Long Lens --- How much would you pay?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
Alan_W1
Contributing MemberPosts: 614
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to Tom Gross, 4 months ago

Tom Gross wrote:

There have been numerous threads and comments here by people desiring a longer prime lens for wildlife, especially bird photography. I don't know if Olympus or Panasonic read this forum, but if they do, perhaps if enough of us are willing to pay the necessary price, they might consider it.

I personally would gladly pay $1,500 - $2,000 for a 300mm f4.0 or 400mm f5.6. These are similar prices that Canon and Nikon charge for such lenses.

I would I pay this price because I would then be able to sell all my Canon gear, including a 500mm f4.5 (non IS) and 100-400mm zoom. This would reduce my camera bag weight substantially and make bird photography more enjoyable.

I think if Oly or Panny ever produce an m43 300/400mm prime, then they need to be serious about it, and not go about it in a half-hearted way.

If one was to be produced at a premium price {maybe £800 for a 300mm/4}, then I feel it should be rugged / have a tripod mount / have a focus limiter/ suitable lens hood......and as it may sometimes/ often be used for hand-holding situations....it must have good handling ergonomics. Bearing in mind that the size of such a tele will be fairly close to a 135 format 300/400mm of similar speed, then if anything less than a serious effort regarding design {preferably by people who actually use these types of tele's}, then I can't see the point of them producing them........especially as it/they would be limited to the m43 format only {bearing in mind that eventually, mirrorless may probably spread to more of the larger formats ......where high quality super-teles already exist}.

Personally, I think I would have to be pretty certain that m43 is to be my future format......before I forked out some serious cash for {what is, in effect} a specialist lens.

Anyway, just my view

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cainn24
Senior MemberPosts: 1,046Gear list
Like?
Dear Sigma...
In reply to cainn24, 4 months ago

How about rescuing us m43 wildlife photography enthusiasts with a sharp 300mm prime lens, because it doesn't look like Olympus or Panasonic really care about us.

Pretty please?

Thanks

I'm sure once they get my message, the engineers will get straight to work.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
cainn24
Senior MemberPosts: 1,046Gear list
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to Dave Lively, 4 months ago

Dave Lively wrote:

cainn24 wrote:

But if we had a faster sharper prime, it would be game over. It doesn't even need to be longer than 300mm, and it doesn't even really need to be that fast. Just sharper. Of course the other things wouldbe nice too though

I am with you on this. Particularly if a slower but sharp lens was significantly lighter than the 2+ pounds I would expect for a 300mm f4. I would pay $800 for a 300 f5.6 if it had good IS, was razor sharp wide open and weighed 1.5 pounds or less.

Indeed.  My thinking exactly.  Soft images bother me more than noisy ones, so I could live with a sharp f/5.6, especially if it wasn't huge.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
AndyGM
Contributing MemberPosts: 692Gear list
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to searun, 4 months ago

Yes, there are those that believe having a fast telephoto is playing to (Micro) Four Thirds strengths, namely the smaller, "cropped" sensor when compared to DSLRs means you can get the narrow angle of view of huge DSLR telephoto lenses at much shorter focal lengths.

However, this conflicts with the main strength of m43, which is small and light. So I really don't see any manufacturer making a fast super telephoto prime with an m43 mount.

If you are going to have a big lens, a lens you mount directly onto a tripod and then mount the camera onto, and let's face it the lens being debated would be like this, the size of the camera would be, within reason, immaterial. It you really want to do birding, an APS-C DSLR is already a very good tool for the job.

m43 has another "hole" in its lens lineup, a UWA prime. I believe there is more of a market for one of these on m43 than there is for a fast tele (to compete with the Fuji XF 14mm for instance), which is why I think it is more likely we will see one.

 AndyGM's gear list:AndyGM's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PL3 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bobby J
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,638Gear list
Like?
Re: Tom, for the last eight years that I know of,
In reply to Tom Gross, 4 months ago

E systems users BEGGED Olympus for something like you mention.  Nothing.  The 300 2.8 was too big and costly.  All we got was the lousey 70~300 f 5.6, which was basically a consumer grade lens.  Useful and cheap but not a very good lens.  What we asked for and never got was a 300mm f 4 (or possibly a 100~300 f 4 zoom) that was built to HG (High Grade) standards.

There's a rumor that they are planning a long lens (may be on the "roadmap") and I hope they deliver.  The current little zoom is OK but overpriced and not optically great from what I've seen.  I know everybody who has one will blast me for saying that, but based on reviews and tests I've seen it's only average.  I hope Oly listens this time.

-- hide signature --

BJM

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
j.m.young
Regular MemberPosts: 429Gear list
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to Tom Gross, 4 months ago

Tom Gross wrote:

There have been numerous threads and comments here by people desiring a longer prime lens for wildlife, especially bird photography. I don't know if Olympus or Panasonic read this forum, but if they do, perhaps if enough of us are willing to pay the necessary price, they might consider it.

I personally would gladly pay $1,500 - $2,000 for a 300mm f4.0 or 400mm f5.6. These are similar prices that Canon and Nikon charge for such lenses.

I would I pay this price because I would then be able to sell all my Canon gear, including a 500mm f4.5 (non IS) and 100-400mm zoom. This would reduce my camera bag weight substantially and make bird photography more enjoyable.

No way would I pay 1500 - 2000 for the 300mm. I have the Olympus 75-300 and the Panasonic 100 -300 and they both are good and most likely as small as a 300mm f4 would be. Don't need the extra speed a 300 with the new cameras.

A 400mm f.4 or f5.6 I would buy for sure at 1000 -1500. I would have it on pre order as soon as I could. I don't know about lens construction but the two lenses that now reach out to 300mm from Panasonic and Olympus in Micro four thirds mount are a good size for me. I would suggest that it be made as fast as possible keeping the approximate same size.

 j.m.young's gear list:j.m.young's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PM2 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Olympus PEN E-P5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 +34 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Walt_A
Senior MemberPosts: 1,478
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to AndyGM, 4 months ago

AndyGM wrote:

Yes, there are those that believe having a fast telephoto is playing to (Micro) Four Thirds strengths, namely the smaller, "cropped" sensor when compared to DSLRs means you can get the narrow angle of view of huge DSLR telephoto lenses at much shorter focal lengths.

However, this conflicts with the main strength of m43, which is small and light. So I really don't see any manufacturer making a fast super telephoto prime with an m43 mount.

I see it differently, small 300 F4's have existed before. The Pentax A*300 F4 was 132x84mm, the panasonic 100-300 is 126x74mm, that's just 6mm shorter than the F4 lens, ok it 10mm less in diameter, but the F4 lens had a built in hood. The Pentax was built in the mid 80's and weighed 850g, the Panasonic weighs 520g, I'm sure with modern materials Panasonic could build a lighter lens with similar dimensions and OIS/AF.

If you are going to have a big lens, a lens you mount directly onto a tripod and then mount the camera onto, and let's face it the lens being debated would be like this, the size of the camera would be, within reason, immaterial. It you really want to do birding, an APS-C DSLR is already a very good tool for the job..................

Yes it does, and I do, but why must I run 2 systems? Well actually I don't, I use APS-C for most and carry a GF-2 for quick macros. But... if panasonic had a 300 F4 I might just make the leap. And isn't that part of the point of M4/3's sales, try and encourage more people to switch? I just can't do the switch to what I consider half a system, when my current one is a full system... I can't be the only person who likes to take photo's of distant wildlife, close up's and landscapes all with one system, can I..?

My partner uses m4/3'rds including the Panasonic 100-300 and has just upgraded from a G2 to a G5 and I'm impressed so far with the G5, but I've never warmed to the 100-300, it's ok but it's not a £400 lens IMHO.

What would I pay for a mythical Panasonic 300 F4, £800-£1000 I guess, which is what I'd pay for a 300 F4 in my current DSLR system. Still like Panasonic/Olympus I'm in no rush.....

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Treeshade
New MemberPosts: 20
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to AndyGM, 4 months ago

AndyGM wrote:

Yes, there are those that believe having a fast telephoto is playing to (Micro) Four Thirds strengths, namely the smaller, "cropped" sensor when compared to DSLRs means you can get the narrow angle of view of huge DSLR telephoto lenses at much shorter focal lengths.

However, this conflicts with the main strength of m43, which is small and light. So I really don't see any manufacturer making a fast super telephoto prime with an m43 mount.

If you are going to have a big lens, a lens you mount directly onto a tripod and then mount the camera onto, and let's face it the lens being debated would be like this, the size of the camera would be, within reason, immaterial. It you really want to do birding, an APS-C DSLR is already a very good tool for the job.

A 300mm f/4 or 400mm f/5.6 m4/3 telephoto lens should be light enough for handheld.
The Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 weights 1570g and is still considered a handheld lens (not for long with 2kg total, but manageable). The lens is 120-600mm on APS-C.

The Pany 100-300mm f/4-5.6 is 520g. I guess Panasonic could make a 300 f/4 prime with OIS at less than 1kg, which produces a less-than-1.5kg package with GH3. If the quality is good enough for a 1.4x TC, it would be a 840mm f/5.6 handheld setup. While the FZ200 is lighter and cheaper, I am sure the m4/3 setup would have better image even chopped to 1200mm.

I hope Pany/Oly could strike a balance between bridge and APS-C for price/quality/weight at above 600mm. For me, the upper reach/aperture limit is handheld weight limit.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sean Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,439
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to AndyGM, 4 months ago

AndyGM wrote:

However, this conflicts with the main strength of m43, which is small and light.

That should read: "smaller and lighter".   And a 300mm f/4 lens will be a lot smaller and lighter than the 600mm lens that gives an equivalent field of view on a full frame camera.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
AndyGM
Contributing MemberPosts: 692Gear list
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to Sean Nelson, 4 months ago

Sean Nelson wrote:

AndyGM wrote:

However, this conflicts with the main strength of m43, which is small and light.

That should read: "smaller and lighter". And a 300mm f/4 lens will be a lot smaller and lighter than the 600mm lens that gives an equivalent field of view on a full frame camera.

True, but it won't be all that much smaller and lighter than a 400mm f/4 lens mounted on an APS-C DSLR. I have a good friend who is a avid, and I mean obsessed, birdwatcher. A hobbyist, but obsessed. The guy moved house to be closer to his favourite reserve for pity's sake. What does he use? An APS-C DSLR. Why not a Full Frame DSLR? Because to get the same reach as his 400mm lens, like you say he would need a 600mm lens, and the cost and weight would be prohibitive. He doesn't know anyone that does bird photography with Full Frame DSLRs for just that reason.

The poster before you mentioned a native m43 300mm f/4 should be less than a kilo. My guess would be not much less, based on the 1.2kg and 1.4kg lenses from Canon and Nikon. Those lenses are about 220mm long, the longest m43 lens so far is 126mm long. I will also draw your attention to the prototype 40-140mm Pro lens Olympus has been showing off, which by m43 standards is, as my old Gran would say, a right old bruiser. The proposed Super Tele prime is going to be bigger again. Mount a 150mm long, 800g lens, even on a GH3, and it will be unbalanced, the lens will swamp the body. And then there is talk of optical teleconverters! When Panasonic reps in interviews have already stated they'll never do optical teleconverters for m43 because they loose just as much line pair resolution as digital teleconverters, so they don't see the point.

People, please. I get that there are quite a few that currently have two systems and want to rationalise to one. What I'm reading is a bunch of guys that want to turn a camera system into something like a DSLR. And there already is a system that's something like a DSLR. It's called a DSLR.

So no I didn't mistype before. m43 is small and light. The latest 14-42mm kit lenses from Oly and Panny make the latest 18–55 mm from Canon look like, well, a Cannon.

I'm just an advocate for using the best tool for the job. Some of you already have the best tool for this particular job, and you want to give it up and stick it on eBay, then advocate that the tool you're left with is developed to become more like the tool you just got rid of. Makes little sense to me...

 AndyGM's gear list:AndyGM's gear list
Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-PL3 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 14-150mm 1:4-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dave Lively
Senior MemberPosts: 1,128
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to AndyGM, 4 months ago

AndyGM wrote:

I'm just an advocate for using the best tool for the job. Some of you already have the best tool for this particular job, and you want to give it up and stick it on eBay, then advocate that the tool you're left with is developed to become more like the tool you just got rid of. Makes little sense to me...

What makes little sense to me is buying a $900, 1.5 pound SLR and a $1500, 2 pound lens when all I really need is the lens. Yes the SLR would be a better choice if birding was my most of my photography. But are the advantages of a SLR in this application worth $900? Not for me.

I expect a system camera to be flexible enough to handle most of my needs. I do not expect it to be the best choice for every situation but it should have a solution for most applications I want. I want a small system but am not going to buy a Nikon 1 for when I want small. I like to take landscapes but am not going to buy a D800 system just for landscapes. And I am not going to buy a D7100 with a 300mm f4 and teleconverter when I want a camera with a lot of reach.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Peter Del
Contributing MemberPosts: 576
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to Tom Gross, 4 months ago

I would be happy to pay £500 for an M.Zuiko f/5.6 300mm lens if it weighed only 300 grams. It seems to me that putting a heavy lens on a lightweight camera rather defeats the object.

Peter Del

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Wallybipster
Contributing MemberPosts: 813Gear list
Like?
Re: Around 2k for a 300 F4 or 400 F5.6 prime
In reply to Paul Auclair, 4 months ago

Paul Auclair wrote:

Wallybipster wrote:

Luckily I can use the ZD 150 F2 with the 2x converter for a 300 F4.0 long lens, but a dedicated prime at this length would be incredibly wonderful for me.

How does IQ compare with 1.4X and the 2X vs no TC?

I haven't done extensive testing on any M4/3 gear, but I know that when I tested it on my old E-5, I couldn't really notice any loss with the 1.4x TC.  The 2x TC degraded things a bit, but it didn't keep me from getting some great shots with that setup that held up to a fair amount of cropping.

Wally

 Wallybipster's gear list:Wallybipster's gear list
Olympus E-620 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 70-300mm 1:4.0-5.6 +7 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sean Nelson
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,439
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to AndyGM, 4 months ago

AndyGM wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

AndyGM wrote:

However, this conflicts with the main strength of m43, which is small and light.

That should read: "smaller and lighter". And a 300mm f/4 lens will be a lot smaller and lighter than the 600mm lens that gives an equivalent field of view on a full frame camera.

True, but it won't be all that much smaller and lighter than a 400mm f/4 lens mounted on an APS-C DSLR.

It's only 75% of the focal length.   That's really very close to the 67% of the focal length that the 400mm APS-C lens is compared to its 600mm full frame equivalent.

If it's a good thing to loose 1/3 of length (and even more of the volume and the weight) in going from DSLR to APS-C, then why isn't it worth loosing an additional 1/4 in going to M43?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
danieljcox
Regular MemberPosts: 125Gear list
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to Tom Gross, 4 months ago

I would love to see Panasonic give us glass in a super telephoto and I would be willing to pay handsomely for it. I'm hopeful they update the 100-300 with the same glass and build as the new 35-100 F/2.8. I would pay as much as $3000.00 for a lens of this caliber. Ideally I would like it to be an F/4 throughout the zoom range.

Daniel J. Cox
www.naturalexposures.com/corkboard

 danieljcox's gear list:danieljcox's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX1 Nikon D4 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH3 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SteveNunez
Regular MemberPosts: 460
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to Sean Nelson, 4 months ago

Bottom line, m4/3 system needs longer glass to be truly accepted as a replacement for DSLR's or else it's a crippled alternative system and DSLR's will continue to grow further as m4/3 simply wont offer all the photographic opportunities DSLR's will...................just give us a Sigma 50-500 type lens and we'll be happy- watch it sell extremely well.

I'm tired of using adapted long glass just to have the reach DSLR's are capable of- stop crippling the m4/3 system and make it a viable alternative to DSLR's!

(I love my GH3 but have been eyeballing the new Sony A7R due to all the glass that will be available to it as well as adaptable lenses m4/3 can utilize........without the long glass omissions............almost ready to jump ship!)

-- hide signature --

Steve Nunez~South Florida Artist
www.stevenunez.com
Oly EM5-OMD, Panasonic GH-3, G2, GF3, G5
Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JosephScha
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,175Gear list
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to Tom Gross, 4 months ago

Apparently, about $270 with tax, delivered. I just ordered the Rokinon 300mm f6.3 mirror lens for micro 4/3 from Amazon, it was/is on sale today for $251.xx .   List is $399.

I remember when it came out thinking that looks like a fun way to get 600mm equivalent in a small package, let's see how much it is ... uh oh, $399, to much for a mirror lens (in my opinion, my judgement of utility, of course).    But, when the ad email said lenses on sale and I found this one was now $251, that was low enough.

-- hide signature --

js

 JosephScha's gear list:JosephScha's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G10 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Leica Summilux DG 25mm F1.4 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tom Gross
Regular MemberPosts: 226Gear list
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to Alan_W1, 4 months ago

That is exactly what I want. I frequently stand around for hours getting photos of egrets and eagles coming to nests. I do this with an APS-C Canon and 500mm lens. I could do the exact same thing with a much lighter 300f4 or 400f5.6 and my Panasonic G5. This would save me roughly 5 pounds of equipment. That would be so nice when I have to walk 1 mile with camera, tripod and lens.

I would insist on a tripod mount so I did not have to hand hold for long periods of time and to get better images because of shutter shock and camera movement.  A lens hood is also mandatory.

 Tom Gross's gear list:Tom Gross's gear list
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-200mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS Panasonic Lumix G Vario HD 12-32mm F3.5-5.6 Mega OIS +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Paul B Jones
Contributing MemberPosts: 823Gear list
Like?
Perspective
In reply to Tom Gross, 4 months ago

The Canon 800mm f/5.6 is about $13,000 US Dollars. The Nikon version of the same lens is north of $18,000.

-- hide signature --
 Paul B Jones's gear list:Paul B Jones's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Canon EOS-1D X Canon EF 400mm f/4.0 DO IS USM Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L IS USM +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
a13
a13
Regular MemberPosts: 162Gear list
Like?
Re: Long Lens --- How much would you pay?
In reply to JosephScha, 4 months ago

JosephScha wrote:

Apparently, about $270 with tax, delivered. I just ordered the Rokinon 300mm f6.3 mirror lens for micro 4/3 from Amazon, it was/is on sale today for $251.xx . List is $399.

I remember when it came out thinking that looks like a fun way to get 600mm equivalent in a small package, let's see how much it is ... uh oh, $399, to much for a mirror lens (in my opinion, my judgement of utility, of course). But, when the ad email said lenses on sale and I found this one was now $251, that was low enough.

-- hide signature --

js

As I mentioned back on the first page there is a 500mm at around the same price, still f/6.3 as well.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads