Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 2, 2013, 1:05 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,378
Default Difference between Oly 50-200mm lenses

What is the difference between the Oly 50-200mm ED and the 50-200mm SWD lenses. What does SWD mean?
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 2, 2013, 1:48 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,533
Default

Hi James

The SWD is the newer version of the lens - it uses an ultra sonic motor so is able to focus faster than the older Ed version. How much faster is the newer lens at focusing I'm not sure but optically they are the same so you can't go wrong with either. Steve, Bob and a few others have the older lens si they can give you an honest opinion on that lens.

Here's some reviews:

SWd version:

http://www.photozone.de/olympus--fou...speed=noscript

http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...35_swd_review/

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/ol...s-review-16110
HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2013, 2:03 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Steven R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,901
Default

Yes, Harj is right, optically it is the same lens, only difference is the newer version uses the SonicWaveDrive (SWD) focusing motor which is faster. I don't feel that it is a big enough difference to justify the extra cost on the 50-200. I do own a SWD lens in the 12-60. It is faster than the 50-200 to focus, but I don't see that the difference is worth the extra money if cost is a factor in your lens purchase. In my opinion the money saved could be put away in the piggy bank saving for your next equipment purchase.

I usually go out with the E-3 and just two lens, the 12-60, and the 50-200. For the type of shooting that I do, 12 thru 200mm in just two lens works well for me. On my wish list is the 35mm macro, and if I had that I would like to try my hand at macro shooting. Right now when I shoot macro I use my old legacy 50mm OM lens with an adapter. It does a good job, but it is all manual.
Steven R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2013, 2:06 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,378
Default

Thanks Harj. I'm thinking of going with the older version rather than get a 40-150mm but I'm not sure yet if I want both or just the 50-200.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2013, 2:08 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,378
Default

I have the 35mm macro and it is a very nice lens with great sharpness. I bought a refurb from Cameta Camera and they give a one year warranty on refurbs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven R View Post
Yes, Harj is right, optically it is the same lens, only difference is the newer version uses the SonicWaveDrive (SWD) focusing motor which is faster. I don't feel that it is a big enough difference to justify the extra cost on the 50-200. I do own a SWD lens in the 12-60. It is faster than the 50-200 to focus, but I don't see that the difference is worth the extra money if cost is a factor in your lens purchase. In my opinion the money saved could be put away in the piggy bank saving for your next equipment purchase.

I usually go out with the E-3 and just two lens, the 12-60, and the 50-200. For the type of shooting that I do, 12 thru 200mm in just two lens works well for me. On my wish list is the 35mm macro, and if I had that I would like to try my hand at macro shooting. Right now when I shoot macro I use my old legacy 50mm OM lens with an adapter. It does a good job, but it is all manual.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2013, 9:18 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
MarceloLI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Long Island - New York
Posts: 2,083
Default

James,

The older version of the 50-200mm is a great lens, as Steve and Harj mention it is not a substantial difference in performance.

I had the old version also and it worked great on my E3

The following pictures are with the Olympus E1









If you are buying the 50-200mm don't make sense to but the 40-150mm.

Congratulations for your new camera James.

Marcelo
MarceloLI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2013, 8:50 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,378
Default

Nice shots for sure, lots of color and detail.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2013, 9:18 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Lordje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Harelbeke, Belgium
Posts: 760
Default

I do own both lenses , the 40-150 3,5-4,5 and the 50-200.
The 50-200 is a way better then the 40-150 and I think you better go that way.
It will cost some extra $$ but it is worth it.
Still the 40-150 is certainly also a good lens.
__________________
One photo out of focus is a mistake, ten photo out of focus are an experimentation, one hundred photo out of focus are a style.

Nikon D800, Olympus E-500
Lordje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 3, 2013, 9:22 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
James Emory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Bay City, MI
Posts: 2,378
Default

Thank you everyone for your helpful input. Now to save some money and start with the 14-54mm f2.8 Oly. I'm still tempted with the 70-300mm also. Greg has taken some great shots with that lens.
__________________
Olympus OMD-M5, HLG6 grip, Olympus 4/3rd 35mm macro lens, Panny/Leica 25mm, f1.4, Olympus 17mm, Canon Pro 9000 Mk II Printer, Canon MP990 Printer, Slik U212 Tripod, Manfrotto monopod, MMF3 converter.
James Emory is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:37 PM.