SWD vs Little Tuna

[Phocal]

My last kayak trip I set out to compare the ZD 50-200 SWD w/ EC-20 against my Sigma 50-500. Because of the shooting conditions I was having to use high ISO's, which really made doing the comparisons a bust. They were also a bit much as far as reach goes, typically shoot the 150/2 without a TC or with the EC-14 when in the kayak. So, I switched things up and mounted the 150/2 and the SWD on the EM1's. My thinking was the 50-200 would give me the same reach as the 150/2 with EC-14 when I needed a bit more reach.

All photos shot with EM1's, handheld, from a kayak, and wide-open with both lenses. Each photo was processed and cropped like I would if I was not comparing the photographs. I was not trying to crop the 150 shots to match the 200mm of the SWD, so the heron will fill more of the frame in the SWD shots. I was after comparing how I would shoot each lens, process the images and crop like it was the only lens I had.

In this first set of images the Green Heron moved and I drifted over some, so they are not the best comparison images. I really wish I hadn't changed perspective because I would have really liked to compare that out of focus area in the 150 shot against the SWD.





This next set is a little better for comparing, but the sun did poke thru a bit more on the SWD shot.





The third set is probably the closes to similar lighting conditions of the three.





I think the SWD held up well as far as sharpness goes against the 150/2. One thing to keep in mind is the extra DoF in the SWD shots plays tricks with your eyes and gives the perception of it being sharper because you have a larger area that is in critical focus. While sharpness may be similar, the bokeh of the 150/2 is much better and it has a bit more micro contrast. Than again it should be since it's 1 1/3 stop faster. The 150/2 images also (to me) have a bit more pop.

I didn't stop the 150/2 down because I wanted to compare them as I would use them, which is mostly wide-open. I do stop down for more DoF when I need it, like my gator shots..........but tend to shoot wide-open because I am after fast shutter speeds with low ISO and usually under the canopy of the swamp (here it was the river, but it was very well shaded).

One side note - I can push the 150/2 images a bit farther in post, one of the advantages of the all optical correction of the SHG glass.

I typically have my 14-54ii (or fisheye) on the other EM1 for landscape shots, but think I will continue bringing the SWD for the 2nd EM1. Next trip I will put the EC-14 on the 50-200 and run the 150/2 without any TC's. This will give me a bit more versatility and a lot of reach for those few times I may need it while in the kayak.

Ronnie

edit - forgot Flickr album with full resolution images if you desire to look.

 

[RamblinR]

Great shots.

How do you find the focusing speed of the 50-200mm SWD on the EM1?

 

[OzRay]

In my view, the 50-200mm has always been a stellar lens, it took some of my bets sports photographs. I would have kept it but after I bought my 90-250mm for the extra reach and speed, the 50-200mm didn't get any use, so I sold it. Mind you, the 50-200 sure is a lot lighter than the 90-250mm.

 

[ijm5012]

Great shots Ronnie. I still love my 150/2 SHG, but the 50-200 SWD is hands-down the best telephoto bargain for m43. Fast apertures, SWD focusing system, beautiful rendering.

OzRay, I'm jealous that you own a 90-250. Such a fantastic range, and having f/2.8 throughout is incredible. If only it wasn't so expensive...

 

[OzRay]

OzRay, I'm jealous that you own a 90-250. Such a fantastic range, and having f/2.8 throughout is incredible. If only it wasn't so expensive...

Had I not been using this gear for professional work, I would never have owned them, but they paid for themselves and tax deductions/depreciation claims helped the initial pain of purchase.

 

[Tooks]

It's been an interesting journey for me, but my 'long' lenses are now the 50-200 SWD and the 150 f2 along with the 1.4x and 2.0x TCs.

They work very well on my M1 II and what dragged me away from the Oly 300f4 and PL 120-400 is the in my opinion generally better out of focus rendering of the older lenses. It's close vs the 300f4 though.

The newer m4/3 lenses are great in terms of focus speed and compact size/weight, but I cobbled together the kit above second hand for approx 2/3rds the cost of a new 300f4.

I'm on the lookout for a good 4/3 35-100 now too.

 

[OzRay]

That is an utter bargain. Much envy.

 

[Tooks]

That is an utter bargain. Much envy.

 

[Phocal]

Great shots.

How do you find the focusing speed of the 50-200mm SWD on the EM1?

I have never had any issues with focusing speed of the 50-200 SWD. I have shot a number of different sports, air shows, and birds in flight with it and have never had a complaint. I also don't see any real difference with the EC-14 attached. With the EC-20 it is a little slow focusing, not something I would use for action......but more than usable. I can follow a bird hunting along the edge of a swamp and not worry about getting focus fast enough with the EC-20, just not something I would use to shoot sports with.

Any other questions dont' hesitate to ask.

Ronnie

 

[Phocal]

In my view, the 50-200mm has always been a stellar lens, it took some of my bets sports photographs. I would have kept it but after I bought my 90-250mm for the extra reach and speed, the 50-200mm didn't get any use, so I sold it. Mind you, the 50-200 sure is a lot lighter than the 90-250mm.

 

[Phocal]

Great shots Ronnie.

Thanks.

I still love my 150/2 SHG, but the 50-200 SWD is hands-down the best telephoto bargain for m43. Fast apertures, SWD focusing system, beautiful rendering.

the 150/2 is special. The 50-200 SWD is the best telephoto bargain in any system, especially if you add the EC-14. Honestly, the EC-20 on it still produces great images that rival the Panny 100-400......just a bit slower to focus and can't really do birds in flight.

OzRay, I'm jealous that you own a 90-250. Such a fantastic range, and having f/2.8 throughout is incredible. If only it wasn't so expensive...

 

[aliasfox]

Very nice shots. I think your conclusions about the 50-200 SWD is similar to mine, in that the bokeh isn't great - I've found that both it and the 14-54 II have a tendency to exhibit 'busy' bokeh in some situations with highlights in the background. However, if you're careful, they can make some exceptional images.

And yes, the 50-200 SWD is a stunning deal - I just wish I had more reason to take mine out.

 

[Phocal]

It's been an interesting journey for me, but my 'long' lenses are now the 50-200 SWD and the 150 f2 along with the 1.4x and 2.0x TCs.

Basically the same as me, I do have the Sigma 50-500 in 4/3's mount but rarely use it. I honestly seldom need more than the 150/2 w/ EC-20.

They work very well on my M1 II and what dragged me away from the Oly 300f4 and PL 120-400 is the in my opinion generally better out of focus rendering of the older lenses. It's close vs the 300f4 though.

The Panny 100-400 is just to slow in my opinion, so it was never an option. I have seen several side by side comparisons of the 150/2 w/ EC-20 against the 300/4 and one of the 50-200 w/ EC-20 against the Panny 100-400. Yes, the newer lenses are sharper.....but not by enough to really get me to have to have them.

Olympus also went a bit different route with their new pro lenses compared to the SHG lenses that I don't particularly care for. Which I should note could change based on an interview I read where someone from Olympus mentioned a change in lens rendering for upcoming pro lenses. They went for sharpness over other lens qualities and my belief is because sharpness is about the only thing that can be scientifically measured by review sites.

My main reason for wanting the 300/4 is as a macro lens for my baby gator, bullfrog and snake photos. It's reach and close focusing make it a great lens for this type of photography...........plus I would love to focus stack some baby gator shots.

The newer m4/3 lenses are great in terms of focus speed and compact size/weight, but I cobbled together the kit above second hand for approx 2/3rds the cost of a new 300f4.

I'm on the lookout for a good 4/3 35-100 now too.

I want that lens but my next one will be the 300/2.8. Already have 300mm @ f4.0 covered with the 150/2 and EC-20. I would love to have 300mm @ f2.8 plus the option of adding TC's for 400 @ f4.0 or 600 @ f5.6.

 

[Phocal]

Very nice shots.

thanks

I think your conclusions about the 50-200 SWD is similar to mine, in that the bokeh isn't great - I've found that both it and the 14-54 II have a tendency to exhibit 'busy' bokeh in some situations with highlights in the background. However, if you're careful, they can make some exceptional images.

I haven't noticed it with the 14-54, but I have not used it much. The 50-200 is a bit better than the 40-150 Pro with respect to bokeh in my opinion. But both suffer from that crazy bokeh in the right situations, which is easy to get around when shooting if you pay attention to it.

And yes, the 50-200 SWD is a stunning deal - I just wish I had more reason to take mine out.

 

[Tooks]

It's partly reading about your kayak adventures that led me down the 4/3 route to be honest Phocal, so I should thank you for that!

I really love the old 4/3s lenses, and for me are a good compromise between size and quality.

I've got a low level aviation spot where I used to use a 300 f2.8 on a FF DSLR, so I'm looking forward to trying the 150f2, with its slower focus motor and all!

 

[Phocal]

It's partly reading about your kayak adventures that led me down the 4/3 route to be honest Phocal, so I should thank you for that!

I hope that is a good thing.

I really love the old 4/3s lenses, and for me are a good compromise between size and quality.

I really love them and for what I photograph they are perfect. I am honestly for once pretty happy with my current gear setup.

I've got a low level aviation spot where I used to use a 300 f2.8 on a FF DSLR, so I'm looking forward to trying the 150f2, with its slower focus motor and all!

I shoot one airshow a year and the last two years have used the 150/2. It has performed perfectly for me both times. The airshow is coming up next month and I intend to use it again this year, no reason to change.

 

[James Erickson]

[No message]

 

[Michael M Fliegel]

They are older FT lenses, the 50-200 f2.8-.3.5 and 150 F2

 

[Phocal]

As someone pointed out they are lenses Olympus made for their old 4/3 DSLRs. You need an adapter to use them but you have full control, just like a native lens. They really only work on an EM1 because the lenses are designed for PDAF focusing. But they work very well on an EM1 and I have been very happy with them.

The ZD 50-200 f2.8-3.5 SWD is one of the HG (High Grade) lenses and can be had for around $400, so it is a really great deal for the effective reach. It can also be used with the EC-14 or EC-20. With the EC-14 it loses little to no IQ and you don't really notice any difference in focusing speed. With the EC-20 it focuses a little slower but is more than good enough for anything but fast action like birds in flight or sports. But the IQ is still very good and I have used it a few times to test it out.........was shocked how good it was, good enough that I would use it if I needed that much reach.

The ZD 150mm f2.0 is one of their SHG (Super High Grade) lenses and is just amazing. Best lens I have ever used. It's a little more expensive at around $1200, but more than worth the price in my opinion. It's pretty much the only lens I use and it is amazing with either TC. Even with the EC-20 it is still capable of birds in flight or sports, have shot both with it.

 

[James Erickson]

Thank You both very much for enlightening me. I'm rather new to MFT's and trying to get up to speed on some of the jargon.

Also, I see an "R" after some lens id's, eg 150mm R lens...what does this R refer to?

TIA