Jump to content

Occasional Long Lens Options


Peter H

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Very occasionally I need/want a good long lens,mainly simply to record the surprise appearance of an unusual creature, or some other odd thing that I can't get close to. These are not serious photographic exercises, more a question of quickly recording something of passing interest, and certainly not worth re-investing in a DSLR and 300mm telephoto-lens set up.

 

Would a V-Lux 4 or the Panasonic equivalent be worth considering?

 

I now no longer have any of my Nikon/Olympus gear and my only serious digital cameraI is my M9. I am considering an M, but I imagine a good long lens for the M will now be extremely expensive and hard to find.

 

Any thoughts anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

some of the v-lux models are quite long at the tele end. i haven't yet looked closely.

 

i did have a panasonic g1 with 135 hektor (270mm equivalent) which was inexpensive, light and quite useful as a medium telephoto (or closer with closeup rings) AND easy to focus. i'll add 1-2 sample photos later this evening.

 

rick

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Very I am considering an M, but I imagine a good long lens for the M will now be extremely expensive and hard to find.

 

Any thoughts anyone?

 

There are many relatively inexpensive used manual focus long lenses, as compared to R lens prices, that the new M will be able to use from Nikon, Olympus, Canon, Tamron etc due to the availability of adapters for these lenses. In addition, Tamron Adaptall lenses have a R mount that should go well with the new M to R adapter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are many relatively inexpensive used manual focus long lenses, as compared to R lens prices, that the new M will be able to use from Nikon, Olympus, Canon, Tamron etc due to the availability of adapters for these lenses. In addition, Tamron Adaptall lenses have a R mount that should go well with the new M to R adapter.

 

I am anxious to find out how my Nikon 14-24, 24-70 and 70-210 will fair on the new M (or perhaps I should just sell them all and get a decent R lens before they get even more expensive.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I don't have a 135, 90 being the longest I have now, but its a thought.

 

I'd imagine its a tricky combination to focus, no?

Surprisingly easy. Don't forget you lose two aperture stops.
Link to post
Share on other sites

some of the v-lux models are quite long at the tele end. i haven't yet looked closely.

 

i did have a panasonic g1 with 135 hektor (270mm equivalent) which was inexpensive, light and quite useful as a medium telephoto (or closer with closeup rings) AND easy to focus. i'll add 1-2 sample photos later this evening.

 

rick

 

as promised, two with hektor 135mm on panasonic g1 (flower bud with several extension tubes) ..........

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very occasionally I need/want a good long lens,mainly simply to record the surprise appearance of an unusual creature, or some other odd thing that I can't get close to. These are not serious photographic exercises, more a question of quickly recording something of passing interest. a

 

Well.... my main thought would be why on earth do you want to lug around a 300mm telephoto lens or similar on the Very occasional appearance of an unusual creature....

 

madness..... sheer madness...... :p

 

go for the compact with a zoom that you can stuff in a pocket on the off chance....

 

I have a selection of unrequired visoflexes and a telyt or two that are collecting dust if your man servant would like to carry them round on your expeditions for you ........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter -

 

Barbara surprised me with a V Lux 4 for the holidays. Last January my R8/DMR and favorite lens were in Solms, much longer than promised so Leica New Jersey let me borrow a V Lux 2 for our Antarctica and northwestern Argentina holidays, to suplement my D2. Go to our site and you'll see many of the V Lux 2 shots in the Antarctica galleries. My only objections to the V Lux 2 were that its low light performance was inferior to my Digilux 2, and manual focus was so clunky that it was all but impossible to do.

 

The V Lux 4 is greatly improved on both counts, and will come with us to the jungles of Panama very shortly, and will produce, based on my testing around here, great reach (25-600MM equivalent zoom range), fine low light performance (partly due to a 2.8 lens that stays 2.8 even at the tele end), and be small and light. Below is a test image shot from street level two city blocks away from the upper floors of the Chrysler Building. Also, all of the low light photos I've posted on the Forum since Christmas are from the V Lux 4.

 

This camera, or the Panasonic equivalent, should meet your needs quite well, and perhaps go along with you more than once in a while.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

as promised, two with hektor 135mm on panasonic g1 (flower bud with several extension tubes) ..........

 

These look really good. Thank you.

 

 

 

Well.... my main thought would be why on earth do you want to lug around a 300mm telephoto lens or similar on the Very occasional appearance of an unusual creature....

 

madness..... sheer madness...... :p

 

................

 

Exactly! That's why I'm asking the question! I have a Viso III that I use for macro with an Elmar 65 and wouldn't mind a longer Telyt but as you point out, its not exactly a weildy set up. Thanks for the offer though! ;)

 

 

 

Peter -

 

Barbara surprised me with a V Lux 4 for the holidays. .....................

 

Thanks for the photo Stuart- it looks very encouraging doesn't it? Its looking like the favourite at the moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am considering an M, but I imagine a good long lens for the M will now be extremely expensive and hard to find.

 

The alternative is an R series with adaptor + EVF for an M ..... when you get it......

 

But the total cost will be much more than a V-lux 4 or similar ... and you have the drawback of weight and lose the benefit of a spare small camera....

 

As far as the M is concerned I have found a mint Vario R 80-200 and a Macro Apo 100 and I will be calling it a day at that.

 

No point having a pile of heavy lenses if, like me, you are no longer willing to behave like a Nepalese Sherpa in pursuit of what is meant to be a pleasurable pastime....:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any difference between the V-Lux 4 and the Panasonic equivalent (FZ2000)?

 

I suppose its unlikely that anyone other than a reviewer or dealer would have had both to make the comparison.

 

I'm thinking as I type here (I know; its an overdue innovation!) but I suppose I should ask a dealer really shouldn't I?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ditto as to difference between PanaLeica and Leica (£200 difference in the UK!). I am in the same position as the OP although I have realized it only very recently. I am predominently a 'wide' photographer but have occasional need for long. This morning, skeins of geese flew over and my existing equipment runs out at 90mm which is useless.

 

I have previous on this as my first serious digital camera was a PanaLeica LC 1 which I preferred to the D2 as, to me, it looked and handled better than the Leica, which looks 'wrong' to me to this day.

 

Why prefer the Leica to its Panasonic sibling? Is there any tangible benefit? I have enough Leicas not to feel Red dot inferiority.

 

Geoff (temporarily poverty-stricken after the purchase of Gitzo System tripod and Arca-Swiss P0 although that is totally not relevant)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Geoff, nice choice of head for your excellent new tripod!

 

From what I can find out on the net there are at most three differences between the two cameras apart from the price:

 

1- The finish, which we can probably judge for ourselves from the photos.

 

2- Lightroom 4 comes with the V-Lux but not with the ZF200.

 

3- The Jpegs from the Leica are said to be less "over-processed". I don't know whether this is true, or even if it is I don't know exactly what it means, although I think I can imagine.

 

Since I already have LR4, and I always shoot in RAW, I'm finding it very hard to justify the price difference, much as I'd like to!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter,

 

Thank you for the comparison. Like you, I never use JPEGs and already have Lightroom 4 so there doesn't appear much of an argument in favour of the Leica version.

 

There is a discussion about the Panasonic version over on Luminous Landscape and the verdict is a little lukewarm. I will have to think about it while my finances recover from the Gitzo/Arca-Swiss purchase - the M9 looks a bit out of place perched on top but at least I can't blame the equipment for camera shake any longer. I am sure that I used to be able to hand-hold the M6 down to 1/4 sec but perhaps I have the DTs now.

 

Geoff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...