• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Olympus 300mm f4 (1 Viewer)

I think the generalizations say that for a 300 mm lens to have f4, it needs a front element of a given size. The size of the sensor behind it has nothing to do with that, but with a smaller sensor you get a narrower field of view with the same focal length of the lens.

The Pana-Leica is not likely to be f4 at 300 mm simply because it has a smaller front element than the oly lens. But it might still be an excellent lens that will (knock on wood) allow us to take some really good photos.

Niels,

I wasn't comparing the f4.0-f6.3 Leica directly with the f4.0 Oly, I was comparing the Leica with similar Canon/Nikon zoom lenses, and the oly with similar Canon/Nikon prime lenses. Obviously, the f4.0 Oly is going to be heavier than slower lenses, and the Leica is not going to offer f4.0 at 300mm.

As for your suggestion that the reduced size of m4/3s lenses stems only from the increased crop factor (i.e. narrower field of view) from the smaller sensor, that contradicts the 4/3 website. Under the benefits of micro 4/3s, it states:
The benefits of reducing the size of an interchangeable-lens type camera cannot be properly experienced unless the size of the lens itself is reduced as well as that of the body.
Therefore, the Micro Four Thirds System standard has reduced the outer diameter of the lens mount to enable lens size reduction.
The new lens mount diameter is about 6 mm smaller than before because this size allows the mount to transmit the same optical flux to the Four Thirds System while still retaining the required strength.
In addition, the lens mount of the Micro Four Thirds System is equipped with two additional signal contacts for smoother Live View shooting with shorter time lags, faster higher communication speeds between the lens and body, and, of course, reduced lens and camera size.

http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/index.html
 
Last edited:
Oh I'm sure they could have made this Olympus lens a little lighter, but probably only by accepting other compromises.

I think they just mis-judged the market, as they did with their failed experiment with the 4/3 system and its heavy lenses (as opposed to micro 4/3). And as both Olympus and Panasonic did in waiting so long to bring out long lens alternatives for micro 4/3. Olympus decided to not worry about weight and added bells and whistles, such as dual IS and programmable buttons, perhaps thinking users would just compare this 600mm equivalent lens to the weight of an actual 600mm lens. Some people are clearly ok with this approach, such as yourself. But the reaction to the olympus lens I've seen on forums has been about 8 to 1 negative; reaction to the Leica almost entirely positive. You are the only one on this forum thus far who has indicated they are likely to buy the olympus. I am just grateful Panasonic is announcing an alternative at the same time otherwise the olympus would be an even bigger disappointment to m4/3 photographers like me.
 
Last edited:
Jim--
8 to 1 negative? Hmmm... Wow. Certainly lots of people are put off by the weight and the price. Misjudged the market? You may be right, but I hope that Olympus is able to be guided more by the pusuit of quality than always targeting the maximum number of sales. One of my disappointments with Nikon is that they mostly sell to the mass consumer market; the quality of their best gear is not what it once was, and huge portion of their lenses & cameras are cheap junk.

The dual IS certainly may have driven up the price, compared to a conventional OIS... But I'm not sure I would classify the dual IS as "whistles and bells." Image stabilization is an important feature for most people on a lens like this (although it is not at the top of my list personally). Olympus made a decision to be a leader/pioneer and implement the dual IS. I give them credit for that. The function switch on the lens probably didn't add that much to the cost; all the Pro series lenses have it so they added it for consistency.

I don't think Olympus is "not worrying" about weight. Olympus is much more in touch with what their customers want than Nikon, and they know how important size/weight are to most micro-4/3 users... I think Olympus is trying to make a viable alternative for "pro" level gear, and in order to do that, I think the decision to make the front element a little larger and go for maximum resolution was the primary driver raising both the price and size of the Olympus lens. That larger front element both allows the larger maximum aperture and helps improve resolution. The build quality, weather sealing, fast AF system, dual IS--these things certainly also added to the cost and/or the weight, but they are part of any truly "pro" lens. And I'm convinced that the limitation that I mentioned above is real: Yes this Olympus lens probably could have a little bit smaller front element and still come in at 300mm f/4, but not that much smaller, and it would have impacted image quality. If the Leica/Panasonic 100-400 lens had a similar maximum aperture to the Olympus at 300mm, for example if the Leica/Panasonic was f/3.2-f/5.6, then I think it would be both heavier and more costly.

The Olympus 300 and Leica/Panasonic 100-400 lenses are really different in many ways. The Olympus will be maybe ~1 lb. heavier and ~$700 more (prices at introduction), and I totally understand anyone who simply sees that and rejects the Olympus. But for those who are willing to pay that premium and carry that extra 1 lb., I think the Olympus might offer more than one tangible benefit. We don't know yet how compelling those benefits are, but choice is good.

Dave
 
Last edited:
The blurb on the amazon pre-order site for the 100-400 has a couple of interesting tidbits:
this lens features a splash and dustproof design
Dual I.S. (Image Stabilization) compatibility
The image shows a focus delimiter.

So, the feature set seems competitive, the interesting thing will be how good the images look from each of the two lenses.

Niels
 
The dual IS certainly may have driven up the price, compared to a conventional OIS... But I'm not sure I would classify the dual IS as "whistles and bells." Image stabilization is an important feature for most people on a lens like this (although it is not at the top of my list personally). Olympus made a decision to be a leader/pioneer and implement the dual IS. I give them credit for that.

Panasonic already has dual IS, so Olympus is following them, not leading. From what I've read, the dual IS doesn't make much practical difference compared to regular IS, so that's why it strikes me as a bell and whistle. Also, I believe it will only be available if you pair it with an olympus body, so it's contrary to the idea of a single lens standard. BTW, personally, I'm not much put off by the price; it's the weight that is the deal breaker for me.
 
The blurb on the amazon pre-order site for the 100-400 has a couple of interesting tidbits:
this lens features a splash and dustproof design
Dual I.S. (Image Stabilization) compatibility
The image shows a focus delimiter.

So, the feature set seems competitive, the interesting thing will be how good the images look from each of the two lenses.

Niels

It says will be splash proof "when paired" with a splash proof lumix camera. Seems to suggest it may not be splash proof when paired with an olympus camera even if the camera is weather sealed--which, if true, is disappointing and contrary to the single lens standard philosophy.
 
We likely will know more when the "hands on" pieces start to appear. But personally I would not expect a blurb originating with Panasonic to even mention Oly. I read this as the Pana PR guys trying to make a little PR for their own splash proof cameras.

Niels
 
Panasonic already has dual IS, so Olympus is following them, not leading. From what I've read, the dual IS doesn't make much practical difference compared to regular IS, so that's why it strikes me as a bell and whistle. Also, I believe it will only be available if you pair it with an olympus body, so it's contrary to the idea of a single lens standard. BTW, personally, I'm not much put off by the price; it's the weight that is the deal breaker for me.

Jim,
Yes, thank you for pointing out that Panasonic already introduced dual IS. You are right of course, so they deserve the most credit for "leading." Nonetheless I suspect that Olympus must have started researching and developing dual IS quite some time ago if it is being launched now, and since Oly's in-body IS is different, I also think they probably had to do their entire own development and testing. I think Oly is rolling out dual IS with a lens while Panasonic rolled it out with a body... Maybe that doesn't matter, but my point is Olympus couldn't simply copy Panasonic's algorithm... So I still give Olympus some credit (25%?) for being "one of the first" to bring us dual IS... How much credit they get really depends on how well it works. Myself I'm a little dubious about IS in general... I would always rather be able to put the camera on a tripod or shoot fast enough that I can just turn IS off. By the way, if you want an example of "not leading," look at Nikon who still as we begin 2016 does not have a single serious mirrorless camera with an EVF (Nikon 1 fans may not like that but I'm not alone in this position).

With regard to a "common standard" where all micro-4/3 cameras/lenses are 100% compatible and interchangeable, that is nice in theory but in practice the details have always been less than perfect, and understandably so.

I am weary of arguing so I'm just going to concede that this Olympus lens is significantly heavier and far more expensive than other options, and for that reason many people will be disappointed and will not to buy it.

Dave
 
Last edited:
I am weary of arguing so I'm just going to concede that this Olympus lens is significantly heavier and far more expensive than other options, and for that reason many people will be disappointed and will not to buy it.

Dave

No problem Dave. Didn't think we were arguing so much as just stating our differing views. I think you are right that the weight of the Olympus lens was a result of Olympus putting highest priority on optical quality--at least that's what the marketing materials suggest. Maybe after I read the reviews I'll decide I need to have the lens after all.;)

Best,
Jim
 
Thanks Jim. No worries. I'm not sure whether I will get this Olympus lens. But for me it's a decision between primes. I resisted the new super light Nikon 300mm f/4E PF lens for the last year partly because I knew this lens was coming. Now that the Oly is finally almost here, I will probably make a decision this year between Nikon and this... I wish it was easier for me to abandon Nikon entirely; then I could also consider Canon options. If Nikon would ever announce a pro DX body to compete with the 7D MkII, that would probably push me to stay with Nikon for my smaller hand-held rig (see my reference at the end of post #52 above). Right now I still have the rather heavy old AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D (~3.2 lbs., no IS). It's a very capable lens, so I should take my time.

Dave
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Having toyed with the idea of switching to m43 from Nikon i put a deposit on the Nikon 300 pf lens today. Really dissapointed with the weight of the 300 Olympus lens as IMO it defeats the purpose of a smaller lightweight system. With today's announcement of the D500 it only confirmed to me that I have made the right choice.

Regards Gerard.
 
Having toyed with the idea of switching to m43 from Nikon i put a deposit on the Nikon 300 pf lens today. Really dissapointed with the weight of the 300 Olympus lens as IMO it defeats the purpose of a smaller lightweight system. With today's announcement of the D500 it only confirmed to me that I have made the right choice.

Regards Gerard.

did you check out the leica zoom?

http://naturalexposures.com/leica-lumix-100-400mm/

just wonder how the AF will work with flying birds, in low light etc.
 
Last edited:
Hi , i did see the zoom Leica but I prefer a fixed focal length on a lens rather than a zoom. I don't doubt that the Leica will be an excellent lens but between the Nikon 300 f4 pf weight, better autofocus for moving birds and the new D500,Nikon won the day.
On saying that nothing is set in stone and I might make the switch at some future point.

Regards Gerard.
 
Gerard,
I can totally understand your decision, and I may be headed in a similar direction. The D500 is a no brainer for me. It's the camera I wish Nikon had offered me for the last 3 or 4 years... And I have confidence that it will be really great for BIF. As much as I love Olympus and micro-4/3, the appearance of the D500 is a major development swaying me back to Nikon, at least for now.

My gosh why did Nikon wait so long to give us this camera? That is rhetorical; there is no good answer as far as I'm concerned. I think it will become a classic case study in business schools on how to lose customers and millions of dollars. But I'm off topic. I need to go post in the Nikon forum.

Dave
 

great, thanks for the link.

The Olympus 300/4 Pro seems to beat the Nikon 300mm PF on sharpness, CA, IS, vignetting
:t:

the weight is apparently 1.27kg / 2.8 lb (without tripod collar!) 1,475 g (with tripod collar),
definitely not super light but considering it's an f/4 compared to the leica 100-400 probably more like 5.6 at 300mm,
it's not a huge difference and the leica zoom seem to have a lot more vignetting.

price seem to be $500-600 more than the Nikon 300 PF and Leica 100-400,
but on the other hand, the EM-1 is a lot cheaper than the upcoming D500.

more info:

http://asia.olympus-imaging.com/product/dslr/mlens/300_4ispro/index.html

Sample photos here:

http://asia.olympus-imaging.com/product/dslr/mlens/300_4ispro/sample.html

Bare lens looks very good even at f/4, and good with TC14.

dpreview real world sample gallery:

http://www.dpreview.com/sample-gall...y-olympus-m-zuiko-digital-ed-300mm-f-4-is-pro

This is a seriously SHARP lens!
Even at f/4 the edge sharpness seems perfect.

This will be a difficult decision...
 
Last edited:
£2,199.99 (or £2,200 as most people will call it!) is right where we didn't want it to start!! The euro price is 2,600 which translates to under £2000 at current rates - and UK Olympus stuff comes through Olympus Europe anyway, doesn't it?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top