Lens for Olympus E510/520 (1 Viewer)

My intention is to buy a SLR camera: Olympus E510 or 520. But I have no idea about the lens. I know a few things about Zuiko Digital ED 70-300mm f4.0-5.6, but (I supose) there are (many) other options. Please help me to decide what lens to buy. For birding, of course.
Thank you,

Cristian

Hi Cristian. I think I would probably go for the E-520 rather than the E-510 now as the minor improvements look worthwhile for the extra cost.

The four thirds format is a bit limited for lenses but the Zuiko ED 70-300 is excellent and is superb value. It is also very light and can easily be hand held, making it a very goodwalk about lens.

It is, however, by the far the best value in the longer focal length lenses. The higher spec ranges are meant to be superb but are horribly expensive. There is a 50-200 ED f2.8-3.5 available and it might be possible to get decent results from using this with the 1.4 or 2.0x Olympus teleconverters. I haven't seen many images from this combination though.

Other than the Olympus lenses the main alternatives come from Sigma. There is a 135-400 f4.5-5.6 available but the preferred choice seems to be the 50-500 f4-6.3, commonly known as the 'Bigma'. This gets good reviews and is excellent value but bear in mind that it is about three times the weight of the ED 70-300 and will probably require a tripod, restricting its use as a walkabout lens.

This is about as much help as I can give but I am sure other people will have alternative suggestions.

Ron

I agree with Ron that the Olympus 70-300 is the best bet as far as reach, price and size. Cristian, note that the 70-300 is being offered in a kit now, as mentioned in this thread:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=114197

and seen in this link:

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/category/basecategory.aspx?cat03=3065&Brand=173&Range=1016

If this dual-lens kit (14-42 and 70-300) is available in the US when the E-520 actually is available for sale, I'll almost definitely go for it over the kit with the 14-42 and 40-150 lenses (even though the 40-150 looks like a nice lens).

One thing to note about the 135-400 is that Sigma have apparently ceased production of this lens so you may need to hunt around to find one of the last remaining ones in 4/3rds mount.

Optically the 50-200 is way above any of the others mentioned and works very well in conjunction with the EC-14 1.4x teleconverter. I don't recommend using it with the EC-20 2x teleconverter though unless you only want to take record shots because, from personal testing, the combination produces rather soft images, the viewfinder is noticeably dark and the AF sluggish. The other thing to note about the 50-200 is that there are two version: the 50-200 and the new 50-200 SWD. Basically what they've done with SWD is lens is use re-engineer it to a different of AF motor which results in potentially much faster focusing. I say potentially because it really needs to coupled with the E-3 to get maximum performance. I've no idea what the speed difference would be between the two version when used on an E-510. All i can say is I've used my old version with my E-510 for flight shots of Red Kites and it coped easily.

I suppose the best way to at the various choices is this:

• the Sigmas will give you the most reach but are the heaviest
• the 50-200 + EC-14 will give you the highest quality (sharper than any of the others even wide open) but is the most expensive option
• the 70-300 is the cheapest and lighted option

I have to agree with Paul that the Olympus 50-200 (either version) is your best bet if image quality is of any importance to you.

I bought an E420 recently with the 70-300 zoom, but returned it within a week as I was disappointed by the image quality. I took several point blank pictures of a young lapwing chick that wasn't moving, tripod mounted etc, and found the pictures soft and lacking in sharpness. I don't mind doing a bit of computer tweaking on a bird in flight, low light etc, but if that was the best it could do with a close, stationary subject then I wasn't interested.

I swapped the camera for an E510 with the two shorter zoom lenses (longest is a 40-150) but again I've found them lacking in image quality too.

When in Norfolk a couple of weeks ago I went into the showroom of WarehouseExpress and tried a few shots with the 50-200 SWD on my camera, which is much closer to a professional quality lens. This was sharper & brighter with noticeably better contrast, though I still found those test shots to be quite noisy at ISO's ranging from 100-400. I'm now debating whether to save for the 50-200 SWD, as I've virtually stopped using the camera with the two kit lenses it came with.

I must emphasize that this is only my personal and subjective view of the olympus lenses, but it does seem that the old truism that you get what you pay for is still very true here. The 70-300 is great for the money and offers superior reach in a small and light package, but don't expect to be blown away with the image quality unless the birds are close and conditions are very bright.

I would expect the 50-200 with the 1.4TC to give similar reach and noticeably better results but at considerably greater cost, compared to the cheaper 70-300 lens. There are quite a few sites with sample shots from each lens, if you do a google search under something like 'olympus lens for wildlife'.

Steve

Hi Steve,

SteveClifton said:

I bought an E420 recently with the 70-300 zoom, but returned it within a week as I was disappointed by the image quality. I took several point blank pictures of a young lapwing chick that wasn't moving, tripod mounted etc, and found the pictures soft and lacking in sharpness. I don't mind doing a bit of computer tweaking on a bird in flight, low light etc, but if that was the best it could do with a close, stationary subject then I wasn't interested.

Click to expand...

A bit late now you've sold the lens but were you stopping down to around f8?

SteveClifton said:

When in Norfolk a couple of weeks ago I went into the showroom of WarehouseExpress and tried a few shots with the 50-200 SWD on my camera, which is much closer to a professional quality lens. This was sharper & brighter with noticeably better contrast, though I still found those test shots to be quite noisy at ISO's ranging from 100-400. I'm now debating whether to save for the 50-200 SWD, as I've virtually stopped using the camera with the two kit lenses it came with.

Click to expand...

If you're seeing any significant noise at ISO 100-400 then there's either something amiss with your camera settings or your work-flow or the camera is faulty. I've taken some superb ISO 800 photos of wild deer in very poor winter light with my E-510/50-200/EC-14. I shoot in RAW and develop in UfRaw/GIMP so there's absolutely no noise reduction being applied at all (I have to export a TIFF to Noise Ninja to do that) yet the images have come out very clean, certainly nothing that would show even on an A4 sized print.

First, thank you everybody for your opinions.
Probably Oly E-510 + 70-300 isn't the best quality image gear, but I supose will be much better than Canon PowerShot S3 IS + Raynox DCR 2020PRO (you can see some pics in my gallery on birdforum) - this is what i'm using now for birding.

Cristian

If you're seeing any significant noise at ISO 100-400 then there's either something amiss with your camera settings or your work-flow or the camera is faulty. I've taken some superb ISO 800 photos of wild deer in very poor winter light with my E-510/50-200/EC-14. I shoot in RAW and develop in UfRaw/GIMP so there's absolutely no noise reduction being applied at all (I have to export a TIFF to Noise Ninja to do that) yet the images have come out very clean, certainly nothing that would show even on an A4 sized print.

Click to expand...

Thanks Paul for the tips. In no way do I consider myself an expert, in fact quite the opposite with an SLR, and some of my poor pictures are probably down to poor technique and not getting to know the equipment properly. I shot all my photos in jpeg format, experimented with various settings including reducing or switching off the noise reduction completely, but was still disappointed with most of the results I got with the 70-300 lens.

I'm still very interested in getting a longer lens, but need to be certain first that it is capable of decent results in a variety of conditions. Then if I still get poor results I can blame nothing more than my bad technique. From what I've read and seen, the 50-200 seems to fit my requirements best, but I'm just not sufficiently convinced yet that committing to the Olympus system is the answer for me. I was initially attracted by the small size of the cameras, 2x effect from the four thirds angle of view, and reputed quality of their lenses, but there seem also to be a number of limitations, not least the limited range of decent affordable lenses available to fit the Olympus bodies.

Buying a decent lens might just serve to convince me that I made the right choice afterall, but then again it could prove to be an expensive mistake. Decisions, decisions!

Hi Steve,

SteveClifton said:

but there seem also to be a number of limitations, not least the limited range of decent affordable lenses available to fit the Olympus bodies.

Click to expand...

It's the same for the other camera makes too. High quality, fast super-telephoto lens are very expensive. If you take on board that 300mm lens on 4/3rds gives about the same reach asa 400mm lens on APS-C you'll see the same pattern: relatively affordable up to 400/f5.6 but then huge price leap to a 500/f4. That's why so many hobbyist bird photographers use the Sigma 50-500 - it's the most cost-effective way of getting a 500mm lens. If you shot Canon or Nikon you'd probably end up using that lens anyway. Using it on 4/3rds will give you image stabilisation, a bit more reach and no dust bunnies.

SteveClifton said:

Buying a decent lens might just serve to convince me that I made the right choice afterall, but then again it could prove to be an expensive mistake. Decisions, decisions!

Click to expand...

Which ever system you settle on, none will compensate for poor technique and neither will buying a more expensive lens. All SLRs are very unforgiving beasts.

Cristian Mihai said:

First, thank you everybody for your opinions.
Probably Oly E-510 + 70-300 isn't the best quality image gear, but I supose will be much better than Canon PowerShot S3 IS + Raynox DCR 2020PRO (you can see some pics in my gallery on birdforum) - this is what i'm using now for birding.

Cristian

Click to expand...

Hi Cristian. I have been following your posts in the Gallery for some time now and am impressed with the results you get from your present equipment. I am sure you would be able to get even better images with the E-510/E-520 + ED 70-300 combination given your ability. The combination has its drawbacks but is reasonably priced, extremely portable and can be hand held pretty successfully.

With a 300 lens the image of the bird will still be quite small and will probably need some cropping. I have also noticed that at the long end of the zoom the depth of field is very shallow so it is possible to have the eye of the bird sharp but the body out of focus and vice versa. It is therefore important to be very careful with your focusing point.

The two images here were both taken with the combination hand held and, although they are not the greatest images ever, I think they are reasonably sharp and I am pleased with them for the money I paid.

Good luck with your choice.

Ron

SteveClifton said:

I'm still very interested in getting a longer lens, but need to be certain first that it is capable of decent results in a variety of conditions. Then if I still get poor results I can blame nothing more than my bad technique.

Click to expand...

My suggestion is to do a controlled test. It's easy enough to do - set up the camera on a tripod with the lens you want to test, set up some cereal boxes or bottles of wine or whatever to give you different colors and levels of brightness, and take a bunch of pictures at different ISOs.

I agree with Paul that if you are seeing noise at 100-400, there may be a problem with the camera. The above type of test can tell you quickly enough. It will also help you determine whether the unsharp pictures you mentioned are the result of any camera movement on your part. If you aren't using a tripod for your bird pictures with the 70-300 lens, camera movement may be part of the problem (and also of course you need a relatively fast shutter speed to freeze the bird).