# Olympus 300mm f/4 reveal!



## PropilotBW

Nothing could quite disrupt the announcement from Nikon with the D500 and D5.  

However, for those mirrorless shooters, Olympus announced the 300mm f/4 PRO lens.  
300mm f/4.  

This could be a really nice lens for wildlife photography, but it comes at a pretty hefty price of $2600 (comparing to other M4/3 lenses). If you compare it to a full frame counterpart, you're at a third of the price.   

What do you think?


----------



## jaomul

Of course I want one


----------



## Derrel

Maybe a better official link to the upcoming 300/4 is this one:

M.Zuiko ED 300mm f4.0 IS PRO - Fixed Focal Lengths - PEN and OM-D - Lenses  | Olympus

It is a handsome lens, but I have to say, the price does seem awfully high. I say high because I was just perusing CL looking at gear for sale, and Canon and Nikon 300mm f/4 silent-wave motor focusing 300/4's are going for $800 or so, used. I know...I know...not the same thing, and this new lens is for an entirely different market, and people are commonly rationalizing the price as if it were a 600mm f/4 for full-frame...

Maybe I am just a cheapskate...I still think of a camera-maker's 300mm f/4 ultrasonic motor lens as being an $1100 type lens...which is what I payed for my then-new Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-S some years back.

But make no mistake: a 300mm f/4 prime lens is a VERY handy lens! It can almost always be used with a 1.4x converter for a 420mm f/5.6 and maintain very good image quality and performance, and also can easily be used with a extension tube for long-distance *pseudo-macro* shots of things like butterflies, insects, flowers and so on. A 300/4 is easily carried in the nylon carry case for the Nikon or Canon 70-200/2.8 lenses, and is in no way the massive PITA a 300/2.8 is.


----------



## PropilotBW

Derrel said:


> Maybe a better official link to the upcoming 300/4 is this one:
> 
> M.Zuiko ED 300mm f4.0 IS PRO - Fixed Focal Lengths - PEN and OM-D - Lenses  | Olympus
> 
> It is a handsome lens, but I have to say, the price does seem awfully high. I say high because I was just perusing CL looking at gear for sale, and Canon and Nikon 300mm f/4 silent-wave motor focusing 300/4's are going for $800 or so, used. I know...I know...not the same thing, and this new lens is for an entirely different market, and people are commonly rationalizing the price as if it were a 600mm f/4 for full-frame...
> 
> Maybe I am just a cheapskate...I still think of a camera-maker's 300mm f/4 ultrasonic motor lens as being an $1100 type lens...which is what I payed for my then-new Nikon 300mm f/4 AF-S some years back.
> 
> But make no mistake: a 300mm f/4 prime lens is a VERY handy lens! It can almost always be used with a 1.4x converter for a 420mm f/5.6 and maintain very good image quality and performance, and also can easily be used with a extension tube for long-distance *pseudo-macro* shots of things like butterflies, insects, flowers and so on. A 300/4 is easily carried in the nylon carry case for the Nikon or Canon 70-200/2.8 lenses, and is in no way the massive PITA a 300/2.8 is.




oops!  Copied the wrong URL.   Thanks! 

I can only justify it's purchase for an African safari trip...of which I am unlikely to go on.


----------



## Ron Evers

Being a poor pensioner, I will be staying with my Oly 75-300.


----------



## Tor

PropilotBW said:


> Nothing could quite disrupt the announcement from Nikon with the D500 and D5.
> 
> However, for those mirrorless shooters, Olympus announced the 300mm f/4 PRO lens.
> 300mm f/4.
> 
> This could be a really nice lens for wildlife photography, but it comes at a pretty hefty price of $2600 (comparing to other M4/3 lenses). If you compare it to a full frame counterpart, you're at a third of the price.
> 
> What do you think?



What do you mean "Hefty Price"?  Have you looked at the price of Canicons 600 mm lenses [emoji23][emoji23]


"Scribbled with my iPhone"


----------



## pixmedic

Tor said:


> PropilotBW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nothing could quite disrupt the announcement from Nikon with the D500 and D5.
> 
> However, for those mirrorless shooters, Olympus announced the 300mm f/4 PRO lens.
> 300mm f/4.
> 
> This could be a really nice lens for wildlife photography, but it comes at a pretty hefty price of $2600 (comparing to other M4/3 lenses). If you compare it to a full frame counterpart, you're at a third of the price.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What do you mean "Hefty Price"?  Have you looked at the price of Canicons 600 mm lenses [emoji23][emoji23]
> 
> 
> "Scribbled with my iPhone"
Click to expand...


you cant _*really*_ compare it to a 600mm lens on another format... (I know you were being sarcastic)
a 300mm lens is a 300mm lens.  smaller formats don't bring the subject any closer, it just crops it smaller from the start. 
what it _*should*_ be compared to are other 300mm f/4 lenses, to which the oly lens is quite expensive. 
I really dislike that they directly list it as the equivalent to a 600mm lens. while they do state it is "600mm *equivalent*", i suspect that more people than not fail to understand the difference between a 600mm lens and a 600mm equivalent _*field of view.  *_to me, this seems like shady advertising on Olympus's part.


----------



## Derrel

Yeah...the thing a 300mm lens on an m4/3 sensor will not provide, because it cannot, is that *extreme *foreground/background separation at moderate to longer distances, on things like sports photos or wildlife in nature situations; the difference even extends to APS-C sensor size cameras. That "totally blown-out", really marked, strong foreground subject with the utterly unrecognizable, so-called *blown-out background*...that's not possible at normal distances in sports like football or soccer, or when shooting photos of say, larger land mammals at distances like 100 to 200 feet...the smaller format sensors and shorter focal length lenses they need for a given degree of field of view, those factors create deeper depth of field than larger sensors bring to the same types of framing and subject size within the picture area.

Still--I think there is a worthwhile net positive too: a little bit deeper focus band also allows for a slight fudge factor on focusing, and also allows more in-focus within a scene. Shallow depth of field with unrecognizable background...that's in some ways, a visual cliche...it shows very little context, very little of the surroundings; there are times when being able to see, and recognize MORE of the scene is a huge positive for the photos. And of course, there is the matter of size and weight and cost when a 300mm f/4 lens gives a LARGE image magnification...a 600mm f/4 from Canon or Nikon is a monstrous lens, and costs over $10k!

I do not think we will ever be free of marketing materials and advertising that lists lens focal length equivalency in terms of the *135 film format*  (AKA 24 x 36mm film size, AKA FX or FF digital) for compact digital, bridge camera, smartphone, and even m4/3 cameras...it's just become the accepted way to list "equivalency" in terms of focal length/angle of view.


----------



## coastalconn

I saw the announcement and price of this lens and it kind of made me go huh?  Used Nikon 300 F4 AF-s is about $700, used/refurbished D7100 is about $500.  Shoot in 1.3x mode and would give you the same "600mm" FOV for a fraction of the price and probably better ISO performance..


----------



## speedliner

You have to judge this lens by more than FL and aperture. It is exceptional quality and very sharp. The combination of IS with Olympus body IBIS provides an amazing degree of stabilization. The images are beautiful, incredibly sharp with surprising bokeh for m43. 

Can't compare it to used though.  The used market for Canikon is so vast and reasonably priced that little competes on price. 

If you want lighter weight, 600mm of very sharp, fast focusing reach loaded with features then this is a great lens.  

It won't be for everyone.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jcdeboever

coastalconn said:


> I saw the announcement and price of this lens and it kind of made me go huh?  Used Nikon 300 F4 AF-s is about $700, used/refurbished D7100 is about $500.  Shoot in 1.3x mode and would give you the same "600mm" FOV for a fraction of the price and probably better ISO performance..


I agree. 

I had a pro mentor for a quick spell and he retired to AZ. He called me yesterday for Veterans Day, we are both Marines and jaw jacked for an hour about photography, mostly developing, and how to deal with guilt. Anyway, he want's to barter me his Nikon  AF-S 300 f/4 ED IF like new with box. He transitioned to a Fujifilm mirrorless system with primes. He said he used it like one or two times but the catch is I have to paint the side of his daughters vehicle. I stopped out this week to have a look, local guy did the body work and did an amazing job but he can't paint or doesn't want to.  I was shocked at the precision of this non-bodyman's work, perfect really and I have trained eyes is an understatement. He is a machinist by trade so I guess it carries over. All I need to do is a quick wet sand, sealer, basecoat blend, and clear the side. the father already bought the material for the guy but he backed out because he wasn't familiar with the material. I am gonna pull it in my pull barn and nail it in short order. Wednesday night is the night and I am getting the @DarkShadow  lens I have been slappin the crap out of him for using and teasing me with. Funny how all this is really... I think I am favored on the best levels....


----------



## petrochemist

Ron Evers said:


> Being a poor pensioner, I will be staying with my Oly 75-300.


Having a young family the Oly 75-300 is out of my price range. I do have a Takumar 300 f/4 , but it rarely gets used - just too heavy!


----------



## Ron Evers

petrochemist said:


> Ron Evers said:
> 
> 
> 
> Being a poor pensioner, I will be staying with my Oly 75-300.
> 
> 
> 
> Having a young family the Oly 75-300 is out of my price range. I do have a Takumar 300 f/4 , but it rarely gets used - just too heavy!
Click to expand...


Been there, I understand.  

Car needs repair, get estimate, can I do it with the correct tools for even or less cost, if yes, buy the tools & you still have them after completing the repair.  I have lotsa tools & much experience.


----------

