Reading mode: Light Dark

GH2-100-300-14-140 Woodland Daffodils

Go to last post
M

mark1000

Veteran Member
Messages
5,717
Reaction score
3
Location
UK
While out taking bird pics i came across these woodland Daffodils.

GH2 and 100-300



GH2 and 14-140





--
Mark.
 
Mark,

I am going to have to put you on my Ignore User list if you keep posting these superb 100-300 shots as my resistence is getting weaker to purchase the lens with each of your posts - LOL!
TP
 
Great shots!

--
Jan

'In Wildness is the Preservation of the World'

Panasonic G2, 14-42, 45-200 & Canon S95
 
That 100-300mm really appears to be a great lens. Probably close to the 14-140mm near the 140mm telephoto end. Sadly, I measured the 45-200mm this morning and it really is as bad as some people have said it is.

That doesn't mean you can't get great shots with it. You can and many people have. However, when you pixel peep the 45-200mm just does not even come close to the 14-140mm at any focal length.

I would really like to sell my 45-200mm and get the 100-300mm. However, the price of it is just a little too steep. Hopefully, it will come down in price in the near future. I would love to be able to get some great longer range photos like yours.

--
GH2, GF1, & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads
http://vimeo.com/user442745
GF1 Pictures
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4222674355/albums
 
I must have been really lucky when i owned my G1 and 45-200 as the lens was super, i never understood all the complaints about how rubbish the lens was supposed to be, but it is obvious that the quality control on the manufacturing side is not consistent, as so many people like yourself have bad copies of the lens, i actually pushed the buy button at amazon yesterday to buy another copy of the 45-200 to use with the LC55 close up lens as a cheap macro alternative, but just after i purchased the lens went to back order status and i am not prepared to wait until June for one to arrive, so am actively looking for somewhere with a decent returns policy, as i don't want to be stuck with a lemon and no way to return it because its within so called manufacturing tolerances.

Mark.
mpgxsvcd said:
That 100-300mm really appears to be a great lens. Probably close to the 14-140mm near the 140mm telephoto end. Sadly, I measured the 45-200mm this morning and it really is as bad as some people have said it is.

That doesn't mean you can't get great shots with it. You can and many people have. However, when you pixel peep the 45-200mm just does not even come close to the 14-140mm at any focal length.

I would really like to sell my 45-200mm and get the 100-300mm. However, the price of it is just a little too steep. Hopefully, it will come down in price in the near future. I would love to be able to get some great longer range photos like yours.

--
GH2, GF1, & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads
http://vimeo.com/user442745
GF1 Pictures
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4222674355/albums
Click to expand...
--
Mark.
 
I actually don't think there are really any manufacturing problems with the lens. I think it is just simply not as sharp as the 14-140mm and the 100-300mm.

However, saying it is not as sharp as those lenses is like saying a Corvette Z06 is not as fast as a ZR1. Both are so mind numbingly fast you won't notice the difference unless you are comparing them head to head(or pixel to pixel in this case).

I think there are actually two different things that cause issues with the 45-200mm pictures. One is that it is not as sharp as the other lenses and people are expecting the world in a $240 lens. That is simply just not realistic.

The other issue is that at full telephoto this lens is subject to any movement whatsoever even with IS on. The problem is that most people just do not give it a fast enough shutter speed to do it justice. This thing needs 4-5 times the focal length(1/800-1/1000 for 200mm with IS on) to really guarantee that shake will not affect the picture.

I tested it several different ways on a tripod and hand held. Basically without IS on the lens is useless at 200mm unless you are shooting with a very high shutter speed ratio(think 10x or more). Even with IS it is hit or miss depending on how abrupt the movement is.

I think the bottom line is that the lens can be an outstanding value if the user is careful with how it is used. If you are expecting to pick the camera up and start taking quick snaps at full telephoto on a cloudy day this lens may not be the best choice.

--
GH2, GF1, & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads
http://vimeo.com/user442745
GF1 Pictures
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4222674355/albums
 
I agree with pretty much all of that, i never trust the OIS and try and work the FL v shutter speed rule all the time, maybe thats why i was more than happy with my copy of the 45-200, i used it within its limitations.

Mark.
mpgxsvcd said:
I actually don't think there are really any manufacturing problems with the lens. I think it is just simply not as sharp as the 14-140mm and the 100-300mm.

However, saying it is not as sharp as those lenses is like saying a Corvette Z06 is not as fast as a ZR1. Both are so mind numbingly fast you won't notice the difference unless you are comparing them head to head(or pixel to pixel in this case).

I think there are actually two different things that cause issues with the 45-200mm pictures. One is that it is not as sharp as the other lenses and people are expecting the world in a $240 lens. That is simply just not realistic.

The other issue is that at full telephoto this lens is subject to any movement whatsoever even with IS on. The problem is that most people just do not give it a fast enough shutter speed to do it justice. This thing needs 4-5 times the focal length(1/800-1/1000 for 200mm with IS on) to really guarantee that shake will not affect the picture.

I tested it several different ways on a tripod and hand held. Basically without IS on the lens is useless at 200mm unless you are shooting with a very high shutter speed ratio(think 10x or more). Even with IS it is hit or miss depending on how abrupt the movement is.

I think the bottom line is that the lens can be an outstanding value if the user is careful with how it is used. If you are expecting to pick the camera up and start taking quick snaps at full telephoto on a cloudy day this lens may not be the best choice.

--
GH2, GF1, & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads
http://vimeo.com/user442745
GF1 Pictures
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4222674355/albums
Click to expand...
--
Mark.
 
.... I started to shoot on burst mode instead of single shots. Shoot a burst of 3 or 4, and even at the long end you should find one of them is sharp.

Used to do this with my old LC1 and not needed to with most other kit - but my conclusion is that the OIS in the 45-200 simply isn't terribly effective.
--
http://jonschick.smugmug.com/
 
Yes shooting burst does help.

I actually think the IS on the 45-200mm is great. For video that is.
Jon Schick said:
.... I started to shoot on burst mode instead of single shots. Shoot a burst of 3 or 4, and even at the long end you should find one of them is sharp.

Used to do this with my old LC1 and not needed to with most other kit - but my conclusion is that the OIS in the 45-200 simply isn't terribly effective.
--
http://jonschick.smugmug.com/
Click to expand...
--
GH2, GF1, & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads
http://vimeo.com/user442745
GF1 Pictures
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4222674355/albums
 
Your photos definitely indicate that you take more care than the average user. Keep posting. They are terrific and you really make it hard to resist buying the 100-300mm.
mark1000 said:
I agree with pretty much all of that, i never trust the OIS and try and work the FL v shutter speed rule all the time, maybe thats why i was more than happy with my copy of the 45-200, i used it within its limitations.

Mark.
Click to expand...
--
GH2, GF1, & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads
http://vimeo.com/user442745
GF1 Pictures
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4222674355/albums
 
I wonder if thats because the OIS had chance to wind up to full speed during the burst, assuming you shot in mode 2.

Mark.
Jon Schick said:
.... I started to shoot on burst mode instead of single shots. Shoot a burst of 3 or 4, and even at the long end you should find one of them is sharp.

Used to do this with my old LC1 and not needed to with most other kit - but my conclusion is that the OIS in the 45-200 simply isn't terribly effective.
--
http://jonschick.smugmug.com/
Click to expand...
--
Mark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top