer here.
I have no concrete evidence, but I highly doubt that there would be any noticeable difference detected in an enlargement made from Leica/Panasonic or Olympus lenses. Obviously cheaper grade consumer glass would be slightly inferior and there may be a noticeable difference side by side. More noticeable difference wide open though, than when stopped down to f6.3 or f8. The content of the image would make a difference too.Thanks Robert,
That’s a wealth of detail to assimilate and a good source for folk to reference!
I think I will need to make a table of the lenses, prices, magnifications and weight to really integrate this, but I get the idea.
I guess that for enlargements, if you did need the max size, then would the new Leica option deliver a better image than current Panasonic and Olympus options? IOW, are the micro 4/3 sensors currently challenging the quality and resolving power of the 4/3 lenses and does the Leica then solve any resulting such issues?
This last post is even more helpful and sobering, especially your postitive client experience from large prints with 8MP and 12MP Olympus sensors.
Also what is especially noteworthy is how your bargain 50mm-250mm lens has withstood the rigorscof your daily street photography in rather ungentle circumstances! One of the arguments for “Pro Gear” is the resilience to harsh demanding conditions of use. Essentially you are like a news reporter for Reuters or some other mainline agency.
What it says is that one just needs a great body, ascthat brings image stabilization and shutter speed you want and the lenses one can afford!
Yes that is the Olympus pro lens that I used for my work. I paid $1,300 CAD for it back in 2007/2008.BTW, do you refer to the Olympus 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 ED SWD Zuiko Zoom Lens for Olympus Digital Cameras, which provides the equivalent of 100-500mm or is this a different lens?
In micro 4/3 do folk talk in terms of 35mm full frame equivalent or the a dual focal length before adding the mag factor?
But the lens I found is “50-200”. Is there another one 50-250mm?Yes that is the Olympus pro lens that I used for my work. I paid $1,300 CAD for it back in around 2008.
I am not a spokesman for micro 4/3 LOL. but I always think of the effect that I will get from my lenses, in the equivalent of the look I know I would get with that focal length on my 35mm Olympus film cameras (with that lens 100-500mm). But when I talk about the lens, I refer to the micro 4/3 designation (with that lens 50-250). As a Canadian I am used to thinking in both metric and imperial measurements - so it’s not a big deal for me.
But the lens I found is “50-200”. Is there another one 50-250mm?
I agree. That range is far more useful to me that the limited 200mm/400mm upper limit. I owned a 70-300mm (140-600mm) lens for my four third system and found that I often still had to crop to get close enough to subjects in the jungles of Costa Rica. But I did love that 600mm full frame equivalent reach. The Pany 100-400 gives a little more reach, mind you at a much heavier cost than the lens I had. But dirt cheap compared to a price tag of around $12,000 USD for a 600mm Canikon lens.What stunned me just now is that for $1597 one can have 800 mm reach in a 4/3 system.
Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm f/4-6.3 ASPH. POWER O.I.S. Lens
So for occasional birding, for me with. GFX MF Camera, the micro 4/3 seems like bargain territory!
I remember you once showed us a snake taken, I think with a 150-300 mm 4/3rds lens, (or the 300-600 equivalent in 35mm terms). I was so impressed how little burdensome “stuff” you had to schlepp around!I agree. That range is far more useful to me that the limited 200mm/400mm upper limit. I owned a 70-300mm (140-600mm) lens for my four third system and found that I often still had to crop to get close enough to subjects in the jungles of Costa Rica. But I did love that 600mm full frame equivalent reach. The Pany 100-400 gives a little more reach, mind you at a much heavier cost than the lens I had. But dirt cheap compared to a price tag of around $12,000 USD for a 600mm Canikon lens.
No, no, no. Sorry !Wow,
Doies that mean you and Luisa are coming to California!
Hmm, that gives me ideas!