Hey folks, I'm looking for a medium telephoto I can bring on backpacking trips that will live in the pack 95% of the time and come out for wildlife photography opportunities. It will be adapted on an A7r ii. What is the lightest lens you can think of for this goal?
The best I've found so far is the OM 200 f/5 at 380g. Is that as good as it gets? How does this lens compare to the pentax and minolta 200/4 options? I noticed those weigh just 405-410g, so I was wondering if there's an image quality tradeoff against those, and if any such differences still exist at f/8.
And the winner in the "lightest 180-200mm lens" competition is.... Olympus OM 200/5! It's super tiny and light, comes with a built-in shade, and is already really nice and sharp just 1/2 a stop up from wide open.
@austlee, I can't say if it's "as good as it gets" or is better/worse than the Pentax and Minolta 200/4 options. But it was a great little lens on my Fuji X-T2, where I used it as a shift lens; in other words, it's not just the middle of the image circle that is good.
Here's a full res sample pic I made to see how it does at distance and in the corners. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GbJscbAu_c59OYq4mFdh3JpMpCS06MAV
Remember, this is a Fuji X-T2. The point of focus is the cell tower in the middle of the frame, and the aperture was f/7.
If you search on FM you'll find other threads extolling the virtues of the thing.
If you decided you're interested in an OM 200/5, I'm selling mine because I don't use my OM lenses anymore for tilt-shift on my X-T2; I've moved to a GFX 50R for that purpose (so my little OM 200/5 is up for sale, along with most of my other OMs).
austlee wrote:
The best I've found so far is the OM 200 f/5 at 380g. Is that as good as it gets? How does this lens compare to the pentax and minolta 200/4 options? I noticed those weigh just 405-410g, so I was wondering if there's an image quality tradeoff against those, and if any such differences still exist at f/8.
I tried several of these lenses with a Sony A7: Canon FD 200mm/4, Nikon AI 200mm/4, Olympus 200mm/4, Leica R 180mm/4...
I found them to lack constrast and have CA. Focusing was not that easy too.
The Leica was the best but heavier: 540g.
I shot 2 or 3 correct urban lanscapes with them but endep up not using them that much.
If I had to do it again, I would compromise on the weight and buy an Voigt Apo-Lanthar 180/4: 485g.
All 200/4 or so lenses from 1980's are pretty similar on the A7R2.Stopped down to f 8 they have very good sharpness across the frame.Below that some sharpness fall-off towards image edges and (easily removable) fringing may occur.
This is the list of the ones I have tried and recommend
1.Zeiss C/Y Tele Tessar 200/4
2.Nikkor 200/4 AI/AIS
3.Leitz Elmar R 180/4
4.Minolta MD/MC Rokkor 200/4
5.EBC Fujinon 200/4.5 m42 (nearly as small as Oly 200/5)
6.Olympus OM 200/4 or 200/5
7.Pentax M 200/4
8.Konica Hexanon/Hexar 200/4
9.Canon nFD 200/4 (smaller) or SSC 200/4(bigger)
10.Sigma Apo Macro 180/5.6 - various mounts,Macro 1:2
i think the Zeiss C/Y Tele Tessar 200/4 is quite rar.
do you know how it compares to the 80-200mm zoom?
is it so much better (and lighter) that i would forget about the 1,5 meter mfd ?
compared to the 1 meter of the zoom.
You're being nudged towards heavier lenses. If you're willing to carry a bit more weight, another good option that I've used is the Tamron 180/2.5 LD. This is a superb lens, and it uses the Adaptall-2 system so you can use almost any mount for which you already have an adapter. But it's not a light-weight at 876 grams. You can find reviews of this one online from Modern Photography and UK Camera Weekly.
I have never owned the Voigtlander 180/4, but it's supposedly a very light but fabulous optic. It's also rare and expensive.
If you're willing to spend Voigtlander 180/4 money, to be honest I'd recommend a modern auto-focus lens. I was only using these older lenses because I really needed the ability to shift on APS-C, so it was worth the hassle.
The Sigma 180mm f5.6 is 440g according to Dyxum, but I’d have to weigh my manual focus version to verify. IQ is good at f8, and the CA correction is much better than any other legacy 200mm f4
trogdon wrote:
The Sigma 180mm f5.6 is 440g according to Dyxum, but I’d have to weigh my manual focus version to verify. IQ is good at f8, and the CA correction is much better than any other legacy 200mm f4
rsrsrs wrote:
i think the Zeiss C/Y Tele Tessar 200/4 is quite rar.
do you know how it compares to the 80-200mm zoom?
is it so much better (and lighter) that i would forget about the 1,5 meter mfd ?
compared to the 1 meter of the zoom.
Tele Tessar C/Y 200/4 is a tad and more evenly sharper across the frame but has slightly more CA at 200 and f4,compared to VS 80-200/4 C/Y.
Stopped down to f8 it is sharper still and both have little to no CA.
rdeloe wrote:
You're being nudged towards heavier lenses. If you're willing to carry a bit more weight, another good option that I've used is the Tamron 180/2.5 LD. This is a superb lens
I'm not crazy about it. I have one and it is a fine lens but not that much at 2.5. If you can accept the weight, you can find better with a 2.8 max aperture.
AmbientMike wrote:
Have you considered 55-250 Canon?
I guess most people will dismiss it because it is APS-C, but it actually makes sense to consider this lens. 200mm on Full Frame is too short for wildlife, and you are going to crop anyway. The APS-C zoom lens goes to 250 mm and is lighter, longer and better than the classic FF primes when cropped.
If weight saving is extremely important I would sacrifice some focal length and go for the native Sony E 55-210. It would save the adapter and some extra grams for the lens as well.
I bought the aforementioned Voigtlander 180/4 and it is spectacularly small and light for this purpose with top-notch image quality. It focuses quite closely too, which ups the functionality for a long prime like this. Great for landscape, though I find the focal length long often and end up stitching. I use it on my A7rii.
I use the Leica 180mm f3.4 APO-Telyt-R. It's not the lightest at 750g but light and compact enough for me. Also of note, it's optimized for the best IQ at infinity (best for landscape)...and I can attest it produces stellar results.
