UPDATE: You can now preorder the new Olympus 300mm f/4.0 PRO lens on Amazon US (Click here).
Digicameinfo leaked two more images of the final production version Zuiko 300mm f/4.0 PRO IS lens. The “beast” will be announced on January 6th at around 6am London time. The Japanese leaked specs list confirmes the “german” spec list we leaked on Friday:
– 6 stop correction (world’s best stabilization!)
– 17 lenses organized in 10 groups (three Super ED lens, one E-HR lens, three HR lens)
– New Z Coating Nano” coating to reduce flare
– weather sealed (17 sealing points).
– Lens fully functional down to -10 ℃.
– Tele Macro function of the shortest photographing distance 1.4m.
– Maximum magnification is 0.24 times (MC-14 0.34-fold during use).
– It is equipped with a “manual focus clutch mechanism”. Focus limit switch, with a L-Fn button.
– nine blade circular aperture
– 77mm filter size
– Total length 227mm (hood when using 280mm). The maximum diameter of 92.5mm. It weighs 1270 grams (1475 grams in the tripod sit).
– built-in lens hood can be fixed sliding that is stretched.
– detachable tripod mount
– price of ¥ 370,000 (including tax ¥ 399,600). In Europe 2.600 Euro
– ships late February
218 Responses
WTF? 2600Euro …it must be joke. I was waiting for this lens for 3 years but now they don’t get my money. I Can buy lens+body for this price.
You may be able to buy lens + body for this price, but whether you will be able to beat the optical quality for that price remains to be seen.
That said, a DSLR may likely give you more keepers thanks to more flexible PDAF algorithms and cross-type sensors, but that’s a whole other story.
**Definitely need cross type AF!!**
What good is unbeatable optical quality if the shot is oof??
I don’t understand why this cannot/has-not been implemented with m43!
With the steep price of this presumably great lens aside, I believe the lack of competitive c-af will hold back potential future investors. Especially those who already get great results with their larger system/format.
The development was announced on Feb 12th 2014 for release 2015 onwards.
So even if you expected it on Jan 1st 2015, I count 1 year not 3 years. LOL.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/0520169368/olympus-confirms-development-of-7-14mm-f2-8-and-300mm-f4-pro-lenses
yes, it was annouced… But i knew it longer 🙂 now i know i had true but this price WTF….
Looks like you had 2 years to save for it. How much is in the piggy-bank? 500?
actualy 1500 🙂 maybe its time to sold some of my mft lenses/body. Local Olympus rep. told me they give me 15% birthday discount but even with this price its ugly!
It’s definitely expensive, and definitely not for me, but it looks like it will be an extremely impressive lens.
None of the lenses this competes against are even weather sealed (well, none of the 300mm/f4 lenses – the 300/2.8s and 600mm/f4s are!), so that alone is a big bonus.
The Pentax DA300 F4.0 is weather sealed.
It’s kind of bizarre that Nikon didn’t add weather sealing the to 300 f/4 VR. At least with the 300 F/4 D and the Canon 300 F/4 versions they have the excuse of the lenses being 20-30 years old when adding weather sealing wasn’t as common. Not including it on a brand new release that’s aimed squarely at shooting wildlife is just baffling.
EDIT: Looking into it a bit more it seems that there are some conflicting reports whether or not the 300 PF is weather sealed. It definitely has a weather sealing gasket on the mount so I think this is probably just a problem with the marketing of the lens.
Buy one and express your confidence by standing under a waterfall with it. We will await your report with a complete lack of interest.
I guess you think you’re being clever or something but nothing short of a true waterproof body would be safe under a waterfall. Take an E-M1 under a waterfall with any significant drop and let us know how it does.
If I could physically stand, I wouldn’t hesitate.
Here is the E-M5 vs waterfall:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YHyn53AeOk&list=PLtBl1wsoV4OFFKowZlJjlv0btjQM8glrq
The E-M1 vs Blunty:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9Omqui0SoI
E-M1 vs mud:
https://scontent-mxp1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpt1/t31.0-0/q81/p526x296/12314332_10207586151747878_7492688216882696844_o.jpg
Quite impressive in its fully-extended glory! 🙂
What’s that tiny thing attached to its farther end?
Oh…I think you mean the camera…LOL
Pentax Q.
The original link mentions it will out resolve the SHG lens. I believe this is the first time Olympus has mentioned this with any of their lenses. I expect this lens to be the new standard for sharpness, even better than the 75mm.
Yes, indeed. I really like how Olympus and Panasonic have differentiated with this last batch of super-teles. The Panasonic 100-400 looks to offer lightweight flexibility (less than 1kg!), while the Olympus looks to offer ultimate image quality with no compromises.
Dailycameranews already said that about the 40-150mm f2.8:
“Olympus ED 40-150mm F2.8 PRO Specifications
Optical performance that exceeds the SHG Four Thirds”http://www.dailycameranews.com/2014/09/olympus-40-150mm-f2-8-pro-mc-14-1-4x-teleconverter-specs/
“Optical performance that exceeds […]” doesn’t necessarily mean that it out resolves the SHG (the SHG out resolves the 16 MP sensors anyway). It could be that the difference in T stops is smaller than the difference in F stops (this is very likely, the SHG lenses don’t excel when it comes to transmission), CA, distortion and many other things.
I don’t doubt that this lens will be seriously sharp, though.
I expect the same and if true the lens will be worth the rumored cost. If it’s anything less than stellar Olympus has shot itself in the foot because this lens, while very much a specialty item, has the potential to bring many pro users to the system.
Upon release, OLY claimed the 40-150 f2.8 was sharper (at 200) than the SHG 150 f2.
Ok, this 300mm looks great and the 75mm is great….now how about some compact quality prime in between…something like a 150mm f2.8 or maybe 200mm f4
Oh yes a 150 macro plz Oly 😉
I was thinking maybe a 90mm macro, but 150, really? That long?
Yes – 150mm- let’s get those tiny bugs! I have frequently used my 40-150 zoom with a macro adapter and use it at 150mm – – –
Yes, the Sigma 150mm macro lens is great on the E-M1 (the only model where it will AF properly) & if Olympus made one it would be fantastic & great on all their cameras.
with the 2.8/40-150 in the line up, I don’t see any 2.8/150 forthcoming.
you could very well be right…but the 40-150 is too big, heavy and pricey to be added to my collection. For me, the spirit of m43 is small and light. Pro aps-c seems the spot for sports/wildlife and FF for ultimate quality…choices 😉
actually, since this is all wishfulware at this point, what can imagine is a prime in the 150mm range that differentiate itself from the pro zoom : a macro. Not that it makes is small…
Pana had a 150mm 2.8 planned, but they scratched it after Oly announced the 40-150mm f2.8.
It would be nice to see Pana release the 150/ 2.8 now that the Oly zoom has been out for awhile. I can see them not wanting to release it at the same time…I have the older Oly 40-150 and use it practically always at 150mm anyways…and the Pana would probably be significantly cheaper than the pro zoom.
Yeah, I remember that one..
“price of ¥ 370,000 (including tax ¥ 399,600)”
Wow. The egregious overpricing which lead to the demise of 4/3 system is here again. And 1270g without even a tripod collar… like it is 1998.
Yeah, and while we’re talking about that, someone needs to take the designers at Zeiss out back and have them shot. a 55mm/f1.4 that weighs 1030g and costs $4000? What were they thinking?!
They are thinking about PRO market where people spend $7000 on a body weighing 1.5kg. Or MF replacement. Who cares, it has nothing to do with m43.
Not that I think that the Otus has a huge number of sales. But it is like optically perfect f/0.7 on m43, thing which does not exist.
With a lens that big, you might as well go with a 7D or FF. M43 has zero advantage against APS-C or FF when it comes to being that big. There’s no excuse.
Olympus is back to making the same mistakes it did with Four Thirds… Big Lenses with Small sensors and a whole lotta noise in the images.
Eh?
M4/3 has a huge advantage against APS-C and FF when it comes to being that big. The advantage gets bigger the longer the focal length. When it comes to super telephoto photography, what matters is pixels per bird, or pixels per airplane. Pixel density, high quality optics, and crop factor, are all benefits.
To achieve the same pixels per bird as a 16MP M4/3 with a 300mm lens, you need 26MP APS-C, or 62MP FF. For 20MP M4/3, you need 33MP APS-C and 77MP FF. And that 300mm optic needs to be perfectly optimized for the pixel density. Find me a 33MP APS-C or a 77MP FF and we’ll talk.
Otherwise you’re back to carrying a 400mm lens with APS-C, and a 600mm lens with FF. Talk to me again about size advantage?
@ Turbofrog: the challenge of achieving a desired resolution using different glass on different systems is more or less the same. I would not say it’s more difficult to achieve 62 MP on FF than 16 MP on m43. The FF lens will be bigger, of course.
The much more important insight using both systems is this one: if you really want to exploit the very high resolution of a modern image sensor you need to have perfect, expensive glass. I like my m43 primes (they deliver). I don’t like my zoom which I only bought to have an OK solution for the occasional video shoot.
My FF tele zoom? It’s a monster. Resolution is very impressive. But the thing is too heavy to be used more than 3-4 times a year.
And we had 24 MP APS-C since April 2012, 28 MP since September 2014 and possibly 30+ MP this year. On paper this 300 mm f/4 lens on its own is not a compelling reason to switch to m43 from APS-C per se (it might a reason to switch from Sony E-mount because the Sony E-mount nor A-mount doesn’t have a 300 mm f/4 lens, though adapting a Canon 300 mm f/4 lens to E-mount might be a reasonable option).
It is rather a reason to not switch from m43 to APS-C, ie, except for its higher price, it neutralises an advantage of Nikon or Canon APS-C had.
Samsung is the only one with a 28MP APS-C sensor, and sadly it doesn’t look like they will ever be releasing their 300mm/f2.8 lens.
As I mentioned above, the 24MP sensors will only give you no better image quality if you crop them to 16MP – almost definitely worse – and if you don’t crop them, you need a 400mm lens. Where’s the advantage?
Did I say there was an advantage? I said that this lens, on paper, roughly evens the field between m43 and APS-C in regard to this AOV.
And why would a 24 MP APS-C sensor cropped to 16 MP give you a worse image quality than a 16 MP m43 sensor to begin with (ignoring the slight difference in pixel density for a moment)?
This Olympus 300 mm m43 lens might have a better IQ (over the m43 image circle) than the Nikon 300 mm f/4 lens but strangely enough, this point, which is the main expected difference, hasn’t been made by anybody.
As I said above, the reason that you will get worse quality images from the cropped APS-C is because all of the supertelephoto lenses that fit APS-C right now are full-frame optics are not optimized for high pixel density. The non-DO/Fresnel Canon 300mm/f4L and the Nikon 300mm/f4 were both designed for film cameras…
Even the brand new 300mm DO lenses are mainly intended for 36MP FF cameras (at most), which is equivalent to 16MP on APS-C…
http://www.amazon.com/Sigma-150-600mm-5-0-6-3-Cameras-Medium-Telephoto-Lens/dp/B00THOYRN6/ref=sr_1_6?srs=2530413011&ie=UTF8&qid=1451940114&sr=8-6&keywords=sigma+zoom+lens
You can get this Sigma Zoom lens and a 7D MkII for around the same price for this lens. You’re telling me this combo is not better, Image Quality wise?
Err, well that’s the “Contemporary” (i.e. consumer) version of the lens, not the “Sport” so it’s definitely not on the same level as a 300mm/f4 prime. Not to mention it’s f5-6.3, so even if you’re taking equivalence into account, it’s slower than the 300mm/f4, which is equivalent to 400mm/f5 on APS-C.
On top of all that, a 7D II + 150-600 will weigh literally double what an E-M1 + 300mm/f4 does. And it’s not weather sealed.
If you’re cropping with the 300mm/f4 on the E-M1, the 7D II would likely give you better quality, since you can get to 960mm equivalent. But if you aren’t cropping, I would bet good money the 300mm/f4 + E-M1 would give you sharper images 9 times out of 10.
While the new Nikon 300 mm f/4 lens is a FF lens, it likely is gets used more often on APS-C cameras than on FF cameras, simply because Nikon sells a lot more of the former and among the people that buy longer tele lenses (> 200 mm or faster than f/5.6 300 mm), the APS-C crowd constitutes an even larger majority. And Nikon knows this full well, thus they’ve certainly designed the 300 mm f/4 to do well on APS-C.
”The non-DO/Fresnel Canon 300mm/f4L and the Nikon 300mm/f4 were both designed for film cameras…”
You’re absolutely right. I bought my 300 f4L IS for my EOS 3, a film body, back in 2000.
With my 7D, this lens is not sharp at all. The 400 f5.6, 135 f:2, 200 f1.8 fair much better…
My m43-designed OLY Pro lenses deliver visibly better wide-open center sharpness on my EM-1 than my L lenses + 7D…with the exception of the 200 f1.8. The OLY lenses were designed to match this format.
You’re talking Per Pixel?
LOL!!
I like how you leave out 43 sensor Noise.
You can use a 16mp APS-C sensor and Pixel for Pixel, the APS-C will win Every. Time. 16mp on a 43 sensor is tight enough! shooting a flying bird or plane from afar, the APS-C clearly wins. You can try and spin it all you want.
And as for size, like I said, if M43 is going to be this big, you’re better off with a bigger sensor camera. They’re all large anyway!
But you’re totally missing the point, then. If you have a 16MP APS-C sensor, to get the same quality you’re going to need a 400mm lens. The 400/f5.6 isn’t stabilized, and the 400mm/f4 is $5700…
Noise-wise, APS-C is 2/3 of a stop better if you downscale from 24MP to 16MP. If you don’t downscale, you have no noise advantage whatsoever while using a 300mm/f4 lens. You can just crop and hope you get as good a result as M4/3…but you won’t, because the FF optics are not optimized for APS-C sensors with high pixel density.
Pentax is probably the best bet at achieving comparable results, since the 300mm DA is at least designed for APS-C, is water resistant, and Pentax cameras have IBIS…
Pentax could have been Fuji. They have the dedication and ability to excel over the competition, but they don’t move fast enough to capture emerging markets. DSLR’s aren’t dead, but they’ll make up a fraction of the market in 5 years. With 7% of the market, it’s time to dive into something else. Instead, they come up with a full frame DSLR NO ONE except HARD CORE and well off Pentax users will buy.
Maybe a few users of older Pentax K-mount lenses will be excited to take full advantage of them. But I imagine most of those people who really wanted to just bought an A7 of some sort and called it a day…
correct
Sure…
http://www.fujirumors.com/page/2/
So, the Fuji will be slightly shorter and lighter. AND this lens is WR, it’s stabilized AND cheaper.
Err, shouldn’t you be comparing that 100-400 lens with the 100-400 lens that Panasonic is coming out with today? The one that’s got OIS, WR, weighs 40% less, and costs the same or less?
MrALLCAPS is never happy.
I’ll be happy when Panasonic Releases a FF GX7 styled camera.
Truth be told, Micro Four Thirds has long reached it’s limit in IQ, and the cameras are getting larger, while FF (Sony) are getting smaller. I think the GM series is very smart of Panasonic, but most M43 users want more bells and Whistles on their cameras, because for some, it’s their primary camera.
And there is no M43 camera out there, that is moving Canikon users away, like the A7 series is doing. Why? -Because it’s Full Frame, it’s smaller than your typical DSLR and you can use most lenses with it.
BUT, it’s Full Frame and that’s the Key Point.
I’ve said it before… When Canikon takes Mirrorless seriously, if Panasonic and Olympus (-Well, more Olympus than Panasonic, because they have excellent video) Don’t improve on IQ and Pricing, they’re done. Because right now, they’re looking like Four Thirds more and more.
Sony OWNS Mirrorless and Fujifilm is front-runner for second place. Thier cameras/lenses are just as small, if not smaller and Better Image Quality. Not to mention, prices are comparable too.
M43 users better Hope Canikon doesn’t take Mirrorless seriously.
Fujifilm is front-runner for 2nd place, if you mean front-runner for last place. They have 5% marketshare.
Sony has 34%. Olympus and Panasonic together have 34% as well. Canon has 13%, Pentax has 8%, and Nikon has 6%.
http://www.fujirumors.com/mirrorless-market-in-japan-fujifilm-still-a-small-but-cool-niche-however-x-series-market-share-increased-in-2014/
But don’t let facts get in the way of your doomsaying, please carry on.
Regardless of what you think of Micro Four Thirds, it obviously carries a lot of appeal for some people.
We’ll see… That was for 2014 by the way. AND for Japan ONLY.
But keep spinning… It’s entertaining.
Please, feel free to provide any single piece of evidence to the contrary beyond your conjecture. I would be very interested to see some.
That’s Japan-only. Globally, Sony is closer to 50% but m43 certainly comes second. And Fuji very likely is still behind Nikon. They certainly beat Leica (but that is not a great feat) and Pentax (Q). They might beat Samsung and Canon as well, I’m not sure.
I don’t disbelieve you, but I’m wondering where you find that information? Accurate global sales / marketshare numbers seem to be very difficult to dig up.
Mostly from posts by Thom Hogan who has access to some marketshare numbers that are not publicly available (but does some extrapolation and guesswork as the data are not always complete). But some of my statements are estimations and extrapolations as well (eg, Leica being very small, Pentax Q being very small outside of Japan and maybe a few other East Asian countries). The data from Japan are a good base to start from (showing trends for example that very likely exist outside of Japan as well).
Mirrorless and small cameras are more popular in Japan (and East Asia) than they are globally, in particular North America but to lesser degree also Europe. But relative shares of, eg, Fuji vs Sony or m43 in Japan are very likely also indicative for global shares. Then add things like Canon not always offering all its mirrorless models in the U.S..
But since this is partly based on estimations and guesswork, I was using words like ‘likely’ or ‘very likely’ or ‘might’.
“I’ll be happy when Panasonic Releases a FF GX7 styled camera.”
I can’t tell you how happy that makes me. The thought that you will be forever a miserable … gladdens my heart.
HAW. If only that were true. My Fuji keeps me quite happy, as well as my G6 for video. My money is on Canon taking Mirrorless serious.
And when that day comes, you might want to invest in Tissue. That will be the coming of the Ice Age for M43… Dress warm.
Nothing could be more obvious than that your Fuji doesn’t keep you happy. You clearly have serious M4/3 envy that is quite obvious to everyone except yourself.
“SIGH”
Keep trying… Matter of fact, I have to upload some more XE2 pics to my Flickr… Thanks for reminding me.
MRALLCAPS is just a attention seeking kid with a rather large inferriority complex.
If that’s the case, you’re sure feeding it…
Why is it that you consider every single product announcement on this site as if it exists in isolation? Nevermind that this is one of dozens of lenses for m43, or that its optical quality and stabilization and focus speed and accuracy might be beyond any comparably priced 600mm equivalent lens… the sum total of your thought process is “it’s too big by my arbitrary standards, therefore a failure”?
It’s tiresome, narrow-minded, and totally unhelpful. Stop wasting your time.
Wake me when this lens is a hot seller. Heck, I’ll take lukewarm.
Keep thinking this is a good thing for MICRO four thirds. I see it as inventory and a big mistake.
For instance, I see Olympus wanting to do some pro primes is a great idea if the price is right, However, what if they can’t do what they wanted to do, because this lens Flops sales wise?
I simply stated, if you’re going to go this large, then you’re better off going with a larger sensor camera. Don’t get upset because it’s true.
You’re essentially saying that Oly shouldn’t have made this lens because the size advantage of m43 is reduced when using lenses of this length. Which makes no sense at all. Literally–it’s nonsense.
It’s never going to be a big seller. Just the same way that any lens longer than 300mm for any other system has never been a big seller.
What else is new?
What? Buy a 7D & 600mm lens & a heavy tripod to support it? Get real! Thankfully the world isn’t full of nay sayers like you & there will be those that will totally appreciate it.
Sorry, no buy! My 45/1.8 is more than 4× brighter. 😀
That is a completely “unsmart” (call it dumb) comment to make.
Unless that was meant to be totally “tongue in cheek”.
Still not worse than all other ‘No …, no buy’ comments.
I think my excuse is better! 😉 I don’t think I’ll be able to buy it because I might find myself single afterwards if I do & I can’t afford to be single. :
Would like to see some sample pics to be wowed. Even better, comparison against Nikon 600mm F4. Any new FW update on EM1, to improve AFC+tracking so the new lens can do BIF easily instead of shooting static objects?
Oh …you can bet there will be PLENTY of comparisons coming down the pike!
won’t count on it. Both Oly, Pany are really bad about showing samples at the release time of new products.
Oh…I don’t mean now….I mean after the lens is available….There will be some photos around the web….sooner than that …but they are usually poorly taken with a guy who has the lens but knows nothing about photography….The usual.!!! LOL!
I just find it obnoxious that manufacturers ask for pre-orders w/o showing good sample results. And this is a common practice for Oly, Pany (maybe others too, I just don’t track as closely). They typically release more info on the japanese websites, and don’t even bother to translate all the materials for the US sites
If you base your pre-orders on manufacturer-supplied samples, I’d like to tell you about the awesome bridge I just manufactured.
If you prefer pre-order on zero-info, i’d like you pre-order a bridge that’s in someone else’s head
Have any of the PRO lenses failed to deliver?
There is no single standard re. “deliver”. IMO the 40-150pro’s bokeh can be ugly. And I saw a quite a few complaints recently re. 7-14mm on dpr
Yep, bokeh can be harsh. That is the inevitable downside of having the lens rendering so sharp. Blame it on the internet, which reduces lens quality to resolution…
Something is wrong. 2,600 euros is 2,800 dollars, 370,000 yen is 3,100 dollars. Either way this is too much.
It will be $2600 or less.
Brains of Olympus managers are wrong. They think their cameras compete with full frame.
Your brain is wrong: They do. They even compete with smart phones. It’s all a matter of the overall package.
150mm f4 macro next please…
Not that’s exactly what I want too…the lineup really needs a longer macro than the current 60mm (the other macros are all shorter).
And most probably someone will make a 90mm and that will just not be big enough difference.
150mm vs 60 is a working distance difference that is needed in the field.
One with OIS to work with IBIS like the new 300mm will have. 6 stop able.
Mount a macro adapter on the $99 40-150/4-5.6. $59 MCON-P01 is specially made for it, but there are others with better magnification.
150/4 macro is not needed as DoF is going to be too short at 150mm anyway.
It is ~0.5x in 4/3 (~1:1 in FF terms), not bad.
Opteka OPT5810X would probably do better (4 elements vs 1 in the Oly).
Yes there are a lot of workaround solutions. Played around with many of them with various results. Nikon diopters have shown to be excellent, Minolta ones not so much as I recall.
None will deliver versatility and performance of a modern dedicated macro and semi fast prime.
The thing is I think the 1:1 150mm lens would be a nice addition even at f5.6 because of the size and optical quality that could be achieved. But anything slower than f4 would hinder it in the eyes of most.
At f/5.6, DoF is like 0.6mm already.
BTW, little known fact among those not dabbling in it, but most dedicated macro lenses, including Oly 60mm/2.8, are actually f/5.6 or so at 1:1. And most people step down them further anyway.
What Nikon diopter would you recommend for 40-150 (58mm filter thread)?
I can send you my excel file where I have put down working distances and magnifications of 40-150mm and Sigma 150mm f5.6 macro using a few diopters.
Can you suggest an email where I could send you the info?
If not I can tell you that on 40-150mm Nikon 4T performed best giving 1:2 magnification at a working distance of 21cm
Working distance was 21-34cm magnification in that range was 1:2 and 1:2.38
Beyond 34cm it wont focus.
On Sigma 150mm f5.6 APO macro WD was 18-34cm, magnification 1:0,9 and 1:2 for Nikon 4T
Minolta was a bit fuzzy in IQ, 3T was not enough magnification, Rynox 250 was to much
Thanks!
Just grab yourself an OM Zuiko 135mm f4.5 macro.
1:2 reproduction ratio for close ups: probably best lens in the world for shooting at butterflies from safe distance
With 1.4m MFD @ 300mm, it’s only 0.25x magnification, so that’s 1:4.
Obviously pixel density comes into play when you’re talking crop factor and macro, but magnification is magnification.
Nope, that’s the magnification w/o the 1.4x converter. With it’s 0,34, which sounds good to me…
official max magnification is 1:0,48 ..so i was right and you wrong.
Sorry, you’ll note that their “official magnification” is a 35mm equivalent value. Which isn’t a real thing. Magnification is magnification, it simply measures how large the image is reproduced on the film / sensor plane.
Is that a hugely expensive telephoto lens or are you just glad to see me?
It will never happen but Olympus should include the 1.4X with this lens. Crazy I know as they’ve just finally started to include hoods for some lenses but one can still dream.
I was dreaming the same thing over the weekend as I expect Canadian pricing to be over $3k with the current exchange rate.
In Japan Oly mostly will. I remember the bundled 40-150Pro was less than the lens alone in US at the release time.
stolzer Preis,,,
Quite a pricy tube for a m4/3! I undertand the 600mm equivalent, but… OLY must have really a walthy customers base… It gives me a bit the feeling of the old 35-100 f2… more an excercise in technology rather than wise marketing or professional choice. Wish I could only think about it.
I am not actually going to worry about the price until it actually if for sale in USA….and see what it is offered at. I will most likely wait a year and buy from Tokyo, S.Korea or Hong Kong….
..but it is too soon to know.
I would like to see to competent images from the lens….on a NEW MFT sensor! LOL!
The biggest and heaviest 300/4 on the market, despite 1/4th of the coverage of the rest of them. I would be OK with the lack of new tech and apparently expensive glass producing this size and weight, but it should at least cost accordingly. As it is, Nikon D7200 with Nikon 300/4 PF weights less than E-M1 with this lens, and is much more useful (if you need m43 crop – crop and you will have the same thing, but if you don’t, you have 450mm EFL with better quality and 24mpix).
WTF Olympus, you will die if you “compete” like this. Learn from your products which sell well, look at E-PL6…
They won’t. They want to return to Four Thirds… Look how that turned out.
And watch when the latest PEN comes out and fails, -Because the OMD is what mostly everyone wants… Not to mention the Price of this lens… Ouch!
Just means cheap PEN cameras for me!!
It is not bad to have an ultimate prime tele lens. It is much smaller and lighter than 4/3 version. The best thing is that m4/3 universe offers lenses from 2 vendors. So you can pick which one you fit more. And the upcoming HG F1.2 primes will be ~400 grams. I am not afraid about future of m4/3. This system is more balanced than wannabe (F)E mount – tiny bodies and huge lenses. But this is only my point of view.
Everyone buys a6000. Look at the amazon ratings. a6000 probably sells more than all other mirrorless cameras COMBINED, for 2 years in a row. Because it is specced right (OSPDAF and 11fps and EVF and 24mpix, no Olympus stupidity of having OSPDAF tech and using it in just 1 camera and sticking to 16 mpix for 4 years) and priced right ($398 for body, $448 for the compact powerzoom kit). No magic here, just spec it right and price it right and people will buy. a6000 even outsells some Rebels now, which is insane given that Rebels is almost everything Canon sells in ILCs and nobody sells anything close to it except Nikon D3xxx.
It is not form factor, it is value. Too few people are so stupid to buy an underperforming camera for $1100 when better performing one costs $400.
“No magic here, just spec it right and price it right and people will buy.”
You’re 100 percent correct. I see more a6000’s on the streets than Panasonic and Olympus Combined. Then again, DSLR rule the streets of NYC, not counting smartphones, of course.
Some brainless dumbfuck in Olympus management decided to withhold OSPDAF from all cameras after E-M1. They have released E-M10, E-PL7, E-M5II (for the fucking $1100!!!), E-M10II since then, and none can to AF-C right, even to a degree of a cheapest Rebel, let alone 11fps with AF-C of the cheap a6000 and cheaper a5100. WTF??!?! I am really pissed off at their stupidity, having developed the technology, investing in its improvements in E-M1 for a number of iterations, and simply not using it, losing all the market to the Johnny-come-lately Sony!
Panasonic who is the only manufacturer now without OSPDAF is even worse with their useless system-breaking DFD.
MORONS! If people shoot static subjects, their 20mpix smartphones are good enough! And much easier to use! People buy large sensors where their subjects move in not so good light and fast AF and shutter speed and good quality at high ISO is required. The rest is just marginal buys from enthusiasts and brand loyalists, not a mass market.
While I agree, I find the A6000 to be chinsy, and I’m not a fan of the ergonomics at all. That said, on paper, its amazing for the money.
Ergo is bad, but OK for auto or semiauto modes.
The A6000 is a nice camera, but the lack of a touchscreen is really disappointing.
I almost never use touchscreen on my OM-D anymore.
Stupid control scheme of a6000, with inconvenient and practically useless rear dial is much more disappointing in my eyes. But that is a feature which would cost nothing to do right.
No exposure compensation in M mode on my OM-D is similarly disappointing. Just stupid interface decisions.
Which OM-D do you have? Because unless it’s an E-M10 II, I am not surprised. The best touchscreen innovation is from Panasonic, who allow you to use it as a touchpad with your eye to the EVF. It’s the fastest direct AF point selection on the market.
Also extremely useful for selecting focus when using the articulating screens, since you cannot easily focus and recompose in those circumstances. Or for instantly moving the location of the magnified area when doing critical focus work with manual focus. Really, I don’t want to own another camera that doesn’t have a touchscreen, everything else feels so clunky by comparison.
With my eye to viewfinder, my cheek touches the screen. I cannot choose AF point with my cheek.
I guess that’s just another reason to prefer the side-mounted EVF. Never an issue with my GX7.
No exposure compensation in M mode: you want to be able to step on the gas and hit the brakes at the same time?
left foot braking is a well known cornering technique in motorsport and the throttle is applied at the same time during the process 🙂 More seriously, Exp Comp in M mode (with Auto ISO, which I assume PeeVee meant) is really useful as you can fix your aperture and shutter but also correct the camera’s Auto ISO choice, as the metering is still fooled by bright and dark areas. It still beggars belief that m4/3 isn’t embracing it as others have (my DSLR has it, it works great and I wish my m4/3 cams had it)
I see!
No, I want auto metering and auto ISO, but help to correct the brightness by adjusting the ISO through EC, not by setting ISO manually (so if I point my lens onto another point in the scene with different light, the ISO would be adjusted automatically, but the brightness I set would keep). Not everybody shoots static subjects and has time to carefully set all 3 parameters for each shot. Not to mention that my OM-D has only 2 dials and setting ISO in M is not so convenient either.
I see! (2)
(Discus didn’t allow me to make the same comment twice)
“The biggest and heaviest 300/4 on the market, despite 1/4th of the coverage of the rest of them.”
Equivalence is strong with this one.
There is no equivalence even needed, 300/4 is 300/4 optically, this one just covers 1/4 of the area.
What are you smoking? Take me to your dealer.
He’s not actually wrong here. The Oly is meant to cover a sensor with an area size 1/4th the area of a full frame sensor, which the Nikon is designed to cover.
However, with supertelephotos the size of the image circle is almost never the limit in terms of the lens design, it is almost always the size of the objective lens needed to achieve the f-number.
Here’s a 300mm f3.3 designed to cover 16mm film.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_QomDizboK-A/TDDRvTEs4HI/AAAAAAAAEDs/jjaqD0WzVQY/s1600/119+TELE+ATHENAR+300+MM.jpg
Looks just tiny, doesn’t it?
However, with supertelephotos the size of the image circle is almost never the limit in terms of the lens design, it is almost always the size of the objective lens needed to achieve the f-number.
Look up the 300mm Tele Athenar, designed to cover 16mm film. It’s still absolutely enormous.
What is your problem? m43 image circle diameter is about 22mm, all the other 300/4 lenses cover image circle of at least 44mm diameter, meaning its area is 4 times bigger. It is called math, maybe you have heard about it, dummy?
Now use that non-weather sealed Nikon lens in the rain.
A rain sleeve ($28 on Amazon) and a hood (included).
I would never consider the Nikon 300mm f4 PF as VR is inoperable between 1/60 and 1/200s. I was seriously considering it last year but once there was confirmation that the firmware update did not fix the issue then it was time for me to move on.
For any moving target you would shoot faster than that anyway. Are you using 300mm for landscapes?
Most of my perched bird photos are shot at 1/200s. Surprisingly most birders don’t do BIF.
It’s because BIF is strictly for masochists. 🙂
Of course it is easy.
But slrgear’s test shows very fine VR. Maybe yours was broken.
Myself and others can confirm, that depending on the camera body, the issue remains. Apparently it doesn’t appear as an issue on the D810. But on the D750, the issue persists between 1/60 and 1/200, approximately. My images at 1/15, and 1/250, are both much sharper than the images between 1/60 and 1/200, where you get a slight double image.
Surprisingly, one thing that reduces this issue, is to keep the lens hood reversed.
And slrgear IS test shows VR very much operational between 1/60 and 1/200, and it works:
“For the 300mm f/4 PF, we see, frankly, amazing performance. With VR
deactivated, we see Rob is able to get 100% sharp shots at 1/250s
shutter speed, which holds true to the “one over shutter speed” rule of
thumb. With VR activated, he’s able to get 100% sharp shots as slow as
1/15s, and even 80% sharp at 1/8s. To get to the 1/15s level is four
stops of hand-holding improvement.”
http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/nikon300f4e/IStest/nikon_300mm_f4e_IStest_on.gif
deleted
But it has higher resolution than any other 300mm ever made, so what do you expect?
It does not, not on 16mpix sensors.
Does too.
Mature.
It could still have higher resolution in its image circle…but I am doubting that it is out-resolving the 300mm f/2.8L IS at like $6000…but I have nothing to back that up.
It surely does not outresolve bigger higher-res sensors. m43 should be 40mpix (double RX100) a year ago to compete.
A lens does not have a sensor. A camera does. I am not going to get into the whole comparison thing about MFT to other formats. Although our sensors currently may hold this lens back…but it will only get better. I am really and excited about seeing what this lens has to offer. I look forward to have Roger at Lens Rentals test this lens. I do know that there is no MFT lens currently available for our cameras that will give us this level of contrast and resolution on our sensors. Is it overkill? Perhaps.
But every lens has a coverage. Some lenses don’t even cover a circle, but just a rectangle of the sensor.
Better quality? How do you know? Unless you’re going purely on sensor quality… which is under a stop’s worth between m43 and APSC.
For all you know, the optical quality of this lens might be in a different league than anything comparably priced by Nikon… nevermind the potential advancements in stabilization and focus speed.
Why bother making such sweeping statements when you have only a tiny piece of the picture?
New 300mm (and other tele) lenses are pretty much perfect, Oly cannot be appreciably better, especially given smaller and lower-res sensors.
“perfect”. lol
http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/nikon300f4e/1blur-t.gif
http://slrgear.com/reviews/zproducts/canon400f4is2/1blur-t.gif
etc.
Seem perfect to me.
The keyword is new.
I guess that makes the only other PRO telephoto we have to compare with, the 40-150/2.8 wide open @ 150mm even perfecter?
http://i.imgur.com/Suzaysa.png
And that’s comparing a 4x tele zoom to a prime…
Yes, it is pretty perfect too.
Sure, you can put it on a 35mm camera and then crop to get the same FOV. You will even get the same quality if you have a 64MP chip. Sounds really low weight and lowcost.
How about 24mpix APS-C, lower weight and lower cost? Sheesh, $300 D3200 can do it.
I bet there are tons of people putting $1500 lenses on their $300 D3200s and fiddling around with the single control dial and peering through its tiny porthole viewfinder. Sounds like a wonderful experience.
If you think the Nikon lens will be in the same class as this Oly lens — based on my experience with Canon lenses of this type I don’t but at this point very few people have any idea — just buy the Nikon and an adapter.
You’d have to be HARD CORE to buy this lens. There are so many good performing telephoto lenses on the market for DSLR’s. At this size, what advantage do you suppose you’ll be given?
Continuing on 2016 will be a steady roll out of full frames which FINALLY have the pixel density of APSC cameras. Point being, you can buy a FF lens which will allow you to move up as those cameras gradually fall in price. Let’s not mention the rather decent selection of telephoto lenses already in existence and on the market for rather affordable prices.
This lens is for those who are ALL IN with M43 and nothing else. It’s a trophy piece for collectors or for those that gotta complete the line-up.
But if you’re moving up to high-pixel FF, you’re still going to need a much longer lens than this one to get the same pixels per bird. Not to mention far lower burst rates than a high-end M4/3 camera, and a much larger, heavier set of gear.
This is definitely one for the specialists, but many wildlife and bird photographers prefer to stick to crop sensors (7D or D300s) because the crop factor is an advantage.
It has its place in the market.
“This is definitely one for the specialists”
-Yes it is. And how many use M43? -Not enough to support this lens, I’m sure.
“but many wildlife and bird photographers prefer to stick to crop sensors (7D or D300s) because the crop factor is an advantage.”
-Which is why Thinkinginpictures made such a comment. This is a Inventory lens. You’re better off with a FF lens and a adapter.
Assuming this lens is of the same quality as Oly’s other Pro lenses, this would be a definite “No”. I can tell you that from experience.
“Not enough to support this lens, I’m sure.”
Which is why it’s price is as high as it is. If they had the assured market size of CaNikon it would be at least 30% less.
“You’re better off with a FF lens and a adapter”
…and no AF.
I see it’s a new year and the same characters are at it bashing a technology company for daring to make a product they don’t want buy personally.
Some people seriously need to evaluate why their emotions get so inflamed at a blog post about a lens.
I don’t want to buy it personally, you’re right. But if you think this is a good move for Olympus, then Buy it. I see it joining the $7000 300mm four thirds lens in inventory.
It’s an overly expensive lens for what it is and used for.
“It’s an overly expensive lens for what it is and used for.”
…what you’d use it for. You simply don’t have the need for this reach, and likely lack the artistic investment in photography to need this lens. I share that situation.
But one can think it’s a good move and not buy it. That’s where all these “ITS NOT PERRRRFECT FOR MEEEEE” pudds can’t think past.
For the photographer who packs a bag with one MFT body and any lot of lenses, be it a few primes and/or a standard zoom, buying this lens is cheaper and more compact than buying and lugging around a Nikon APS/300mm combo.
If it’s a high performer that’s a massive benefit. One that doesn’t apply to you, therefore rendering your (and Peevee’s) opinion useless as usual.
The ZD 300mm f/2.8 is built to order, just like the 90-250mm f/2.8
+1000. In the end the availability of this lens will be a good thing for the system regardless of how many casual users find it too expensive. Long, inexpensive zoom options have been available for m4/3 for years so I don’t understand all the complaining over a serious lens (or 2 if you count the PL zoom which also has more or less the same people in an uproar).
This Olympus lens is the largest, heaviest, and most expensive 300/4 lens ever
made. Check the 2 Nikons, Canon and Pentax. Even though it only covers a m4/3 sensor instead of “full
frame”. It really has to be totally exceptional to justify that, or it will end in desaster for Olympus. On the other hand: it probably will be totally exceptional: Check the number of elements and special glass. These are the benchmarks: It has got to be noticeably better with the 1,4 converter wide open (420/5,6) than the Panasonic Zoom. And it has got to be better than the Nikon 300/4 PF on the 24MP Nikon7200 by a good margin. If not, this lens makes no sense.
You could say the same thing about the Canon 100-400mm ii as it was the largest and heaviest 400mm f5.6 zoom ever made. The reality is that faster focusing and better lens stabilization adds weight. I am glad that Olympus didn’t cheap out in these areas.
The Nikon 300mm F4 PF has serious VR issues even after the firmware update. I hope the Olympus bar will be set much higher than that.
It might also make sense for m43 users that don’t want to get an extra body (as in APS-C body) to get ~600 mm FF equivalent.
“It really has to be totally exceptional to justify that, or it will end in disaster for Olympus.”
Rrrrright. Because Olympus has such long history of producing high-end lenses with bad IQ.
Why people even keep repeating that?
If anything, people should be asking, begging Olympus to produce more mediocre lenses, so that we can justly complain about them being overpriced.
But hedging on bad IQ out of a premium Olympus lens?…
It really doesn’t matter since they’re not really in the market for the lens anyway.
“This Olympus lens is the largest, heaviest, and most expensive 300/4 lens ever
made”.
Yeah…I just check spec on the Nikon very new 300mm f/4 PF VR and it has similar spec. even 4-stop IS …and 16 elements (17 for the Oly)…yet it weighs less than 2.3 the weight of the Oly. The Nikon has 2 “special” glass elements. …but it is for a FF camera …so you think it would be bigger and heavier. So we expect the IS to be better on this Oly lens….but why is it larger and heavier than a top-notch FF lens. ..and why does it cost so much more. $2000 for the Nikon.
I think we need a lens engineer to splain to us why these specs are so over the top.
The Nikon is a Fresnel design which has some negative optical consequences but can be made smaller and lighter. Many Nikon owners have also been reporting VR issues with this lens in the 1/60s – 1/200s. Nikon did issue a firmware fix but results have been mixed with many still reporting issues on fixed lenses as well as new lenses (recent serial numbers) that should not have the issue.
The Canon Lens (only $1400) is REALLY dated…has lackluster IS…no special glass elements and is most likely not of the quality of the Olympus lens. (I think this lens has not been updated in a long time because of people prefering zoom lenses…then you go up to the 300mm f/2.8L IS and the cost is like $6000!!! LOL!….so…I do not know what to think.
I had two of the Canon versions of this type of lens (called “DO”) and was always a bit disappointed in the results. Ultimately I dumped both. Unless Nikon’s effort is more fruitful, my guess is that you could get the same optical quality and similar AF from the standard NIkon consumer lens which a slightly larger maximum aperture. As a practical matter we know that there are issues: otherwise manufacturers would only be developing lenses with this type of technology, which has been around for quite some time.
For a standard lens the specs on this 300mm f/4 are pretty much spot on to what you’d expect. The length is set by the path, the front end by the maximum aperture, and the mass is set by the length, diameter, and quality of the materials.
Just too damn expensive 🙁
(I don’t care about the size or weight)
Let’s hope the Panasonic is better value
7-14 is already selling at 21% discount at Amazon Italy – so give this 3/4 months
I always thought that the E-1 looked small with the ZD 300mm f/2.8 but this seems more unbalanced.
I think it mostly looks odd because the hood is about the same diameter as the lens, making the whole thing look like a bit of a baguette. Also, I don’t think many people will use this thing without a battery grip.
The lens hood of the ZD 300mm would likely hide the biggest dSLR available, maybe even a medium format body. My ZD 35-100mm f/2.0 lens hood is huge too.
130 comments for a post that tells us basically nothing new. Official announcement post will probably hit 1000 comments then.
Yet still there are people who claim there’s no interest for this lens.
If only Panasonic 100-400mm can attract so much attention. But the last Pana 100-400 post only got pathetic 53 replies.
Because all it doing was reporting good news (that it weighs under 1000g). Controversy (pricing, size and weight, in this case) breeds commentary.
People still talking about this? Incredible.
The specs seen to suggest this is a monster lens and the size is right in line with other 300mm f4 lenses and the price only slightly higher than the new Nikon 300mm f4.
So far we have some pretty bold claims rumored which adds up to one serious piece of glass. Or isn’t cheap but them neither is the 35mm f1.4 Mark 2 from canon. Quality costs money.
I am fully committed to m43rds after owning Nikon apsc and Sony ff dslrs I won’t be buy ing lenses for ant other system and so I am glad to see Panasonic and Olympus cover important focal lengths for photographers. It shows continued investment and belief in the future of the mount unlike the lack of development of apsc lenses and reliance on ff options to complete other systems.
You are still talking about it, too. 🙂
Yup. But I am in the system with two feet 🙂
A leak of a weatherproof lens.
Just for fun I might borrow this and pair it up with my super tiny Panasonic GM1, LOL. “Would you like some camera with that lens?”
Done that with the GM1 on the massive 4/3 Bigma 😉
It’s always funny with the good ol’ GM1 isn’t it? Almost any lens looks big on it, but I love the small size of it 🙂 that said, I think I might need to upgrade to an Oly EM5 M2 sometime, that 5 axis IBIS is too good…!
Price is double Canon’s. Ouch.
Are you sure? 600mm f4 L lens costs around 8000 GBP and 300mm (which becomes 600mm) costs 2000 GBP… price is double Canon’s …. You sure?
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/129188-USA/Canon_2530A004_Telephoto_EF_300mm_f_4_0L.html
Canon 300mm F4 is not the same as Oly 300mm f4 even if you use Canon’s 300mm on Canon’s APS-C it’s only 480mm…. On Oly it becomes 600mm because M43 crop is x2 so 300mm becomes 600mm and there is the fundamental difference so if you want to compare compare focal lenghts after applying multiplication factor… or in another words find me a lens which effectively is 600mm or near that with f4 and cheaper than that
Olympus going in the wrong way…. [size]
Well, 300/4 = 75mm. That’s the minimal front lens diameter for this lens. The only way to get that significantly smaller is the use of fresnel lenses or mirrors, which have their own share of issues. Olympus has a lot of knowledge with fresnel lenses in microscopy, so I would assume that not going this route was a deliberate choice.
Yep, looks about the right size to me. It should hand hold rather nicely actually. I’ve shot a Tokina 300 2.8 (2.8kg, MF) on an E-PL7 with VF-4 and didn’t have too many issues – apart from focusing is tricky of course – so I can’t see how this lens would be a problem at all, especially on something like an E-M1. I don’t want DO or Fresnel optics as they have too many issues, especially shooting into the light and its impact on contrast. This lens looks very good indeed (on paper), though it needs to have good AF with the 1.4x fitted and minimal IQ impact from it to be really successful. They’ve just missed the boat somewhat now, with the Nikon 200-500 and the Sigma and Tamron 150-600s giving DSLR users performance levels they’re happy with for quite a lot less outlay than this will be (I have the 150-600 Sport on a D7200 for wildlife now and I’m VERY pleased with it). That was quite a market to tap into, had Oly and Panny been two years or so earlier. I gave up waiting for this and, seeing the price, I have no regrets. I still hope it’s successful for the people waiting for it, though!
I use the 4/3 Sigma 50-500 on the E-M5ii, E-PL7 and GH4. The Bigma weighs about 2kg. Size really is an issue no matter how good the lens is.
The problem with the Olympus 300 will be that no matter how good the glass and stabilisation, there will be handling problems and difficult to aim (Olympus red-dot sight?), it is too heavy and too long and in truth too late; the Leica 100-400 has beaten them to the punch by being smaller and lighter and shorter, with longer FL.
There will be no handling problems with the 300 f/4, for its intended users anyway. My current “rig” is 4.5kg and is proving no particular problem to hand hold, even out on rough terrain. In fact I started out with it on a monopod but have abandoned it now as I just don’t need it. You’d not hold it to your face all day but in such a situation you’d use a tripod anyway. I’m at 900mm equivalent framing with the Sigma Sport and aiming is all about getting used to your kit. The more you use it the easier it gets. Btw there’s no “beating” of anyone with either of the new lenses. Just like with any other system there is now a choice of the Prime route or the Zoom. As both should work very well it can come down to the individual’s preference. In fact looking at the latest update on the Oly it’s looking very good indeed, and not particularly large either. Make your choice folks, you’re not likely to be disappointed either way!
can’t edit so a couple more points to add: 1.27kg vs 1kg is not much diff at all (you really wouldn’t notice it and overall balance is far more important), plus you’re at f/4 rather than (probably) f/5.4 ish at 300mm. Add the converter and the prime is probably now around 1.45kg and f/5.6. That really isn’t very heavy at all. Add the camera and it’s maybe a bit over 2kg? You either want a decent tele lens – which means some weight – or you don’t…..
Again, make your choice of prime or zoom. I’ve shot both many times and ultimately a zoom was practical for me as I’ve become better at getting close to subjects, but many people prefer primes, just like at the shorter end of things.Panny are doing far better than Oly on pricing, it appears, and I think the Oly will need to drop pretty sharpish ($2k would be more sensible). But what happened with the hood on the 100-400? It’s WAY too short, unless there’s something they’ve not shown yet…..
When you look at the 100-300mm I think is a better choice……………..
If this were the only lens they make, but it’s not. They are building a ‘system’ with options for different levels of user.
When you look at the 100-300mm I think is a better choice
Then that is the lens for you. There would be people who would prefer the 6 stops of IS and higher image quality and who wouldn’t mind the necessary size, weight and cost trade-off. For those people the Zuiko will be a better option. From a system viewpoint, the capabilities the Zuiko will bring are a positive so it’s actually a move in the right direction.