50-200 swd or not for mFT

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
illy
Forum ProPosts: 11,119
Like?
Re: Have to disagree with both points here
In reply to jim stirling, 5 months ago

jim stirling wrote:

Big Ga wrote:

jim stirling wrote:


Thank you for your view on this, Sabine, Overall it looks like at least regarding the much hoped for future PDAF supported body that the SWD version is the better choice. I do not intend to be using it for any fast moving subjects and will happily use MF .Though as you say the lens is not the cheapest in the world it really delivers a lot for the money.

Jim

Jim. I'm confused.

Everything in this thread only confirms to me that for you and I, its the non SWD that's the best bang for the buck lens to get ??

I agree that at the moment the SWD is not the best choice for the mFT cameras, but my plan for the lens is on a future PDAF supported body where hopefully it will have better AF than the non-swd version and i am increasingly getting into video so the SWD version also seems to be quieter . I don't mind just using manual focus at the moment, and if my only intention was for use on the current non PDAF mFT bodies then the non-SWD body is a great buy. Though there seems to be some differences of opinions between people regarding the AF speed, the majority seem to side with the SWD. I know buying gear for an unannounced camera is a bit of a gamble.

Jim

it's a cracking lens Jim, even if you have to manually focus the optics are worth it....especially if you can get one dirt cheap

--
The time you enjoy wasting is not wasted time.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow