Panasonic 45-200 lens.

[concorde 1954]

Just a quick one ,how do you tell the diffrence between a MK1 and MK2 45 to 200 mm f4-5.6 lens.I want to buy used but the dealer dose not know the diffrence.

Cheers David

 

[peppermonkey]

Just a quick one ,how do you tell the diffrence between a MK1 and MK2 45 to 200 mm f4-5.6 lens.I want to buy used but the dealer dose not know the diffrence.

Cheers David

The old one says mega ois while the new one says power ois. Old one has some child lettering. I think the new one is all white. And I think the new one is all one colour while the old one is two toned (black and grey). There may be others but this would be the easiest to see.

Cheers.

--
Hubert
My non-digital gear: Agfa Isolette, Ricohflex VII, Bessa R, Bessa L, Zorky 4, Fed 2, Konica Big Mini, Konica Auto S2, K1000, Yashica Electro 35 GX, Recesky
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2034/2457111090_00eafbf8a4_m.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/peppermonkey/

 

[pannumon]

The model name of 45-200mm mk I is H-FS045200.

The model name of 45-200mm mk II is H-FSA45200.

The model name is usually printed on the lens barrel, under the lens when mounted to camera, next to the camera mount.

 

[liquidsquid]

Unless the MK2 of this lens is markedly better than the first release, I would shy away from this lens. The range of 150-200mm actually looses resolution on the MK1 copy I have, so it really is only a 45-150mm lens, with the remaining "zoom" only the equivalent of cropping.

There are much better zoom lenses out there which you will not be disappointed with.

IMHO I would save some pennies and spend a little more on an Olympus version or the 100-300mm MK2 which I am very happy with.

 

[spike29]

I see you have a G9 and a pl12-60mm , ive had the 45-200mmii briefly and brought it back.

i suggest ive you like a second lens to accomplish your 12-60 don't go for 45-200mmii

Your getting dissapointed. it's mediocrate in AF and soft above 170mm.

Ideal is the pl50-200mm but hell that thing is eh expensive.

So 14-140mmii or 100-300mmii depending on your goal.

The gab from 60mm to 100mm can be cropped. (20 Mp)

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
knowledge is addictive, every time i get some i want more.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(If i can remember 1/1000 of everything i learned/read in the past i will be happy as a monky with........)

 

[concorde 1954]

Cheers for the info,The 50-200 f2.8-4 is £1500 in the UK and second hand about £1000.The 100-300 is about £300 second hand but thats a MK1,I will carry on looking as I am not in a great hurry as the motor racing and airshow season is coming to a close

Thank you all for your advice.

David

 

[spike29]

Cheers for the info,The 50-200 f2.8-4 is £1500 in the UK and second hand about £1000.The 100-300 is about £300 second hand but thats a MK1,I will carry on looking as I am not in a great hurry as the motor racing and airshow season is coming to a close

Thank you all for your advice.

David

You definitely want the 100-300mmii (mk2) much faster AF, dual is2, DFD, WR. optics are the same but the video adaptation is better in AF and less noisy OIS.

If you in a hurry the 45-200mmii is cheap new, kit leftovers, 269,- euro so probably cheaper second hand. (i think you don't like the results comparing to your PL but it beats cropping a bit.




almost wide open f6.3 high iso 3200 200mm.


inside wide open 3200 iso

and my 100-300mmii


f7.1


45-200mm aimed at his head and green boxed it.


200mm 200iso f5.6 looked ok to me.


14-140mm at 88mm


f7.1 iso3200 1/125sec best Aperture for the 45-200mmii

nasty f11 against the sky:


you see the fly's at the bottom at 280mm even above diffraction limits (7.1-f8) f9 can but near end, f11 well is dropdown in IQ charts.

So the 100-300mmii is much more lens to enjoy need less work to get it right.

it's not only the endresult, because it isn't fair comparion , i place the 45-200mmii 3200iso and wide open, against f7.1 and good shutter time with the 100-300mmii, but i throw away my initial test shots of the 45-200mm can't find any low iso high contrast one's i did in the garden as test shots. (i am sure some people have good clean shots with the lens and are working around the problems) it's the overall difference in feel you got from the 45-200mmii and its bigger brother 100-300mmii

1 Aperture did make a strange sound at M-mode.

2 AF did hunt alot in less contrast light. lots of "mishits" when i used AF.

lens felt "cheap" so after some test i brought it back and bought a new 100-300mmii.

which had no AF-hunt aim, lock, click. (ok too close it cant lock it's no "macroshooter")

lens felt as payed for. no lens creap,( which i think the 45-200mm could develop.)

200- vs 300mm is very much difference when you have a 14-140mm as mid lens.

I hope it helps you decide what to do.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
knowledge is addictive, every time i get some i want more.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(If i can remember 1/1000 of everything i learned/read in the past i will be happy as a monky with........)

 

[jwilliams]

Just a quick one ,how do you tell the diffrence between a MK1 and MK2 45 to 200 mm f4-5.6 lens.I want to buy used but the dealer dose not know the diffrence.

Cheers David

Don't bother. Just skip any version of this lens. I had a V1 and it is the worst lens I have ever owned in any brand or format. Absolute junk on the long end. There are lots of cheap tele zooms that are better like the 40-150 Oly, 45-150 or 45-175 Panny. The fact that the 45-200 goes an extra 25 or 50mm is irrelevant as that part of the range is totally useless.

Buy any one of the above if money is limited. If not go for the Oly 40-150 Pro or PL 50-200.

Also you can adapt a Conon EFS 55-250 via a Viltrox adapter (I have done this) for about the price of a 45-200 or less. AF might not be as good, but the image quality is in another universe compared to the Panny 45-200.

 

[evetsf]

Please cite your reference for the earlier 100-300 lenses not benefiting from DFD.

The article I read when DFD was announced stated that the DFD maps for legacy lenses introduced before DFD bodies were launched would be loaded into the camera's firmware. Lenses introduced after the DFD launch would have the DFD map in the lens firmware & download this to the camera when mounted.

If this article is correct, then all Panasonic lenses would benefit from DFD on DFD- capable bodies. Are there other documented references that show this article to be incorrect?

Steve

 

[Michael J Davis]

Unless the MK2 of this lens is markedly better than the first release, I would shy away from this lens. The range of 150-200mm actually looses resolution on the MK1 copy I have, so it really is only a 45-150mm lens, with the remaining "zoom" only the equivalent of cropping.

There are much better zoom lenses out there which you will not be disappointed with.

There is clearly some sample variation over the years with the Mk 1. I bought mine in 2008 (as part of a G1 kit) and have been delighted with it. I find that stopping down to f/6.3 at the long end gives excellent quality although it's OK at f/5.6 - and it's my 'keep in the bag' when I'm not exactly prepared to carry my 200-400mm.

This is a recent one cropped from a 1/4 frame when I 'dropped in' on a bird reserve:


Lesser Black-backed Gull & crab

I am constantly using it with extension tubes for close-up work, and would recommend it to anyone (especially at current prices). But clearly do make sure you get a decent copy!

Mike

--
Mike Davis
Photographing the public for over 60 years
www.flickr.com/photos/watchman

 

[HRC2016]

I use the original 45-200 all the time. I got it for a song thanks to someone else's GAS.

My copy is very good. This along with the Oly 12-50 make a great travel combo!

 

[Wildalaskaken]

there's a like new one in the box at one of the camera stores in Bangkok for less than $200 and it's negotiable. It's a decent lens oh, it does not compare to the 50 to 200, but it's a lot lighter and handier.

Some of my biggest sellers have been taken with that lens

 

[spike29]

Please cite your reference for the earlier 100-300 lenses not benefiting from DFD.

i don't know if you can update the 100-300mm mk1 for dfd and such.

The article I read when DFD was announced stated that the DFD maps for legacy lenses introduced before DFD bodies were launched would be loaded into the camera's firmware. Lenses introduced after the DFD launch would have the DFD map in the lens firmware & download this to the camera when mounted.

So you mean upgrade/update the firmware version of older lenses to benefit from dfd?

no word of DFD

If this article is correct, then all Panasonic lenses would benefit from DFD on DFD- capable bodies. Are there other documented references that show this article to be incorrect?

Don't know. i didn't looked at the mk1(HFS) because the mk2 (HFS-A) was better.

Steve

 

[Adrian Harris]

The Panasonic 14-140 mk2 onwards is in a different league and far more versatile. But for airshows I would use the Olympus 75-300 mk2. Check it out.

 

[spike29]

Unless the MK2 of this lens is markedly better than the first release, I would shy away from this lens. The range of 150-200mm actually looses resolution on the MK1 copy I have, so it really is only a 45-150mm lens, with the remaining "zoom" only the equivalent of cropping.

There are much better zoom lenses out there which you will not be disappointed with.

There is clearly some sample variation over the years with the Mk 1. I bought mine in 2008 (as part of a G1 kit) and have been delighted with it. I find that stopping down to f/6.3 at the long end gives excellent quality although it's OK at f/5.6 - and it's my 'keep in the bag' when I'm not exactly prepared to carry my 200-400mm.

This is a recent one cropped from a 1/4 frame when I 'dropped in' on a bird reserve:


Lesser Black-backed Gull & crab

I am constantly using it with extension tubes for close-up work, and would recommend it to anyone (especially at current prices).

i tryed it with a oly C180 TC , didn't post it here because the where not very good. (TC is fun but not very good) i didn't use it long because i needed a 31day's returnpolicy and it was rainy and bad weather that month every time i had time to go out. So i am sure you can get good images out of the 45-200mmiilens when conditions are good.

But clearly do make sure you get a decent copy!

i returned one and asked for a test on an other body, (i got a strange humming sound of the Apertureblads in M-mode.) and mounted a second one on mine. Both had that strange noise. That was my end of fait.

Returned it and bought a 100-300mmii instead which felt great, good zoom restistance but not stif, AF nailded every time my test inside and outside. costed my an extra amount but the extra 100mm does help. Only bummer is 100mm WA isn't really a good walkaround, wile 45mm WA can be. I eyeballed the 50-200mm but geesh my wife's car cost less! and bringing in a lens that expensive would be costing me new car for her to keep her happy! LOL

Mike

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
knowledge is addictive, every time i get some i want more.....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(If i can remember 1/1000 of everything i learned/read in the past i will be happy as a monky with........)

 

[spike29]

you throw away dual is2 and DFD for 25mm on the wide end?

i think that DFD and OIS is needed/wanted when you mount a supertele.

don't know the price difference but that could be a factor.

 

[Allan Brown]

Just a quick one ,how do you tell the diffrence between a MK1 and MK2 45 to 200 mm f4-5.6 lens.I want to buy used but the dealer dose not know the diffrence.

Cheers David

... because, I believe, they tried the lens years ago with non-stabilized bodies with the old firmware OIS. This lens on a body with a 5-axis stabilizer works well.

As you will find, there is only one lens choice in that range - the 50-200 @ $$$$

I also have the 100-300 that others mention. It is quite a bit larger and heavier and does not go to 45mm.

While some complain about the "loose" zoom, it does have a great benefit for a lens in this range which is the ability to zoom fast to follow the action. The 100-300 cannot and I know this from experience with volley ball and Oz Rules football. The 100-300 fails.

Below are some photos taken with the 45-200. The first one is wide open at f5.6 @ 200mm @ 640ISO. Look at the sharpness of the grass in the background - even across the frame.

Make up your own mind and choose what suits you best.

Allan


45-200 @ 200 f5.6 wide open 640 ISO


45-200 @ 200 f8 320 ISO


45-200 @ 200 f7.1 320 ISO


45-200 @ 200 f7.1 320 ISO


45-200 @ 91mm f7.1 320 ISO

 

[pannumon]

Please cite your reference for the earlier 100-300 lenses not benefiting from DFD.

i don't know if you can update the 100-300mm mk1 for dfd and such.

The article I read when DFD was announced stated that the DFD maps for legacy lenses introduced before DFD bodies were launched would be loaded into the camera's firmware. Lenses introduced after the DFD launch would have the DFD map in the lens firmware & download this to the camera when mounted.

So you mean upgrade/update the firmware version of older lenses to benefit from dfd?

no word of DFD

No, I think his/her point was that the camera memory is used to store the DFD data of older lenses. Newer lenses have the data in the lens.

This has been debated several times, and I am convinced that officially all Panasonic µ4/3 lenses support DFD. That being said it's clear that DFD does not make AF of certain lenses (100-300mm mk I and 20 f/1.7) much faster.

 

[spike29]

quote from camerajabber: (no clue if this is a credible site to write in concrete but it was the first which popped up. ;-) )

"In order for DFD technology to work the camera needs to know the level of micro contrast that a lens can achieve and understand its bokeh, the quality of the out of focus areas. For this reason DFD focusing is only compatible with Panasonic’s lenses.

Although Panasonic’s DFD-enabled cameras have a database of information about the lenses that were current at the time of the body’s production, new lenses have the data stored inside them so that they can be used with existing DFD-capable camera bodies."

end quote

So this seems to be in line with the statement that DFD works backwards with Panasonic lenses. But in order to have a quick AF you need a quick AF motor.(DFD does hunt but very fast => 240fps or more ;-) )

And most type ii are updated with faster AF-motors, so that's why they are having better AF then the type i regardless of DFD compatible or not.

edit found thisno review but it shows sizes)

Loading…

www.ephotozine.com

and a blog where the difference of 100-300mmi and ii is tested.

Better focus with Lumix G 100-300mm Mk II

The original Lumix G 100-300mm f/4-5.6 was an affordable and basic long tele zoom lens, from the early days of Micro Four Thirds. It was gen...

m43photo.blogspot.com

 

[alcelc]

You nailed it.

This lens has 2 magic words to get the best out of it. Stop down to f/7.1~8 for the sharpest result, and good stabilisation.

On GX7, and GX85, while I had stopped down this lens (for the sweetest spot) and on e-shutter (to eliminate possible shutter shock), I cannot get >70% satisfactory result and so more happy with 14~140 or 45~150 (both give satisfactory result on wide open). You might aware that 45~200 is one of the Panny lenses first to raise the suspicion of shutter shock.

Recently when tried it on G85, the improved ergonomic had much better result than the smaller and soap like RF bodies of GXs. Although I owned this lens for >10 years, on G85 it looks like a new lens to me.

All of the above could determine the performance of this lens.

Can't rule out sample variation. Also this is obviously not an easy lens so had a lot of negative opinion on it if has not been used properly. TBH this is not a mediocre lens, only a difficult one for better result.

--
Albert