Oly 150mm 2.0 or K-5 plus DA* 200 2.8

I have been eyeballing the Oly 150mm f2.0 for a couple of years now and always had trouble dealing with the price. I know it is still cheaper than some of the C or N equivalents but $2150 is still quite a hunk of change. Never really see them on the used market and when they do, they are almost the price as new.

Looking around, I found the Pentax DA* 200 f2.8 seems to be of comparable quality and less than half the price . It also seems to have a nice bokeh as does the Oly 150mm. On their respective bodies, they both give a 300mm perspective and I could almost afford the K-5 plus the 200mm for the price of the 150mm and the body plus lens is almost the same weight as the Oly 150mm.

Since my E-5 may well be my last FT body and also as Oly is playing the semipro mFT body release so close to the chest, I am not sure that another Oly lens is a risk worth taking at this time. Buying the K-2 plus 200mm would also give me a body with a great zoom, E-5 plus 50-200 plus TC14 matched with a body with a great prime and no need to switch lenses when a critical moment arrives. If only Oly would say for sure if the SHG lenses are still in the mFT future or are they too at an end. Do they really think that the E-5 will not sell if they announce the upscale mFT body. I think they would sell more as many of us would like to have both.

At any rate, if anyone has any experience with the two different setups, I would like to hear about it. Thanks,

Dave
--
DaveJC

Hi Dave,

I have zero experience with the Pentax lens and only recently got the Zuiko 150, so am still in the learning phase with the lens. Based on this review of the 200 at least, the Zuiko seems clearly the better lens. Better enough to be worth the difference in price? Depends on your demands.

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/370-pentax-smc-da-200mm-f28-ed-if-sdm?start=1

This much is clear to me after using the Zuiko a few weeks: it's earned the gaudy reputation honestly. Shoot it wide open all day--you'll not uncover any flaws. Don't discount the weight difference though, the 150 is a real load.

Happy shopping,

Rick

What's the risk? You said it yourself: when you see them used, they're nearly the same price as new.

The Olympus ZD 150/2 is a superb lens. It's what I'd buy in an instant rather than a different camera system.
--
Godfrey
http://godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com

Can be had for $350-450 used, you just gotta manually focus
It's actually remarkable how similar the output is btwn the ZD 150 and 135 AIS

Nikon 135/2



Oly 150/2



--



http://www.pbase.com/jfinite

A couple of points-

Is the Pentax lens water resistant like the body? The Zuiko is and matches the body you have.

I see from the review that the Pentax is basically an older design lens and suffers quite badly from CA. You could find this very annoying, because it is not always easy to completely remove, as I have found with a high quality legacy 400mm Nikkor. The Zuiko sometimes shows a little of this but being a modern lens, it's much more under control.

Given recent history, it could be said that Pentax may be less likely than Olympus to see through the next decade.

I bought my 150f2 from the 4/3 Photo forum where they pop up from time to time. The 150 is the main reason I have stayed with Olympus dslr's which suit my style in some ways, but not others.
Cheers,
Don

Why learn a totally new system when you could have one of the best (as many claimed) lens in 4/3rds system.

And f2 vs f2.8 is going to help alot in freezing motions

--
My Galleries
http://picasaweb.google.com.au/sadwitch

I recently bought the 150 F2 on the 4/3 forum for much less than the new or refurbished price. I did wait a while before I found one. I have been extremely pleased with the purchase and can not imagine a better lens relative to quality. Definitiely was worth the wait (and weight) for me. Now if I can just find a used 300 F2 I will have it all.

--
http://www.pbase.com/vor/profile

E5 E30 E510 E20 C8080 C2100 11-22 12-60 50/f2 150/2 14- 35 35-100 18-180 50-200 (SWD) 70-300 EC 14 EC 20 EX25 FL FL50 FL36R HLD-4

Hi Don,

Based on poking around the specs, the Pentax lens is weather-proofed and has ultrasonic focusing, making it an SWD equivalent. Not optically up to the ZD 150 standards, regardless.

Cheers,

Rick

jfinite said:

Can be had for $350-450 used, you just gotta manually focus
It's actually remarkable how similar the output is btwn the ZD 150 and 135 AIS

Nikon 135/2

[imgs]

Click to expand...

Side by side, this excellent!
How do you find defocusing on 135, which setting do you put it on?

--
- sergey

Skeeterbytes said:

Hi Don,

Based on poking around the specs, the Pentax lens is weather-proofed and has ultrasonic focusing, making it an SWD equivalent. Not optically up to the ZD 150 standards, regardless.

Cheers,

Rick

Click to expand...

Thats a plus Rick
The K5 seems to be an excellent camera, but those Zuikos are hard to beat.
Don

John Pucel said:

I recently bought the 150 F2 on the 4/3 forum for much less than the new or refurbished price. I did wait a while before I found one. I have been extremely pleased with the purchase and can not imagine a better lens relative to quality. Definitiely was worth the wait (and weight) for me. Now if I can just find a used 300 F2 I will have it all.

Click to expand...

Judging from the the compact-brick weight of the 150f2, and the size of the 300 f2.8, if you find a 300 f2, you'll likely have to also find a wheelbarrow to transport it with!
;-)

Typo I know - and I make lots myself...just couldn't resist a bit of humour, Actually I find the 150f2 I just got quite manageable, and the picture quality (sharpness, colours, bouquet) incredible, Just posted a few of my first shots with it at at:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=37828170

BTW, I got mine for around $1550 and I think that Adorama was selling it new for around $1850.00. Still expensive, but better than $2200.
--
erichK
saskatoon, canada

Photography is a small voice, at best, but sometimes one photograph, or a group of them, can lure our sense of awareness.

• W. Eugene Smith, Dec 30, 1918 to Oct 15, 1978.

http://erichk.zenfolio.com/

http://www.fototime.com/inv/7F3D846BCD301F3

underwater photos:
http://www.scubaboard.com/gallery/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/5567

Another alternative: Leica R 2.8/135. In Holland second hand for about 350 euro. Exceptional creamy bokeh, mechanical absolute top.

Can be used on both Oly and Pentax cameras.

Greetings, Theo

it's a fine fine lens. I would think it's probably the best prime Olympus has of all as far as image quality, etc. goes.

That said, I am pretty sure the Pentax you mention can't be a bad lens either. You have to remember at the end of the day besides the risk you mentioned, you need to plug this lens in an Olympus body and it sure gets very pricey.

The E-5 is certainly limited in several ways compared to a K-5, but at low ISO (as long as you don't need solid silky shadows) and the ease to get color right from the get go I would give the nod to the E-5

So with that in mind:

• The K-5 at the moment has an AF problem. I got good word that Pentax is working on a firmware to fix this. To me the uncertainty is how well the firmware will fix it. I remember the days of 3 firmwares in a row for the E-3 that didn't quite fix the focus problems.

If you shoot with manual focus or in good light this is a non issue.

• I have noticed more instances of purple fringing with Pentax than Olympus. Though that could be because of the small lenses I am using (pancakes). I remember trying the DA * Gold 14-54 equivalent and didn't see that, but I am still inclined you may see it more on the Pentax side of things.

• Tonal range, shadows, low light photography, the K-5 will beat the E-5 hands down. But the question there is what do you really need. If you shoot ISO 800 or lower I would say consider the E-5. Have you seen the output of the E_30/620 E-5 from RAW on the shadows? It's definitively less than say what you see on default on the E-3.

As far as Olympus supporting this lens, they have mentioned that's a plan for the pen unified system, but yeah, spending so much cash one has to be more sure. Honestly what worries me more here is Olympus Imaging health which seems to be down down down on the last 2 years, but it could still turn around. Pentax isn't that solid either on that end though they seem to have gotten a lot of good press lately and interest.

I think another very important question you have to ask yourself is: have you shot with a prime before? of that focal length? (sorry if you have). Spending so much money with either direction, only to discover is not quite your cup of tea is something best avoided if one can help it. You may not be able to help it, in which case consider it a $2K USD lesson

Good luck with either choice. The Olympus prime is certainly one of the very best lenses in the entire 4/3rds catalog. I saw a shot with it and the e-510 and made the e-510 look like a new camera.

Here's a link to some user comments on that Pentax lens. The shots were not shot with a K-5, the K-5 would do even better. Look at the wedding shots.

--

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo

Shotted said:

A couple of points-

Is the Pentax lens water resistant like the body? The Zuiko is and matches the body you have.

I see from the review that the Pentax is basically an older design lens and suffers quite badly from CA. You could find this very annoying, because it is not always easy to completely remove, as I have found with a high quality legacy 400mm Nikkor. The Zuiko sometimes shows a little of this but being a modern lens, it's much more under control.

Click to expand...

This isn't an old Pentax lens, this is also a new design.

Shotted said:

Given recent history, it could be said that Pentax may be less likely than Olympus to see through the next decade.

Click to expand...

I am not sure about that. Pentax even put out their medium format camera. If the company was doing that bad they wouldn't have done that, and they do have a lot of interest.

Shotted said:

I bought my 150f2 from the 4/3 Photo forum where they pop up from time to time. The 150 is the main reason I have stayed with Olympus dslr's which suit my style in some ways, but not others.
Cheers,
Don

Click to expand...

--

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo

There's a reason it's half the price, and the fact 150mm is one of the best if not the best tele lens out there.

200 2.8 is probably great value for under 1000$, but it doesn't seem much better compared to better 70-200s, so you know why it's priced that way.

Also ZD works great with both ECs, while Pentax doesn't even have TCs of their own....
--
Cheers,
Marin

and it does seem to be (yes, I am talking about the Pentax one), that doesn't mean it's a bad or horrible lens by any means. Then of course you have to weight in the body you are going to put in.

If you need the dynamic range, low light performance the K-5 provides, there isn't much the 150 F2 is going to do on the E-5 body.

But to make it clear, I am not suggesting the 150mm F2 is a bad lens or the like.

msusic said:

There's a reason it's half the price, and the fact 150mm is one of the best if not the best tele lens out there.

200 2.8 is probably great value for under 1000$, but it doesn't seem much better compared to better 70-200s, so you know why it's priced that way.

Click to expand...

How do you know this?

msusic said:

Also ZD works great with both ECs, while Pentax doesn't even have TCs of their own....

Click to expand...

That's true, though on the discontinued scale the 4/3rd lens line seems closer to that than any Pentax lens.

I think the last point is valid, but again, depends on other factors too. If the OP needs low light/good tonal range in the shadows performance, the 150 won't provide it until a body with a new modern sensor comes out. At least that will probably eventually happen.

msusic said:

--
Cheers,
Marin

Click to expand...

--

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo

I'm pretty sure 150mm @ f2 will give better IQ than 200 @ f2.8, and there goes your ISO/newer sensor advantage.

I don't think K5 even has 1 stop advantage over E-5 in that regard (i.e. ISO800 vs ISO1600).

Plus, Zuiko has focus limiter which is extremely useful for some applications, and as you said yourself K5 has AF issues whereas 150mm I've used was very quick, even with EC20 mounted.
--
Cheers,
Marin

msusic said:

I'm pretty sure 150mm @ f2 will give better IQ than 200 @ f2.8, and there goes your ISO/newer sensor advantage.

Click to expand...

No, sorry but don't think so. It really depends the situation you are shooting in, which is why I pointed that out in my reply.

msusic said:

I don't think K5 even has 1 stop advantage over E-5 in that regard (i.e. ISO800 vs ISO1600).

Click to expand...

The K-5 has more than 2 stops advantage over the E-5 (by a bit) so you still have one more stop of an advantage. Also you have NO banding and much MUCH greater DR.

That doesn't mean the E-5 doesn't have its better situations but you make it sound like the K-5 doesn't have any strengths here which is false.

msusic said:

Plus, Zuiko has focus limiter which is extremely useful for some applications, and as you said yourself K5 has AF issues whereas 150mm I've used was very quick, even with EC20 mounted.

Click to expand...

Yes, the K-5 right now does have focus issues in warm/tungsten low light. Something Pentax is working on. Just like I admit the K-5 has this issue, let's admit the E-5 does have its issues too. I have been able to shoot very high iso, push shadows to equivalents of ISO 6400/12800 in real world situations that the E-5 would simply fall apart even shooting 1 iso below, as it has banding.

But you didn't answer what I was asking, about how did you know about the performance of the Pentax lens. My point is, the Pentax lens is pretty darn good too. I will give the win to the 150 F2 but since what you can put in is the E-5 body, there will be many situations (depending what you shoot) where the K-5 + that lens will have the advantage.

msusic said:

--
Cheers,
Marin

Click to expand...

--

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo

Raist3d said:

msusic said:

I don't think K5 even has 1 stop advantage over E-5 in that regard (i.e. ISO800 vs ISO1600).

Click to expand...

The K-5 has more than 2 stops advantage over the E-5 (by a bit) so you still have one more stop of an advantage. Also you have NO banding and much MUCH greater DR.

Click to expand...

So you are back at that notion?
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse5/page11.asp

Take iso 800 and see what iso that resembles that amount of noise on the Pentax...

In Raw the iso 800 is a tad less noisy, and if the k5 uses 1600 (vs the E-5 800) the Pentax is noisier.

Then pick .jpg and be surpriced.... Just because the Pentax is better at iso 6400 doesn't mean that it is that much better at iso 800 as you responded.

And there is NO banding in iso 800 of the E-5 and at iso 200 with gradation normal (and the Pentax eq.) the difference is huge to the Pentax advantage!
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse5/page7.asp
Ops, no it wasn't....

I am glad that you like your Pentax, but that doesn't mean that the Olty sucks

fiolmattias said:

Raist3d said:

msusic said:

I don't think K5 even has 1 stop advantage over E-5 in that regard (i.e. ISO800 vs ISO1600).

Click to expand...

The K-5 has more than 2 stops advantage over the E-5 (by a bit) so you still have one more stop of an advantage. Also you have NO banding and much MUCH greater DR.

Click to expand...

So you are back at that notion?

Click to expand...

Not back. I know.

fiolmattias said:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse5/page11.asp

Click to expand...

First error- the link you show me is showing JPEGS, not RAWS. I always said the JPEG engine of Olympus is better overall. But even then, even the very link you are showing, shows less detail at that point than the K-5, in JPEG.

Moreover of course, I am not talking about a shot like that in the lab (which doesn't show anyway what it seems you wanted it to show), but many real world situations. You can see noise in E-5 shots in the shadows in as early as ISO 200 (though not as bad as the E-620/E-30 have it, the E-30 still doing a bit better than 620).

fiolmattias said:

Take iso 800 and see what iso that resembles that amount of noise on the Pentax...

In Raw the iso 800 is a tad less noisy, and if the k5 uses 1600 (vs the E-5 800) the Pentax is noisier.

Then pick .jpg and be surpriced.... Just because the Pentax is better at iso 6400 doesn't mean that it is that much better at iso 800 as you responded.

Click to expand...

The Pentax does much better in shadows. I am talking about real world shots here. On the E-5 you can get noise in the shadows in as early as ISO 200. If shadow range doesn't matter to you, then it's all good. You should download a RAW of the E-5 at ISO 800 and a RAW of the Pentax at ISO 800 and play with both and see just how much more data in the shadows the K-5 has (and it does still have more in the highlights anyway).

Don't take my word for it, grab a couple of those files and do it for yourself. I have done this and the difference is pretty obvious.

fiolmattias said:

And there is NO banding in iso 800 of the E-5 and at iso 200 with gradation normal (and the Pentax eq.) the difference is huge to the Pentax advantage!

Click to expand...

Actually there is.

fiolmattias said:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympuse5/page7.asp
Ops, no it wasn't....

Click to expand...

Of course you ignore the fact it's a JPEG engine they talk about in that link, you ignore the fact that dpreview themselves mentions that the E-5 is notably limited to its competitors and the incredible shadow recovery of the K-5.

But the most fun part is, you think I am even going by this review or such. Get some E-5 raw files and get some K-5 raw files and see it for yourself. That's when you realize just how much better DR the K-5 has and how more notable performance the K-5 also has over the E-5.

fiolmattias said:

I am glad that you like your Pentax, but that doesn't mean that the Olty sucks

Click to expand...

I didn't say the Olympus sucks per se if you read my thorough reply to the OP. I even mentioned if you keep your shooting to ISO 800 and below you can get great stuff out of the E-5.

--

Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- "You are taking life too seriously if it bugs you in some way that a guy quotes himself in the .sig quote" - Ricardo