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

Olympus 300mm F4 in spring...for 1799-1999 Euros?

Discussion in 'Micro 4/3 News and Rumors' started by mcasan, Oct 1, 2015.

  1. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Atlanta
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    I'm also hoping that the rumor sites price is way off. $1499 at the most - otherwise it's a niche lens that will probably not sell to well, IMHO. I like the IQ I get from my Oly 75-300, even though it is slower than heck in the aperture department. Sure I have to use it in good light, but for what I need an effective FOV of 600mm for - it was worth the sub $500 price I paid for it.

    Now, if my shooting clientele changes and that reach out and look up someones nose is required....I might need to reconsider.
     
  3. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    Actually... for what it does in terms of filling a frame on your camera at that aperture...its a bargain...

    If you shot apc Canon you would be looking at 6900 dollars for a 400mm lens of equivalent speed

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/Cameras/N/0/Ntt/CA4004ISEFM2

    If you shot full frame Nikon you would be in the hole for 12,300 dollars for a 600mm lens

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?N=11166859&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ps

    and they are both really really big lenses

    I have recently been shooting the 50-200 with a 1.4 tele and the 4/3 to micro4/3 adaptor.... that gets me to close to 300mm on a budget.. max aperture 4.9, and physically pretty big but not unbearable.. certainly hand holdable

    even then for sports and birds/wild life 300mm on 4/3, 400mm on apc or 600mm on full frame is still a challenge

    this shot

    21565156876_de5910d1a1_b. P9200055 by kevinparis, on Flickr


    is a crop shot from 30m/ 100 feet...say half the width of a sports field... well thats what my EXIF tells me anyway.. Here is a screen shot

    Screen Shot 2015-10-01 at 22.17.09.
    Yes its an expensive niche lens... not for everyone... but i reckon it will be a stellar lens optically, and I will be queuing up to get one and a teleconvertor....anybody want to buy a Canon 5d Mk 2 and a couple of lenses :)

    K
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. Sniksekk

    Sniksekk Mu-43 Veteran

    334
    Apr 7, 2015
    Kevinparis: I suspect you are a Olympus-salesman, cause you almost sold me that Oly 300 Pro with that post. :D
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Carbonman

    Carbonman Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jul 10, 2014
    Vancouver BC
    Graham
    The price estimated in Euros is way too high and sales will be very small. I can't see it being more than the 40-150 Pro, and would certainly not pay more than the price being asked for the zoom in Canada, a very steep $1899 CDN (on sale for $1799 CDN right now). Conversion from the Euro makes the 300 $2666 to $2962 CDN. That's ridiculous and puts it way out of my price range, especially since it's not as usable a lens as the 40-150. I know it's a case of "what the market will bear", but it's not going to entice buyers away from Canikon if there isn't both a cost savings and some other performance enhancement.
    From what I've seen in Vancouver camera stores, Oly has fallen off the map. Nobody's stocking anything except one E-M10 or E-M5 Mk.II body and some of the lower cost primes.
     
  6. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    haha

    I have been a marketing guy for Apple..and I am friends with the west coast US sales guy for Olympus...but I am not on either of their payrolls :)

    Just to be clear... that shot was NOT taken on the unreleased 300mm... but with an e-m1 with a frankenstein combo... it is purely to illustrate what a near 300m lens gets you in the viewfinder.

    Bang for buck the new 300mm looks very interesting for folks who want to do stuff like my shots.. Oddly I am not by nature into this kind of stuff... but I do like to experiment

    cheers
    K
     
  7. Sniksekk

    Sniksekk Mu-43 Veteran

    334
    Apr 7, 2015
    I never thought that picture was taken with a early OL300 pro, but I've never thought I would ever need a 300 lens.

    Now I'm uncertain.

    Trying to convince my GF to go safari in Africa next year.
    A 300 lens might be bought for that trip.
     
  8. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    extrapolating rumoured prices from one currency to another is always a dangerous game to play, as are ignoring variable like sales taxes.

    Still happy you seem to have multiple camera stores...Even in Los Angeles, beyond electronic box shifters like Best Buy there is basically Samys and maybe Bel Air... and Bel Air had the whiff of death the last time I was there

    K
     
  9. Speedliner

    Speedliner Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 2, 2015
    Southern NJ, USA
    Rob
    The metabones speed poster with AF makes these discussions interesting.

    You can get a canon 400,5.6, ab excellent lens for well under $1000 if your patient. A 70-200, 2.8 as well.

    That would get you an excellent 280,f4 and a 50-142,f2 for little more than the price of the O300,4. You only pay for the metabones once and can keep adding lenses at used canon prices.

    I'd prefer the native lenses, I think, but the decision'so getting muddy.

    Delay is never a good thing.
     
  10. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    I think frankenstein is a bit of a misnomer. The E-M1 was designed to take advantage of these lenses and the 300f4 is going to have to be pretty good to make me want to give up the 150f2 + TCs.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    that is a valid solution...if it suits you... maybe there is a metabones speedbooster that does autofocus... but what about weather sealing

    as you say its a tricky decision

    K
     
  12. siftu

    siftu Mu-43 Top Veteran

    633
    Mar 26, 2015
    Bay Area, CA
    siftu
    Does the Canon 400mm f5.6 work with the focal reducer? I didnt see it on the list.
     
  13. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    the frankenstein comment really realted to the overall length of the combo - the 50-200 goes pretty long at 200 and the fact in my case my MMF adaptor is the older non sealed version :)

    plus the AF does hunt badly ... well it did on the surfing shots... suspect the 300 will be better

    never held the 150/2, but suspect its not light

    K
     
  14. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    Yes the 50-200 hunting can be annoying. The focus limiter on the 150f2 really helps this situation. You just have to remember to move the setting when you can't focus on something close :duh:.

    Yes, not light, describes the 150f2 very well! :biggrin: It is very much built like a tank.
     
  15. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    Why does everyone keep saying that the 300/4 is a niche lens or even worse.....and expensive niche lens. The new Nikon 300/4 is $2,000.....would you call a 300/4 for Nikon or Canon a niche lens? When I go to my favorite state park to photograph alligators I run into 15-20 non-pro photographers out there with various setups. Everywhere from the Canon 100-400 to the Sigma/Tamron 100-600, all of them spending money on "niche" lenses for their hobby. This is just in one little park in east Texas, how many people are in the other 1,000's of parks and wildlife areas in Texas on the same day, all taking photos with their "niche" lenses. The bird page on FaceBook for Texas has 17,670 members, all of them buying "niche" lenses for their hobby. I know a lot of them that use the Sigma/Tamron 100-600 and while they enjoy the lens because it provides them the long reach at cheap price they complain about the slow speed (have to stop down to around ƒ8.0 to get sharp photos). Most of them would love to get 600mm of reach (840mm with TC) with a lens that is capable of sharp photos at ƒ4.0 (ƒ5.6 with TC) for only $2,000. There is nothing out there that will compare to the speed and IQ (that's assuming it is as good or better then the other Pro lenses) of the 300mm ƒ4.0 Pro for the price. To get that reach and speed in APS-C it is a 400mm ƒ4 at $6,899. To get that in full frame is a 600mm ƒ4.0 at $11,499.

    I guess I am on the wrong forum with all the people here who bitch and complain about anything that is not super small, super light weight, and super cheap. The µ4/3 system is a dream come true for me. I got tired of lugging around heavy lenses and camera's into the woods, sometimes walking up to 10 miles in a day. Even my 150 ƒ2.0 is light compared to getting the reach and speed I got compared to my previous setups. A 300mm ƒ4.0 (effective 600mm) is not a "niche" lens in respects to people who photographs birds or sports as a hobby and definitely not for pros. Maybe because µ4/3 has lacked this ability for so long is why you people think it is a "niche" lens. Hell, you could not even effectively use 4/3 lenses until 2 years ago with the EM1.

    While I like to spend as little as possible on my camera gear, I feel the pricing on the Pro lenses is about right.....especially compared to anything of equivalent IQ. Hell the 40-150 Pro is cheaper then the 70-200/2.8 on the market buy $500-$1,000.
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2015
    • Agree Agree x 10
    • Like Like x 1
  16. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
    Basic rule of thumb with lenses is you get what you pay for... more expensive lenses in most cases are better than any less expensive alternative

    Price versus value is a trickier equation

    Look forward to seeing the shot of the Oly shooter with the 300 next to the canikon guy with the 400 or 600 lens
    :)

    K
     
  17. Speedliner

    Speedliner Mu-43 All-Pro

    Mar 2, 2015
    Southern NJ, USA
    Rob
    I expected the 300,4 to be closer to the price of the 40-150 Pro, not 33% higher. Not unlike nikons 300,4 and 70-200,2.8
     
  18. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium

    think its priced fair for what it should delver..compare like with like

    K
     
  19. Luke

    Luke Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jul 30, 2010
    Milwaukee, WI
    Luke
    I don't doubt that it will be a great lens. But I'd LOVE to know why Sigma and Tamron continue to ignore m43 mount. Can't they just put new mounts on existing lenses? Sure they'll be bigger than they need to be. But I'd love to have a Sigma 70-200 f2.8.... and the 50-500mm would also be rad. I don't shoot enough telephoto to go with a 300mm prime. But could definitely more easily justify the price if it covered more range AND was closer to $1,000.

    I'll start saving up now regardless, but I don;t think it's on my personal roadmap.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. mcasan

    mcasan Mu-43 All-Pro

    Feb 26, 2014
    Atlanta


    The wife and leave for Kenya in early November for the month. We will each take two E-M1s, our 12-40, 40-150, and a Panny 100-300. We used the Panny since last year for shooting wildlife. Works OK, just not as much reach as I would like to have. So I am hoping we can swap the 100-300 for the new Panny/Zeiss 100-400 by mid 2016. Now shooting to 400mm (800 35mm FF equiv.) just might be worth nearly $2000.....just maybe. Much depends on the IQ.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1