Olympus 50 - 200 f/2.8 Worth the money?

locostbob

locostbob

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,071
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi there,

Please forgive me, im not quite sure what my question(s) are as Im still new to photography and especially hardware. (It will suddenly click in my mind!)

I have an Olympus E1 with a 40-150mm F3.5 - 5.6 lens (I assume is the 'kit' lens sort of quality). I am really getting into motorsport photography and feel a little more focal zoom would be helpful and have spotted this :

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&Item=160315814324&Category=30070

Just wondering if it is worth the money and upgrading (assuming I can get say £90 for my 40-150mm). Would a f2.8 lens make all that much difference at my level?

Would I use f2.8 for motorsport - isn’t it too fast? or should I just save my money for a better camera (canon 40D / 50D in a year or so is a thought). At the moment I seam to be shooting at 80 – 125sec with a f5 – 8. When its really poor light ISO400 seams to sort every thing out.

I have been looking on threads etc and there seams to be 2 camps, big zoom (400mm f/4) and smaller zoom and bigger aperture (200mm f2/8)

Could anybody shed some light on this for me.. and the pro’s and cons..

Many thanks

bob :)
 
I have the newer SWD version of this lens. Optically they are as near to each other as to make no difference. Some reviews claim the SWD is optically better. Most users I know or have read on the interweb that have experienced both see little difference.
Regardless of old or new 50-200 the image quality far surpasses the 40-150 lens. It is really really sharp and so much faster. I had the older metal mount 40-150 and while it is a good kit lens the 50-200 really is another league (as the price suggests!).
With regards to motorsport specifically I am no motorsport expert but you probably would not be using the lens at 2.8 as the DOF even on a 4/3 sensor could be too shallow although this lens will get you further into lower light than the 40-150 ever would (I hesitate to use "low light" as fast moving objects requiring AF is not 4/3 forte - even the E3).
As the current price of a new SWD 50-200 is closer to £800 than £300 the price certainly seems good.

As for cons ... the 50-200 certainly isn't light. A few hours trying panning shots and I find body parts aching I was not aware I had.

Maybe if you list the particular motorsport you are interested in someone more into motorsport can guide you further to it's suitability.
 
Well its £300 with two days to go. I'd expect nearer £500.

Dekhog is a regular on the oly e-system usergroup forum. If he says its good then I'd believe him. You might approach him direct, he doesnt seem to have it listed on the forum.

One advantage is that I think that the 50-200 is waterproof so with the e-1 you have an all weather setup (not sure if you need to put a uv filter on the front to make it fully watertight)

In terms of reach the 70-300 is cheaper but not a pro grade lens so not as fast and not waterproof.
 
cheers for the advice guys. I do like the sound of the lens, more for picture quality over the f2.8. Im expecting the price to rise a bit yet. but there 'only' £650 ish new. i suspect it will go out of my price range but there will be others.

im mainly found at Oulton park shooting cars

Who? - would you be able to send over a link to the 70 - 300 you mentioned. Im keen and far from a pro so something in between what i have and the 50-200 might tick the boxes (and match the wallet!)

many thanks

bob
 
eg here

When I looked they were on fleabay around £200ish from the grey import people, prob more though with the pound falling through the floor.
I dare say that shopping around will get you £260 or so from a uk source.

edit: Should also say look at whatever sigma are offering - they do some longer zooms but I would make sure to read up on quality before buying.
 
cheers for the link - something like that could be a nice compromise over nice focal length and quality.

Do you have any experience of this lens and would the quality be better than the 40-150 which i have or would i just be getting an extra 150mm?

many thanks

bob
 
I dont have one. You can search flickr etc for images taken with that lens or look on the esystem forum.

I'd guess that image quality would be like the 40-150 - not that theres anything wrong with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top