The huge 300mm PRO lens box image by PenAndTell.
The German blog Pen And Tell posted the first unboxing pictures. He also shared his first impressions on that post (google translation here). He compared the new lens with the [shoplink 22405 ebay]”older” 300mm f/2.8 FT lens[/shoplink]:
The old Zwo-Eight’s is allowed to sit comfortable on his throne. The new f/4.0 lens is indeed superior on mobile shots, but when it comes to high-end and plastic reproduction, the f/2.8 FT can comfortably is still superior. Glass is simply irreplaceable.
The new f/4.0 MFT is a high-tech product that pushes the limits. The f/2.8 FT is a lens for the soul. And the biceps.
In summary: Reinhard thinks the new lens strong selling points are the quality of shot handheld. It’s a way more mobile lens than the FT version. But for ultimate quality and bokeh the FT lens is still slightly superior.
Preorder links to the two new MFT lenses:
Panasonic-Leica 100-400mm lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto and Panasonic. In EU at WexUK. ParkCameras.
Olympus 300mm f/4.0 PRO lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, GetOlympus. In EU at Amazon DE. WexUK. ParkCameras.
–
15 Responses
How does it even fit in that box??
you can fold it, one of the plusses of M43!
It’s all made smaller so you can carry it more easily
They made a fancy retractable lens hood – but can’t work out how to retract it so it was easier to make a bigger box.
The Pen and Tell blog seems to confirm the SLRGear test, and that is there is a serious shutter shock issue with the Olympus 300mm f4 PRO when it is mounted on a tripod and used with the E-M1. The SLRGear test, demonstrated that on a tripod, there was a serious shutter shock issue with the E-M1, even with the 0s anti-shock on, and it was only with the fully electronic shutter that it was sharp in the critical range of shutter speeds effected by shutter shock. Hopefully this problem will be addressed in the future as the Olympus 300mm f4 PRO seems to be a very fine lens. I think that m4/3 really needs a global shutter to address this problem, although as I point out below this may not be a problem with the E-M5 mkII.
It would be interesting to know how the 300mm f4 PRO performs on the E-M5 mkII on a tripod, as this supposedly has a proper native EFCS, whereas on the E-M1 I believe there is still some pre-cocking of the shutter before the exposure, and the E-M1 achieves anti-shock by creating a slight delay. Hopefully this will be something addressed on the E-M1 replacement. It is possible with EFCS for there to be no mechanical movement at all before the exposure.
I put global shutter up higher on the priority list than sensor technology. There is an ever so slight chance we will see it in the E-M1 II.
It only seems to be an issue when using the tripod. So it would seem that the IS is compensating correctly for the shock. Someone who can read German can confirm.
“It does not matter whether electronic shutter or mechanical shutter I’ve tried both versions, a difference I could not find.. The problem of uncertainty in mechanical shutter seems to occur only when you have a tripod, which provides a base such as concrete. Handheld, the lens everything”
> It only seems to be an issue when using the tripod.
Good sharpness achieved with either tripod + e-shutter or hand-held.
What his tests show is that mechanical shutter + tripod (regardless of the IS/anti-shock settings on the E-M1) produces worse results than handheld, which is counter-intuitive and unconventional.
I personally think that a firmware update is due – lens or camera or both: it is as if disabling the IS has no effect.
What Reinhard says is that there is an issue with shuttershock in the combination of the E-M1+300mm f4.0 and a solid tripod.
Handheld amazing no issues but on a tripod only the electronic shutter should be used.
Mind you while this is a production model, one should expect a firmware update once the 300mm f4.0 is on sale which should address this issue.
Shutter shock seems highly variable. I’ve tried reproducing SS results using the same camera, lens, and shutter speeds and have never been successful. Maybe it’s the tripod? Anyway my guess is that this is not generally reproducible. Might even get the opposite result from the two lenses.
FWIW Oly does say to use Anti-Shock or Silent Mode for highest resolution. So it may know of the problem. As for moving forward, isn’t the next E-M1 supposed to come with a global shutter?
To complete the translation of this part:
“Das Vier-Null ist zwar mobil überlegen, aber wenn’s um High End und
plastische Wiedergabe geht, kann sich das Zwo-Acht gemütlich
zurücklehnen und mit der Streulichtblende klappern.”
The new
f/4.0 lens is indeed superior on mobile shots, but when it comes to
high-end and plastic reproduction, the f/2.8 FT can comfortably lean back rattling with it’s lens hood.
Sorry …boxes don’t impress me. They are …boxes.
If you look at the Olympus MTF charts for both the f/4 and the f/2.8 300mm lenses, the f/4 is clearly superior. No doubt why Olympus says the f/4 is its highest resolution lens.
The bottom line on the MTF charts is related to contrast. This is where the biggest improvement is. This is likely due to better lens coatings today.
Not exactly what line you’re referring to, but I was thinking that MTF 80 versus MTF 70 at 60 lines/mm would suggest higher resolution. Both lenses are basically MTF 90 at 20 lines/mm.
Someone try plugging this 300mm baby onto the Panasonic GM1 / GM5, LOL 🙂