50-200 first impressions

I had a good offer for a 50-200 (mark I, i think, but dont care since i dont know the real difference) brand new, boxed and untouched.

Today i made a walk and start doing some test to understand if i like it or not... I made most of my test @200mm althrough it is far from my comfort zone but also not the best focal of the lens itself. I use speedmode and 1/320 so to avoid blur problem.

1) Resolution: i think that the 20Mpix sensor outresolve the lens. At 10Mpix it seems pretty sharp but at 20Mpix, 100% magnification it becomes a bit soft. Such a pity because it limit the crop capability.

2) Colors: as always, best color i've found are from the 20-50. 50-200 is not on par...

3) Size: 400g is a biggy lens. I found a lot of plastic so i guess that the weight comes from a good quantity of glass... I like glass! On the good side the lens can be handled well on a nx1100, on the bad side, i dont think that such a big lens fit well in the nature of a compact camera like an NX1100. I hope that Samsung will build a more compact lens, maybe with a shorter range...

4) Focus: it was a good day and i did not found any problem with the Focusing of the 50-200

5) Corner to corner sharpenss: i will say, not that bad, better than the 18-55

Overall i think is a good lens, compared to the average of this range and this price. I think i will keep it.

Interesting that you would say that about the 18-55.

Maybe i can make a comparison @50mm
--
http://samsungnxtips.blogspot.com

I Will give it a try, but i have some of the tests with aperture set at f8.
--
http://samsungnxtips.blogspot.com

mordor_74 wrote:

Maybe i can make a comparison @50mm

at 50mm samsung tele is very sharp, i'd say at last as sgarp as 45mm. things get worse after 130mm.

-- hide signature --

http://samsungnxtips.blogspot.com

mordor_74 wrote:

I had a good offer for a 50-200 (mark I, i think, but dont care since i dont know the real difference) brand new, boxed and untouched.

Today i made a walk and start doing some test to understand if i like it or not... I made most of my test @200mm althrough it is far from my comfort zone but also not the best focal of the lens itself. I use speedmode and 1/320 so to avoid blur problem.

I was initially very disappointed with the results which this lens produced. However, thanks to Raw Jaw's 50-200mm lens appreciation thread, I started using it more frequently to find out that it's not as bad as I thought!

Few weeks ago I made a trip to the Tatra mountains and ended up with taking lots of landscape shots with 50-200mm, as I didn't have enough time to get to some scenic viewpoints:

Hawrań/Havran and neighboring peaks, Polish/Slovak border.

Had I had more time to wait for better light and weather (Overcast almost all the time - the clouds only dispersed for few minutes every couple of hours on a single day during the whole week!), the results could have been more interesting...

I also recently used it for outdoor portraiture (75mm-100mm with fill-in flash) and was quite pleased with results! I was surprised even with the look of the OOC JPEGs:

Not quite my primary subject, but it's a sharp one taken at 200mm.

1) Resolution: i think that the 20Mpix sensor outresolve the lens. At 10Mpix it seems pretty sharp but at 20Mpix, 100% magnification it becomes a bit soft. Such a pity because it limit the crop capability.

You need to stop it down (I saw best results around f/7.1) in order to see its real potential. I'd say that up to 100mm it's quite sharp, then between 100mm-150mm it becomes "reasonably sharp", and after 150mm it struggles to produce a sharp picture (but please see below). It's a usual pattern for zoom lenses, which are typically better at their "wide" end.

2) Colors: as always, best color i've found are from the 20-50. 50-200 is not on par...

I agree, this lens produces appaling, muddy colours - I can't seem to get any vibrant colours unlike from my other NX lenses. I will try it with a polariser, but I'll need to wait for summer.

3) Size: 400g is a biggy lens. I found a lot of plastic so i guess that the weight comes from a good quantity of glass... I like glass! On the good side the lens can be handled well on a nx1100, on the bad side, i dont think that such a big lens fit well in the nature of a compact camera like an NX1100. I hope that Samsung will build a more compact lens, maybe with a shorter range...

You can't cheat physics - I believe that it can't be made in a much more compact form, especially with OIS.

4) Focus: it was a good day and i did not found any problem with the Focusing of the 50-200

I noticed that at 200mm it's hit and miss - sometimes the photos get blurry with no apparent reason. I think that at longer focal lengths you just need to focus on a small, contrasty detail and keep the focus square on objetcs aligned with the focal plane. Also, you need to watch your DoF and not trust OIS. When there's plenty light, there's a fair chance that you'll get a nice shot.

5) Corner to corner sharpenss: i will say, not that bad, better than the 18-55

I didn't notice any either, just some vignetting.

Overall i think is a good lens, compared to the average of this range and this price. I think i will keep it.

In fact, there no alternative in the NX system for me. The 18mm-200mm lens is being bashed for its subpar IQ, the 50-150mm S one is too big and too expensive for me, thus I'm staying with the 50-200mm.

I give it  a fast try... @50mm the 50-200 is a bit less sharper in the center but is more costant corner to corner, althrough my 50-200 is softer on the right side and my 18-55 is softer on the left side. The 50-200 is f4 and seems to have a better OIS, so if do not conseder the size it is a winner. f4+ois = f2 so only big advantages of the 45mm seems to be bokeh and size

mordor_74 wrote:

I give it a fast try... @50mm the 50-200 is a bit less sharper in the center but is more costant corner to corner, althrough my 50-200 is softer on the right side and my 18-55 is softer on the left side.

Take tripod, using two lenses you'll have both sides sharp!

The 50-200 is f4 and seems to have a better OIS, so if do not conseder the size it is a winner. f4+ois = f2 so only big advantages of the 45mm seems to be bokeh and size

-- hide signature --

http://samsungnxtips.blogspot.com

vatazhka wrote:

mordor_74 wrote:

I had a good offer for a 50-200 (mark I, i think, but dont care since i dont know the real difference) brand new, boxed and untouched.

Today i made a walk and start doing some test to understand if i like it or not... I made most of my test @200mm althrough it is far from my comfort zone but also not the best focal of the lens itself. I use speedmode and 1/320 so to avoid blur problem.

I was initially very disappointed with the results which this lens produced. However, thanks to Raw Jaw's 50-200mm lens appreciation thread, I started using it more frequently to find out that it's not as bad as I thought!

Cool thread! Tank you!

Few weeks ago I made a trip to the Tatra mountains and ended up with taking lots of landscape shots with 50-200mm, as I didn't have enough time to get to some scenic viewpoints:

Hawrań/Havran and neighboring peaks, Polish/Slovak border.

Had I had more time to wait for better light and weather (Overcast almost all the time - the clouds only dispersed for few minutes every couple of hours on a single day during the whole week!), the results could have been more interesting...

I also recently used it for outdoor portraiture (75mm-100mm with fill-in flash) and was quite pleased with results! I was surprised even with the look of the OOC JPEGs:

Not quite my primary subject, but it's a sharp one taken at 200mm.

1) Resolution: i think that the 20Mpix sensor outresolve the lens. At 10Mpix it seems pretty sharp but at 20Mpix, 100% magnification it becomes a bit soft. Such a pity because it limit the crop capability.

You need to stop it down (I saw best results around f/7.1) in order to see its real potential. I'd say that up to 100mm it's quite sharp, then between 100mm-150mm it becomes "reasonably sharp", and after 150mm it struggles to produce a sharp picture (but please see below). It's a usual pattern for zoom lenses, which are typically better at their "wide" end.

I set to f8, but, again, tested on the tele end. I want bad new first

2) Colors: as always, best color i've found are from the 20-50. 50-200 is not on par...

I agree, this lens produces appaling, muddy colours - I can't seem to get any vibrant colours unlike from my other NX lenses. I will try it with a polariser, but I'll need to wait for summer.

3) Size: 400g is a biggy lens. I found a lot of plastic so i guess that the weight comes from a good quantity of glass... I like glass! On the good side the lens can be handled well on a nx1100, on the bad side, i dont think that such a big lens fit well in the nature of a compact camera like an NX1100. I hope that Samsung will build a more compact lens, maybe with a shorter range...

You can't cheat physics - I believe that it can't be made in a much more compact form, especially with OIS.

a shorter (150) lens with a shorter range (75-150 or 50-120) may be smaller... i hope!

4) Focus: it was a good day and i did not found any problem with the Focusing of the 50-200

I noticed that at 200mm it's hit and miss - sometimes the photos get blurry with no apparent reason. I think that at longer focal lengths you just need to focus on a small, contrasty detail and keep the focus square on objetcs aligned with the focal plane. Also, you need to watch your DoF and not trust OIS. When there's plenty light, there's a fair chance that you'll get a nice shot.

5) Corner to corner sharpenss: i will say, not that bad, better than the 18-55

I didn't notice any either, just some vignetting.

Overall i think is a good lens, compared to the average of this range and this price. I think i will keep it.

In fact, there no alternative in the NX system for me. The 18mm-200mm lens is being bashed for its subpar IQ, the 50-150mm S one is too big and too expensive for me, thus I'm staying with the 50-200mm.

I had alternative, the minolta  70-210 that i sold to buy this one and the sigma 100-300 that i still own (not to use with the NX1100 but with the a200, i decided to keep both system to get more fun!). But as i state,i like the lens and i like own it performs in the 50-100 range that is where i will use the most. Maybe i will buy a second, bigger nx body to use with this lens, a nx11 or a nx20 when nx50 will make its price fall!

-- hide signature --

Check here if your Samsung NX / NX mini camera & lens firmware is up to date!

Thank you again for all the information.

mordor_74 wrote:

Maybe i can make a comparison @50mm
--
http://samsungnxtips.blogspot.com

Well, they're certainly a lot closer there.  My 50-200 sees it's use almost exclusively at 200.... while my 18-55 is most commonly at 18 or 55, both of which are sharper than the other at 200.  My 18-55 also sees some midrange use.

I believe my 50-200 issues are mostly where light is weak and OIS cannot quite overcome my movement; when in doubt try a few images with a tripod and see what you think!

through a window = not a fair test (also cropped)

I've just picked up a $35 Rexatar 200mm f/3.3 to see how the extra light compares to OIS; first shots look pretty good but I haven't yet pulled them on the monitor at any scale just zoomed on the nx300 screen.

jimrpdx wrote:

I believe my 50-200 issues are mostly where light is weak and OIS cannot quite overcome my movement; when in doubt try a few images with a tripod and see what you think!

through a window = not a fair test (also cropped)

I've just picked up a $35 Rexatar 200mm f/3.3 to see how the extra light compares to OIS; first shots look pretty good but I haven't yet pulled them on the monitor at any scale just zoomed on the nx300 screen.

I'm often using mine at shutter speeds where OIS is at best a tertiary concern, often 1/2000.

I have a Quantaray 75-200 f/2.8-f/3.5.... it's not worth comparing with the Samsung 50-200.  It wins on amount of bokeh... I'm not sure if I would say the quality of the bokeh is any better though.

....also shot with the 50-200mm.

Your photo reminded me of how I had used my 50-200mm some -- shot with flash: