1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

2 New Olympus lenses, 40-150 & 75-300

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by JoepLX3, Aug 31, 2010.

  1. bilzmale

    bilzmale Mu-43 All-Pro

    I'd really like the 70-300 but it is nearly 3 times the street price of the 4/3 version. It seems to have a complex design (18 elements) and quality (ED/HR) components so hopefully the IQ will match the price.

    Will wait on the Pana 100-300 before deciding but the 4/3 lens with my adapter is looking good value.
     
  2. pdh

    pdh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    598
    May 6, 2010
    I see that 75-300mm is f/4.8-6.7.

    The 4/3 version (I have it) is f/4-5.6, and for the purposes I use it for (birding) I need all the aperture I can get ... on the other hand the 4/3 lens is agonizingly slow to AF, especially at the long end, which is also a problem!

    If the new lens has got much better AF I might be willing to trade a bit of aperture ... but I'll be wating to see the Panasonic 100-300mm too (I think it's also f/4-5.6 ?)

    The 4/3 lens is very good value, but after using for a few months I have become a bit disappointed in how it performs, and so long as IQ doesn't suffer and AF speed is better, I'm very strongly inclined to move to a native lens, even if at a price.
     
  3. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Super Moderator

    Apr 17, 2010
    Near Philadephila
    I tend to like the smaller Oly lenses (other than the Pany 20, of course) for most day to day shooting, but this longer tele, if I even decide I want one, is one I'm going to have to see the Panasonic version also and really compare them. This seems like one lens where having OIS might be a benefit over IBIS and where size and weight wouldn't be a primary concern. For a walk around lens, smaller and lighter matter to me, which is part of what makes the 14-150 and 9-18 such great lenses. But this would be a real specialty lens, only coming out of the bag (hell, out of the HOUSE) for fairly specific events and might even justify a tripod, so a little more size and weight won't bother me much for this lens. And if the Pany looks like a better lens or if the testing shows the OIS better than the IBIS for handheld shots, this might be one place I'd spend the extra, deal with the size and weight, etc. Then again, I have the 45-200, which gives me a good video lens (definitely like OIS for video), has an awful lot of overlap with the 14-150 for most shooting, but does have a longer reach for some events. I'm not at all sure I'll even be in the market for one of these 300mm tele-zooms. Just have to wait and see. Maybe just wait for that wide angle prime before parting with more dollars. Or another generation or two of Oly bodies - when they come out with an articulated LCD in a Pen form, I'm all over it - and continued sensor advances would be a nice bonus but not strictly necessary.

    -Ray
     
  4. addieleman

    addieleman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 5, 2010
    The Netherlands
    Ad
    Judging from the pictures at dpreview the 40-150mm seems to have a plastic bayonet mount. For me that's a dealbreaker unless the IQ is really excellent, I'm looking out for a replacement of the not-so-good Panasonic 45-200mm.
     
  5. everythingsablur

    everythingsablur Mu-43 Veteran

    412
    Aug 4, 2010
    Toronto, ON
    Unless the final design and production build has changed from the prototypes they've been showing, it should be f/4-5.6.
    43 Rumors | Home
     
  6. feppe

    feppe Mu-43 Regular

    I'm new here, long-time lurker.

    I'm going to Central America in mid-November, and the 75-300 would be perfect for that trip for my E-PL1 - I don't feel like lugging my DSLR gear for three weeks across thousand or so kilometers while backpacking :eek: I don't use long lenses but am considering going on a workshop which has ample opportunity for birding and wildlife photography. I could buy it for the trip and sell it afterwards if it's not to my liking.

    What's the track record of Olympus release dates - is there any hope I could get my hands on it in Europe before leaving? Or should I just keep my fingers crossed that the Panasonic 100-300 is released earlier?
     
  7. igi

    igi Mu-43 Regular

    111
    Feb 24, 2010
    yawn... (goes to sleep)
     
  8. schmadde

    schmadde New to Mu-43

    6
    Mar 4, 2010
    So you are using 300mm f/5.6 on a 4/3s Body with In-body IS? How is it doing? I honestly can't believe a lens that slow (or even slower at f/6.7) is good for anything except neat motionless subjects at the brightest conditions. What shutter speed can you do without tripod and what ISO do you need usually? My experience has been that the E-P1s IS is good for 1/100s at 135mm focal length, so I wouldn't expect a lens without OIS to do any better than 1/300s at 300mm. You would be at ISO 1000 pretty often I reckon.
     
  9. pdh

    pdh Mu-43 Top Veteran

    598
    May 6, 2010
    hmm ... well, there's slow and slow isn't there ... still, you seem to have strong opinions and I must respect them, especially if they are based on personal experience of using such a setup ... as for me, I take each shot on it's merits, and I decided on this combination because it gave me longish reach in a small package ... I don't find myself shooting at 1000 ASA and I generally don't use shutter speeds less than 1/800s ... but then I don't expect to be able to shoot at dusk either ... I also don't expect perfect crisp frame-fillers as I might get from a 1DIII and £6500-worth of 400mm f/2.8 lens ... but I do take some satisfying photographs ...
     
  10. schmadde

    schmadde New to Mu-43

    6
    Mar 4, 2010
    No, really I'm interested (especially what shutter speeds can be handheld at 300mm). My experience with a (borrowed) 420mm f/5.6 Lens on a FF DSLR is, that I with a very old impelementation of Canon Optical IS I can handhold shutter speeds of 1/160 and if I am prepared for at least some blurred shots maybe 1/125. This translates to around ISO 500 on a sunny day (with the subject sitting in a tree) or up to ISO 3200 on an overcast day.

    I do not have many years experience shooting with lenses that long so maybe I am off here. But based on that little experience I have, I think I would not have had one good shot so far with this new lens. Its a pity because I am currently shopping for a lens in that range. The m.Zuiko 75-300 has not convinced me, so far.