Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

This summer will need a 300mm - suggestions

A

Allan Ostling

Guest
Tele-Takum ar 300mm f6.3

The suggestions have all been for lenses which are too heavy for a Micro Four Thirds camera. The whole point is to keep the outfit as light as possible.

Think slow. Here is the lightest (non-reflex) 300mm lens, the Tele-Takumar f6.3 preset. The curtailed aperture is no drawback on my E-P2 -- the screen brightens automatically to compensate.




Here is a shot I took with this lens yesterday, a Ring-necked duck on a nearby pond.

 
K

Kewk

Guest
I think you'd be better off using the 45-200 and cropping.

I'm not sure a monopod is needed. On public whale watches you're always running from one side of the boat to the other, along with everyone else, and a monopod could get in the way. Resting the lens on the rail will help, but don't do it if the engine is on.

I'd stay away from the mirror lenses. Very slow (you'll need all the shutter speed you can get) and optically poor.
 
K

Kewk

Guest
I get the sense you like to argue Allan. I will concede that the Hubble beast my Canon telephotos when it comes to nebula photography. For nature photos I stay away from mirror lenses due to fixed, typically slow speed, nauseating bokeh and flat contrast.
 
A

Allan Ostling

Guest
Kewk said:
I get the sense you like to argue Allan. I will concede that the Hubble beast my Canon telephotos when it comes to nebula photography. For nature photos I stay away from mirror lenses due to fixed, typically slow speed, nauseating bokeh and flat contrast.
Click to expand...
I seem to like to argue with you, apparently. Now you've stated another falsehood, that mirror lenses lack contrast. A mirror lens has far fewer glass/air interfaces at which contrast can be attenuated.

Bad bokeh? On that we can agree.
 
hodad66

hodad66

Member
I have the 300/2.8L and a Sigma 600/8. I took them both to
the wetlands. The mirror is light and compact & I have had some
great, sharp shots with it.... from close range. Out at the wetlands
I simply couldn't get a decent shot at distance. It did lack contrast
and I couldn't focus the sucker for nothin. I tried, I really tried.

I had an old mirror back in the AE-1 days and loved it for short distance
macro shots...........
 
K

Kewk

Guest
This thread got me thinking that I might like a nice, small travel telephoto for my E-P1 kit. I decided on a Canon FD 300mm f5.6.

Good optical quality, about the same weight as the 4/3rds 70-300mm zoom and dirt cheap.
 
R

Rich M

Member
Kewk said:
This thread got me thinking that I might like a nice, small travel telephoto for my E-P1 kit. I decided on a Canon FD 300mm f5.6.

Good optical quality, about the same weight as the 4/3rds 70-300mm zoom and dirt cheap.
Click to expand...
Getting back to Alaska,.......last spring when I was there it was overcast...a lot. I think it rained every day in my honor. :)

In these more marginal conditions, I think a faster lens is better....because you also need faster shutter speeds (even with IBIS, if your camera supports it) too. Or shoot at ISO 3200 :bugeyes:
 
K

Kewk

Guest
Yes, faster is better, but more money and more weight.

We could talk about trade offs forever, but it's really up to the individual.

I went with the 300mm f5.6 lens because it will fit upright in a Domke f-803 and that's my designated E-P1 bag. Besides, with manual focusing I could use a bit more DOF.

When I feel like doing some serious bird photography I break out the big Canon glass.
 
A

Allan Ostling

Guest
Kewk said:
This thread got me thinking that I might like a nice, small travel telephoto for my E-P1 kit. I decided on a Canon FD 300mm f5.6.
Click to expand...
I considered that lens too. I opted for the Takumar 300mm f6.3 mainly because I already had an M42 adapter.

Your Canon FD 300mm f5.6 has the essential tripod collar. I've found that magnified manual focusing on the E-P2 without having the rigidity of this central support is virtually impossible. I tried my Minolta AF Apo 100-300mm, but gave up on using that.

I expect you will be very happy with your FD.
 
slau

slau

New member
I wonder how effective is the EP1 body IS with a 300mm lens. Kewk and Allan, can you comment on that. Thanks.
 
A

Allan Ostling

Guest
slau said:
I wonder how effective is the EP1 body IS with a 300mm lens. Kewk and Allan, can you comment on that. Thanks.
Click to expand...
The 300mm lens really needs to be on a tripod to enable critical focusing with the magnified view. At least, I think so. I have not tried mine without this support. I set IS to OFF, the recommended setting when using a tripod.

I took an SMC Takumar 150mm f4 out today on its maiden outing. I was using a monopod so set the mode to IS3. Here is a shot from this lens, taken at f8:


 
L

lcubed

New member
fwiw, i'd think the ep-1/2 gf-1 style bodies aren't a good choice for handheld shooting with the longer Focal Length Lenses. The extra point of stability when using the EVF on the G1/GH1 bodies adds enough additional stability for critical focusing.
 
P

PeterB666

Member
lcubed said:
fwiw, i'd think the ep-1/2 gf-1 style bodies aren't a good choice for handheld shooting with the longer Focal Length Lenses. The extra point of stability when using the EVF on the G1/GH1 bodies adds enough additional stability for critical focusing.
Click to expand...
With any long lens, you cradle the lens to do hand-held shooting, not try and hold the lens cantilevered from the body of the camera. The E-P1/E-P2 works fine with longer lenses but the tripod mount is not very strong so a tripod collar is essential. The thin aluminium base plate (no, it isn’t stainless steel – only the body veneer is) will bend very easily.
 
JimBuchanan

JimBuchanan

New member
The operative phrase in the previous post is "extra point of stability" of the EVF possessing camera body. I doubt the poster meant the camera with long lens be held with 2 hands and no lens support.

Now, my effective 500mm lens solution would allow hand holding the camera with 2 hands, if one wanted to do that.

I have hesitated to post this, as I haven't started the job yet, but I will be converting the Minolta MD 250mm Cat lens to m4/3s mount. This lens is about as light and small as it can be at 9 oz. and will give an effective 500mm.

I have yet to acquire a E-P2 or G-something for the process, but was thinking of the in-body stabilizer Olympus, so I would also be interested in the in-body stabilizer of the Olympus EP-x cameras. Any other thoughts?
 
A

Allan Ostling

Guest
JimBuchanan said:
I have hesitated to post this, as I haven't started the job yet, but I will be converting the Minolta MD 250mm Cat lens to m4/3s mount. This lens is about as light and small as it can be at 9 oz. and will give an effective 500mm.
Click to expand...
I cringed when I saw your photo. I had this lens, but sold it three years ago before the price skyrocketed. I did not then foresee the coming of m4/3s. It is a marvelous lens.

I have an MD adapter for my EP-2 -- these are cheap, and effective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top