Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by harry3, Jan 19, 2014.
I hope to see fast 300mm lens 2.8 or at least 3.5
It is nice to dream! Would be sweet but it would be expensive.
Olympus sells a 300/2.8 for 4/3. Not µ4/3 but it can be used with an adapter (on an E-M1 to get decent AF).
$7000 at B&H.
I use an olympus 300 f4.5 OM mount ,and have been quite pleased with the results on the E-M1 and E-M5.
yup.. fast telephotos are a missing component in micro 4/3rds but as someone already pointed there are options to found in standard 4/3rds mount form.
the long zooms have kind of always been missing. Sure there are the 4/3's... but a 300 f3.5 or f4 would be great. At least they're seemingly going to push some more ultra wide options in the future, maybe long zooms after that.
You are asking too much (unless you are rich, or in a job where it would pay to have a $6000-$15000 lens). If money is no object, as others mentioned Olympus has the perfect lens for you on 43, and if you have a EM-1 with 43->m43 adapter, you would have fast focusing etc.
I'd settle for 300mm/f4 myself.
Hmm.... I wonder how it would be using an inexpensive 500mm 5.6 Mirror lens on a speed booster.
Anyway, if you can accept Manual focus only , there are many Legacy choices that wont break the bank.
300mm f4 please
300mm f2.8 is very expensive and heavy
I ended up pre-ordering the Tamron 150-600mm for the Nikon mount. It doesn't look like we will see a 300mm f4 or something similar for m43 in the next 2 years. I decided I didn't want to wait any longer for an upgrade to my 100-300.
Nice and long but not much faster than the 100-300mm and no AF. Manual focusing that long a lens is tricky especially for wildlife. Good luck and enjoy.
I'll pick up a used D7100 so I can AF.
There you go!
It's a LOT longer than the 100-300... the 100-300 is 300mm. The 150-600 is 600mm:
So if you're used to full frame focal lengths, this is a 1200/6.3. It doesn't get much better for wildlife than "300-1200mm"! The only spoiler is the lack of AF, but all of our long lenses suffer from that at the moment, barring the 300/2.8 and 90-250/2.8 with TC's. But then you're blowing a ton of money on a PDAF lens whose AF can't keep up the competition from Canon and Nikon. Buying a DSLR just for the telephoto is a better idea if you really need a solid wildlife kit.
Hopefully we'll get a system lens longer than 300/5.6 soon. <crossing fingers>
I'm using a 500 f/4 (not a mirror lens though) with speed booster and it's great! It becomes a 350/2.8, and a very sharp one!
43rumors posted a photo of an Olympus 300/4. Interesting lens. Possible configurations:
300/4 = 600mm-e at f/4
300/4 + 1.4x = 820mm-e at f/5.6
300/4 + 2x = 1200mm-e at f/8.0
I don't doubt--given my experience with Olympus' Four Thirds 2x TC--that a 2x TC would give very good image quality, but at f/8 you'll have a tough time with PDAF, and CDAF probably won't be all that great, either. And that's to say nothing of shooting such a long focal length at f/8... shooting in anything but bright daylight would be tough to handhold consistently.
I'll put my money on the 300/4 being released with a 1.4x TC. That combination should AF just fine and be very sharp.
Hopefully we do get a TC. I have no use for this lens without at least a 1.4x.
Too bad Olympus didn't make a 300mm f/2.8. If you're crazy like me* and Speedboost, you'll end up buying something like a Tokina 150-500mm f/5.6 ($500USD) which turns into a 106.5-355mm f/4.0 and I would handhold it. (That's a whole lot of reach for a f/4 lens that goes between the FLs of 105 and 350.) Or you could get a Nikon 400mm f/3.5 AI-S ($Sub 2kUSD?) which turns into a 284mm f/2.5. There's also the Sigma 50-500 f/4.5-6.3 (~1.5kUSD?) or Sigma 150-500 f/5-6.3($800USD) which will get you 35.5-355mm f/3.2-4.5 and 106.5-355 f/3.5-4.5. Or really, the Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3 ($1kUSD) which will give you 106.5-426mm f/3.5-4.5.
Of course all of these lenses will break the backs of some people. If these were APS-C image circle lenses, then I am sure they would cost less, have less weight and also less volume.
Unfortunately, I sense that those will be "price competitive" against the 300 f/4 there. Current m43 glass has been significantly higher priced than I would like to buy at. Especially given I am already set to buy a D3s in the future so at this point, unless there is a particularly good price on m43 lenses, I personally will end up adapting over.
*Crazy enough to handle a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6G in manual focus, handheld, 1/50s exposure. https://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=52850&page=3&p=595864#post595864
I use and old F. Zuiko 300mm f4.5 for birding and get good results from it. Even on a X2A adapter it gives usable results with a bit of appropriate post-processing. A fast 300 native lens would be great, but if the 4/3 version is any indiction, I couldn't afford it anyway. So I'l consider getting one of the long zooms --Olympus 75-300 or Panasonic 100-300. But I've found AF is hit or miss photographing birds in trees - too much stuff to get in the way and throw it off - so I end up manually fine tuning focus anyway.
Reflector, you just made me think about a 400/2.8 with speed booster. That would be a 284/2.0. *drooling*
Skickat från min Nexus 4 via Tapatalk
I've got a 300mm 4 and it's seriously heavy. (Mind you it is a 'full frame' one.)