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

A $900 lens that is kinda 'meh'

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by OdzBodkinz, May 23, 2012.

  1. OdzBodkinz

    OdzBodkinz Mu-43 Regular

    153
    Sep 11, 2011
    Let's face it, you spend the bigger coin on lenses that you expect to 'Wow' you or at least give you some super neat ability (macro, fisheye, tilt shift), but I went ahead and blew some money on what is undoubtedly one of the more controversial m4/3 lenses around.

    I got the Olympus 75-300mm 4.5-6.7 today.

    I expect to use this lens for the zoo, airshows, and maybe the brighter parts at the renaissance festival. It does get you in rather close, so, at least, that's cool. I took it out in the backyard and made a few shots at 300mm. F/8 really seems to help this lens out, but overall, it;s not too bad. I think this lens ought to be about $750 maybe, but the build quality is nice enough. I have a few events for the weekend that I plan to use it at. Enjoy.

    300mm shots, followed by center crop. All shot on E-M5 with IBIS!

    f/8
    P5230060-2-X2.jpg

    P5230060-X2.jpg

    f/6.7
    P5230008-X2.jpg

    P5230008-2-X2.jpg

    f/8
    P5230032-X2.jpg

    P5230032-2-X2.jpg
     
    • Like Like x 7
  2. Uwharrie

    Uwharrie Mu-43 Veteran

    239
    May 10, 2012
    North Carolina
    Lynne Ezzell
    Odbodkinz I think you could take a piece of saran wrap over a plastic ring and make a good image from it :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. OdzBodkinz

    OdzBodkinz Mu-43 Regular

    153
    Sep 11, 2011
    Thank you, that is nice of you to say. I am looking forward to using it in real world circumstances....we shall see!
     
  4. RT_Panther

    RT_Panther Mu-43 Legend

    May 4, 2011
    Texas
    Some nice shots!
    If I didn't want fast primes, that would be on my list! :smile:
     
  5. OdzBodkinz

    OdzBodkinz Mu-43 Regular

    153
    Sep 11, 2011
    Fast primes are on my list too! 75mm 1.8 has some money earmarked for it....
     
  6. Uwharrie

    Uwharrie Mu-43 Veteran

    239
    May 10, 2012
    North Carolina
    Lynne Ezzell
    Time to schedule another junk yard shoot.

     
  7. Uwharrie

    Uwharrie Mu-43 Veteran

    239
    May 10, 2012
    North Carolina
    Lynne Ezzell
    So far this is the biggest downfall I see to the m43 systems. I will have a hard time giving up my fast glass I use with my canon DSLR!
     
  8. D@ne

    D@ne Mu-43 Top Veteran

    593
    Feb 23, 2012
    Toronto
    Well the pictures definitely aren't meh...but I agree that when dropping $900, I'd have high expectations. Hopefully in the future the super zoom m43 market will be better equipped.
     
  9. OdzBodkinz

    OdzBodkinz Mu-43 Regular

    153
    Sep 11, 2011
    I'm not really disappointed, per se, but you expect more for close to a grand. Anyway, it is utilitarian. 600mm equivalent is pretty nice, and my former 80-400 Nikon is so. much. heavier!
     
  10. nueces snapper

    nueces snapper Mu-43 All-Pro

     
  11. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    The Four-Thirds Zuiko 70-300mm f/4-5.6 was only $450 at its highest retail price, and most people were buying them from $300-$350. I bought mine at the high price, but was deeply satisfied with every penny spent on it! It was an amazing lens for the price, and doubled as a 1:2 tele-macro with over 3' working distance. That's something the new $900 m.Zuiko version doesn't even do.

    I think the m.Zuiko 75-300mm f/4-6.7 is a fine lens, but I also agree that it's overpriced.

    I've even seen the Zuiko 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5, non-SWD version, sell brand-new for $950. That is of course old stock long after it was replaced by the SWD version, but still... what a different class of lens for the almost the same price!

    I totally understand what you mean about the price affecting the "wow factor" of the lens. Although they're two totally different classes of lenses, both the Zuiko 70-300mm as well as the Zuiko 50-200mm had that "wow factor". The Zuiko 70-300mm I'm sure is no better (except for its macro capabilities) than the m.Zuiko 75-300mm, but when you pay $300-$400 for this lens and see what it's capable of, then you do actually get that "wow", even for such a cheap lens.

    But what's a few hundred dollars anyways in the big scheme of things? A couple few days of work? You got a fine lens, so just enjoy it! ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Pyro451

    Pyro451 Mu-43 Regular

    162
    Apr 18, 2012
    Massachusetts, USA
    Steve
    The big question for me is, do you find the reach (or the IQ) of the Oly 75-300 worth the $ premium over the Panny 45-175?
     
  13. Lawrence A.

    Lawrence A. Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 14, 2012
    New Mexico
    Larry
    I use the ZD 70-300 on the micro 4/3 bodies with the MMF freebie from Olympus, although I'm looking forward to getting the grip for the E-M5 to use it with. It works fine; the close focus (1 meter at 300mm gets awfully close) is wonderful for shooting insects without "bugging" them, and it's quite good optically. f8 is the sweet spot on it, but I've shot wide open with success.

    I thought long and hard about getting the M. Zuiko version, but if it doesn't dazzle optically I'd rather acquire the E-M5 grip for about 1/3 the cost and keep shooting with the ZD, which has given me many good bird and bug shots on my E-510.

    In general, I guess I'd second what Ned says above.
     
  14. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Bob
    Wouldn't the better comparison be with the Panasonic 100-300mm?

    Either way, it does seem a bit expensive. :eek:
     
  15. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    I compared the 75-300 and the P100-300. The bokeh on the P100-300, from the shots I saw, seemed better, it has IS, and is almost 1/2 the price. It's also a slightly brighter lens. I'm not sure what the Oly is about, to be honest. Are the MFT charts better? Is it sharper?
     
  16. Ned

    Ned Mu-43 Legend

    Jul 18, 2010
    Alberta, Canada
    Zuiko 70-300mm:
    bumble_bee_web.jpg

    Zuiko 70-300mm with EC-14:
    ladybug_web.jpg

    Indeed, this was my favorite use for the lens. :biggrin:
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. OdzBodkinz

    OdzBodkinz Mu-43 Regular

    153
    Sep 11, 2011
    Yeah... I felt the 45-175mm was really sharp, but for a zoo lens, it's simply too short. I have had long 80-400mm lenses for my APS-C and FF cameras before, so I know what that is like lugging that heavy stuff around. This is a load off, to get an equivalent 600mm even if I have to stop down a tad for good resolution. I dont think IQ is any better.
     
  18. OdzBodkinz

    OdzBodkinz Mu-43 Regular

    153
    Sep 11, 2011
    Those are all true....but, for me, I wanted a little smaller, so I paid the premium for it.
     
  19. WT21

    WT21 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Feb 19, 2010
    Boston
    So, the 75-300 is smaller/lighter? Didn't realize that.
     
  20. RevBob

    RevBob Super Moderator

    Jun 4, 2011
    NorthWestern PA
    Bob
    I think the OIS in the 100-300 makes it larger/bulkier.