Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 26, 2007, 11:39 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,200
Default

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0706/07...zuiko70300.asp
DonalDuc is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 27, 2007, 8:14 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
HarjTT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,534
Default

Hey DD

I had a look at the lens over at dp - looks as if its pretty similar to the Sigma 70-300 in design and just hope that its better than it. Pricewise, at $620 its cheap on for a 140-600mm lens but I'm not sure it would be a lens for me - I want a faster lens so this is a wee bti slow for me. On the otherhand, anyone looking for a cheap lens for birding in good light this lens may just be what you need.

Cheers

Harj


HarjTT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2007, 10:32 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,200
Default

Yes, it looks like Sigma 70-300 ... and it's (for 140-600) very light weighted.

I hate heavy objectivs - about 1000g :-) My Tokina 80-400 (1080g) is my heaviest, I don't like to have two sherpas behind me.

Both kit objectivs (14-42, 40-150)seem to be better than other kit objectivs and so I'll hope the 70-300 too.



I smile at my brother's Nikon 70-200VR, 215 mm long and 1480g (> 1800 €). Zuiko 70-300, 127 mm and 620g looks better!
DonalDuc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2007, 10:51 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Mikefellh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,707
Default

Probably made by Sigma too...it has the exact same lens arrangement, and it also has an AF/MF switch on the lens (which is a trait of Sigma lenses).

There's an image going around that shows the Olympus 70-300mm lens arrangement on top, and the Sigma lens arrangement on the bottom:
http://www.qtp.it/Gallery/albums/use...0667/70300.jpg
Mikefellh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2007, 1:34 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 822
Default

The specs look the same, and the MTF charts suggest their about the same optically as well.

http://sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_...mp;navigator=3
http://www.olympus-esystem.com/dea/p.../70-300_40-56/

Sigma has their MTF chart at 10lpmm and 30lpmm, whereas the Olympus charts are at 20lpmm and 60lpmm. So it's tough to compare directly. Also, the four-thirds image circle only extens 11mm from the center (22mm diagnol), so ignore the half of the Sigma chart beyond that.

That said, the 20lp/mm plot on the Oly chart seems to fall smack dab in the middle of the 10lp/mm and 30lp/mm plots for the Sigma. So it looks like it's the same optics. Still, those MTFs really don't look any worse than the 40-150.

The lens is also a bit heavier than the Sigma (620g vs. 550g), which does possibly suggest some upgrades as far as build and mechanics. So it probably is worth a bit more. But if the street price is really $400, twice as high as the Sigma, that might still be just a bit disappointing. I wouldn't be surprised if it sells for under $350 though.

Also, if you are comparing to the Sigma, be aware that there have been four versions of that lens. The one that seems similar is the recent DG APO Macro version. The non-DG, non-APO, non-Macro versions of the lens all seem to be considerably softer (esp at the long end).

kenbalbari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 27, 2007, 4:24 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,200
Default

the four sigmas and their street prices




DonalDuc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 29, 2007, 12:21 PM   #7
Junior Member
 
iamfisheye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12
Default

I had hopes that this would be out by the summer.

Bit of a shame I'm off to Madagascar in September and wanted to get a bigger zoom. for the wildlife Looks like I'm going to have to save up for the 50-200mm.
iamfisheye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 29, 2007, 5:11 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,200
Default

There are other FourThirds objectivs (from Sigma) - heavier, but with more zoom

http://geizhals.at/?cat=acamobjo_oly

50-500 or 135-400 for example.
DonalDuc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 29, 2007, 8:44 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 37
Default

300mm with no tri-pod mount?
StretchMaK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 30, 2007, 6:10 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,200
Default

Why do you need for a light weighted, short 300 mm a tripod mount? :?

be happy that is has no tripod mount!
DonalDuc is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:27 PM.