The lens I've been waiting for, PL 50-200

[Knorp]

Dear Bart
I think you understand us better than we do ourselves!
.. and I think it's rather unkind to refer to an M10 as a kidney!
but indeed, you are right, I wasn't borassic until I bought an SL 16-35 and 7 new sash windows for our house

I still very much like the PL 100-400 though . . very much!

best

I see - that's new information: then you're skint indeed, but my sash urban dictionary was sash about 'sash' ... :loco:
Anyway, 7 windows to replace that surely will kick up some dust in the house.

All the best.

 

[Knorp]

I don't take photos of plants and bees with a telephoto lens very often. In this case, because of the dense growth of Devil's Club plants, I could not get any closer to this flowering Devil's Club.

I decided to use this image for the July color print exchange.

Gary

G9, PL 50-200 at 156mm (FF eq 312mm), ISO 400, 1/3200 at f4

Really there's nothing better than a tele lens for insect close ups and of course the occasionally difficult to reach plants and flowers.
So far I think your 50-200 does a splendid job.

Kind regards.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I don't take photos of plants and bees with a telephoto lens very often. In this case, because of the dense growth of Devil's Club plants, I could not get any closer to this flowering Devil's Club.

I decided to use this image for the July color print exchange.

Gary

G9, PL 50-200 at 156mm (FF eq 312mm), ISO 400, 1/3200 at f4

That's excellent and shows off the qualities of that lens in a great way. My 35-100 is already up for sale, and the 50-200 will probably replace my 100-300 next year. Need to dig up some monies first

 

[Elderly]

My 35-100 is already up for sale,

Gosh! and I thought that was one of your many, many, many, many favourite and most used M4/3rds lenses Jorgen.

Apologies for not writing the 'o' with its /, but every time I push alt0248, my post disappears
and for some reason my smilies are not working either :confusedand perplexed:.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Gosh! and I thought that was one of your many, many, many, many favourite and most used M4/3rds lenses Jorgen.

Apologies for not writing the 'o' with its /, but every time I push alt0248, my post disappears
and for some reason my smilies are not working either :confusedand perplexed:.

It is, but I'm selling all my zooms except the 100-300 (can't afford the 200/2.8 to replace it). I'm going to work with primes only for the coming year, small primes.

Most of what I did with the 35-100mm can be done with the 75/1.8. The 12-35 is harder to replace, but I've been shooting with Zuiko 12/2.0 on a GM5 and the Panasonic 25/1.7 on a GX8 lately. The 25/1.7 will probably have to be replaced with the PL 25/1.4, but no hurry. The 75/1.8 is mounted on my second GX8. I consider buying one of the 40-something lenses as well (I have a second GM5 for that :loco: ), but I'll sell some more stuff first.

 

[ptomsu]

It is, but I'm selling all my zooms except the 100-300 (can't afford the 200/2.8 to replace it). I'm going to work with primes only for the coming year, small primes.

Most of what I did with the 35-100mm can be done with the 75/1.8. The 12-35 is harder to replace, but I've been shooting with Zuiko 12/2.0 on a GM5 and the Panasonic 25/1.7 on a GX8 lately. The 25/1.7 will probably have to be replaced with the PL 25/1.4, but no hurry. The 75/1.8 is mounted on my second GX8. I consider buying one of the 40-something lenses as well (I have a second GM5 for that :loco: ), but I'll sell some more stuff first.

Jorgen,

as I can understand your brave motivations and these seem all good - BUT I would reconsider the PL25/1.4, had this lens twice and sold it twice as it was pure plastic, very loud (aperture noise) etc. I would rather go with the Oly 1.8/25 if it needs to be really cheap or with the new 1.2/25, which I see again and again is a marvel of a lens.

Peter

 

[Knorp]

Gosh! and I thought that was one of your many, many, many, many favourite and most used M4/3rds lenses Jorgen.

Apologies for not writing the 'o' with its /, but every time I push alt0248, my post disappears
and for some reason my smilies are not working either :confusedand perplexed:.

Jørgen ? He's an old 'swinger' ... :clap:

 

[Elderly]

Well, in a sense every lens is a Black Hole, right ?

There's definitely something wrong with my PC and/ browser/settings ? …..
Viewing your post on my PC Bart I can only see a black rectangle within your post (hence my Black Hole comment),
But having just looked on my iPad I see the image that everybody else is presumably seeing :andmysmiliesstildon'twork:.

 

[Knorp]

There's definitely something wrong with my PC and/ browser/settings ? …..
Viewing your post on my PC Bart I can only see a black rectangle within your post (hence my Black Hole comment),
But having just looked on my iPad I see the image that everybody else is presumably seeing :andmysmiliesstildon'twork:.

Hi there Ian, that's no good at all.
What you call an image is actually a Youtube video. Can you start this video on your iPad ?

As for your PC, did you or some else perhaps change some security settings recently ?
Can you see others' smilies on your PC ?

Kind regards.

 

[Elderly]

Hi there Ian, that's no good at all.
What you call an image is actually a Youtube video. Can you start this video on your iPad ?

As for your PC, did you or some else perhaps change some security settings recently ?
Can you see others' smilies on your PC ?

Kind regards.

I can see and run the YouTube video on my iPad.

There has been a recent LARGE update to Windows 10, maybe 'they' have changed some security settings,
but GetDPI is the only forum I've used recently that I have this problem (on my PC) with.

The background as I type this is very pale grey, but it reverts to white
when I click (without them working) on any of the Smilies to the right of this box ….. all very strange :loco:

To get the smilies you now see, I have had to type "loco and banghead", and I do not have Smilies Disabled :banghead:

Other things have disappeared too such as the Icon to insert an image; I can only do that using

.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Jorgen,

as I can understand your brave motivations and these seem all good - BUT I would reconsider the PL25/1.4, had this lens twice and sold it twice as it was pure plastic, very loud (aperture noise) etc. I would rather go with the Oly 1.8/25 if it needs to be really cheap or with the new 1.2/25, which I see again and again is a marvel of a lens.

Peter

The 25/1.2 is too big and to expensive for my current budget. Maybe I'll just keep the Panasonic. I'm also considering the Panasonic 30mm macro, which also has the advantage of OIS (and dual IS on the GX8), plus it solves my need for a travel macro lens.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Apologies for not writing the 'o' with its /, but every time I push alt0248, my post disappears
and for some reason my smilies are not working either :confusedand perplexed:.

I've never understood why MS hasn't solved this in a more elegant way, like Apple has. On a Mac, you just push alt/o to get the ø and similar combinations for other Scandinavian and German characters. I suppose MS DOS still has it's limitations :ROTFL:

 

[Elderly]

There's definitely something wrong with my PC and/ browser/settings ? …..

Well …… last night I got another uninvited update from our TinySoft friends
and today, I think it's all working again :thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:.

I'm aware that I've taken this Off Topic , so I'll post this now and then edit my post with something back On Topic to confirm that function now works too

ETA That I've phoned my usual photo store to ask what they will give me in part exchange for my 40-150 PRabbitO and also have made an enquiry to a dealer who has given me respectable prices in the past for unwanted lenses.

 

[drofnad]

The Panasonic Leica DG Vario 50-200/2.8-4 was first announced in February 2018 and has only become available within the past month, so I'm surprised that you could have had this same lens "some long time ago."
Gary

You need to see the absence of an "m" before his '43' to see its denoted object being the older, Olympus bigger like-range (f/2.8-3.5) lens. Which I recall Godfrey using w/appreciation on his E-M1.1.

-d.

 

[bensonga]

You need to see the absence of an "m" before his '43' to see its denoted object being the older, Olympus bigger like-range (f/2.8-3.5) lens. Which I recall Godfrey using w/appreciation on his E-M1.1.

-d.

I figured out later that this older Oly FT 50-200 must be the lens Peter was referring to. However, in the context of discussing the PL 50-200 vs his preferred Oly mFT 40-150 Pro, I just don't understand the relevance of his comment about the Oly FT 50-200 lens. His previous comments re "not bothering" with the PL 50-200 were also about the Oly 40-150 vs the PL 50-200, not the Oly FT 50-200.

Well the Olympus 40-150 is faster and obviously sharper in most situations. It is a bit more compact than the Olympus, but not much IMHO.

BUT the additional f-stop especially in the tele-range is of significant value since we have to deal with m43 sensor size, that finally makes the Olympus 2.8/40-150 the clear winner for me :clap:

Another reason not to bother about the PanaLeica 50-200 anymore!

Gary

 

[ptomsu]

I figured out later that this older Oly FT 50-200 must be the lens Peter was referring to. However, in the context of discussing the PL 50-200 vs his preferred Oly mFT 40-150 Pro, I just don't understand the relevance of his comment about the Oly FT 50-200 lens. His previous comments re "not bothering" with the PL 50-200 were also about the Oly 40-150 vs the PL 50-200, not the Oly FT 50-200.
Gary

Gary,

I exactly referred to the older FT 50-200 that I owned together with my first 43 camera - the E1, but for me this is also true of the new m43 50-200. For me the Oly 40-150 wins hands down, so I do not bother. But for others as you the milage may vary and this is great, so enjoy your PanLeica 50-200

Best

Peter

 

[bensonga]

Gary,

I exactly referred to the older FT 50-200 that I owned together with my first 43 camera - the E1, but for me this is also true of the new m43 50-200. For me the Oly 40-150 wins hands down, so I do not bother. But for others as you the milage may vary and this is great, so enjoy your PanLeica 50-200

Best

Peter

The older Olympus FT 50-200 lens is a very different lens from the new PL 50-200 for those of us who are using modern Panasonic mFT cameras, like the G9. But I won't bother debating this difference with you Peter. You are happy with the your choice of the superb Oly 40-150 Pro for your Olympus mFT cameras and I'm happy with my choice of the PL 50-200 for use on my Pana G85 and G9 bodies. We will leave it at that.

Gary

 

[biglouis]

I sold my 100-400 a couple of weeks ago as I have not used it much since I got the 200/2.8.

However, I now miss it. I wouldn't replace it with the 50-200, imho it is not long enough. But I am thinking about the 100-300v2.

Just my two cents.

LouisB

 

[ptomsu]

The older Olympus FT 50-200 lens is a very different lens from the new PL 50-200 for those of us who are using modern Panasonic mFT cameras, like the G9. But I won't bother debating this difference with you Peter. You are happy with the your choice of the superb Oly 40-150 Pro for your Olympus mFT cameras and I'm happy with my choice of the PL 50-200 for use on my Pana G85 and G9 bodies. We will leave it at that.

Gary

Gary, as I said - ENJOY your 50-200, this is for sure a superb lens albeit not for me and I by no means have the intent to convince you!

The reason I replied to this thread is that I would have rather preferred a reasonably fast PRO quality 75-300 - either from Olympus or PanaLeica - but that unfortunately did not happen so far, but who knows maybe Olympus have something to surprise us soon. I also prefer meanwhile fast constant aperture zooms - at least for m43 in order to avoid too high ISOs and keep DOF as shallow as possible, which I all get with the Olympus PRO zooms and not with the variable aperture PanaLeica zooms.

The often repeating story that wishes, requirements and needs of people are too often different :thumbs: which actually is GOOD as otherwise we would live in a boring world

Peter

 

[bensonga]

I sold my 100-400 a couple of weeks ago as I have not used it much since I got the 200/2.8.

However, I now miss it. I wouldn't replace it with the 50-200, imho it is not long enough. But I am thinking about the 100-300v2.

Just my two cents.

LouisB

If you get a good copy of the 100-300 II, it is a very attractive addition to your PL 200. It is hard to beat the reach, compactness and price of the 100-300. I am keeping mine just for the few times when I might want the longer reach vs my PL 50-200.

Gary