PDA

View Full Version : 50-200mm + EC1.4 vs 70-300mm


Jonesgj
30th January 2009, 09:58 PM
50-200mm + EC1.4 vs 70-300mm

I may have an opportunity to purchase the Zuiko 50-200mm F2.8 (the older non-SWD version) with an EC1.4 convertor. I have the 70-300mm which I love. However, I have been impressed with shots posted here taken with the 50-200mm/ EC1.4 combination. The other reason for looking at this option is that I find the 70-300mm quite slow to focus.

Just looking for advice, experience or thoughts.

Many thanks in advance.

Graydon

andym
30th January 2009, 10:50 PM
Hi

If it's a good price go for it,you wont regret it.

It will give you a focal length of 283 mm at F4.9.Weather sealing and great image quality.

Wreckdiver
30th January 2009, 10:56 PM
The 70-300m lens' widest aperture is f/4.0 - f/5.6 whilst the 50-200mm with EC-14 is f/4.5 - f/4.9. The 50-200mm on its own is f/2.8 - f/3.5 but (when used with and without the EC-14) covers focal lengths of between 50-280mm.

So, the 7-300mm scores only by having the longest focal length.

However, the 50-200mm is in the Pro range whilst the 70-300mm is Standard so the quality will be better with the former.

I would recommend the 50-200mm + EC-14 as long as you don't need the full 300mm. Of course you could also go for the EC-20 to get 400mm at the expense of the min aperture.

Steve

Nick Temple-Fry
30th January 2009, 11:07 PM
I will add my voice to those endorsing the old 50-200, ec1.4 combination. They work well together and give a great image quality.

Will it focus faster than the 70-300 - don't know, not sure anyone who posts regularly has them for comparison. But it is no slouch for focussing.

Nick

The Saint
31st January 2009, 07:24 AM
Graydon

I recently replaced my 70-300 with a 50-200 (already had EC14). I haven't had many opportunities to use the 50-200 yet.

One big difference is the size and weigh of the 50-200 EC14 combo. The 70-300 is considerable lighter.

I do have the SWD version of the 50-200 but on a E510. The focus is fast and accurate, I never heard any complaints with the original model either.

You also have the flexibility to use the 50-200 without the EC-14 which is an excellent lens when you don't need the extra length.

Also if you can hold on to your 70-300, you can use the EC14 in good light on it. Giving you a maximum of 420mm although at f8, very useful for occasional birding.

I found with my 14-54 / 70-300 that I missed the 54-70 range, the 14-54 didn't go tele enough and the 70-300 isn't really wide enough and I have to keep swapping lenses.

Basically, if you can afford it get the 50-200, I'm sure you won't be disappointed.

If you don't get on with it after say 6 months, you can always sell it on, as used prices remain reasonably stable (I won't be selling mine).

Simon

StephenL
31st January 2009, 07:56 AM
Go for it. It's a combination made in heaven. The only downside, as Simon says, is the weight penalty, but it's not cumbersome, just heavy. (if that makes sense!)

mike_j
31st January 2009, 08:54 AM
I should just check the extension barrel of the 50-200. I bought mine from ebay unseen and while the lens was immaculate the barrel when fully extended (and it goes a long way out) wobbled around in a worrying way. I'm told that this is not unusual.

I sent it to Olympus and they replaced all the seals, checked the lens over and gave me a 6 month warranty as a guarantee repair which was nice of them.

Other than that I have found it a superb lens.