Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Olympus Micro Four Thirds

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 1, 2013, 4:49 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
The problem with his lens is the speed (f4.8-6.7). This lens is way too slow for being a long zoom lens. You will need a ton of light if you want to keep the ISO at decent levels.
you need good light with any of the 300mm lenses currently available for mft, 5.6 isn't that much faster than 6.7 and you will likely want high shutter speed to avoid camera shake or motion blur in the subject with wildlife.

End of the day I have heard from more than a few people who have had the chance to shoot both with the 75-300 and the 70-300 that the difference doesn't matter much since the 75-300 is sharp wide open at the long end whereas the older lens isn't as sharp till f8. Don't believe me, take a look at Bryce Bradford's flickr for example, you will see some excellent shots with this lens you deem as way too slow.

Don't get me wrong we'd all like a 12-300mm the size of a12oz beer can with a constant f2.0 aperture but the laws of physics won't let it happen.
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2013, 6:09 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

The difference is 1/4 stop...you have a point,it's not that much slower but still, considering that it's new technology, I'd hope they could come up with something f2.8-4.0. Then the price would be justifiable.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2013, 7:17 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

I see Panasonic finally listed the 150mm f2.8 on their lens roadmap to be released soon. Now, there's an f2.8 prime worthy of buying.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2013, 8:21 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Tullio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,370
Default

Agreed but...how much will it cost? I say above $800 easily.
__________________

Tullio
Tullio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 1, 2013, 9:05 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

Oh......I'm betting more than that...
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2013, 8:07 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tullio View Post
The difference is 1/4 stop...you have a point,it's not that much slower but still, considering that it's new technology, I'd hope they could come up with something f2.8-4.0. Then the price would be justifiable.
A 75-300 f2.8-4.0 would be way more than the $900 they charged for the version 1 of the lens. I think $550 is about right for the new version.

Look at the SWD 50-200 f2.8-3.5, it still sells for $1100
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2013, 8:52 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

Back when I bought my 50-200 SWD, it was $895 brand new, $4 less than the 75-300 M. Zuiko cost.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2013, 10:46 AM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New England, USA
Posts: 2,069
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Chappell View Post
Back when I bought my 50-200 SWD, it was $895 brand new, $4 less than the 75-300 M. Zuiko cost.
Yeah and how much was gas?

Don't worry there's no inflation!
__________________
in my bag: e-m1, 7-14mm pro, 14-54mm mk ii, 50-200mm mk i, 70-300mm
in my pocket: e-pm2 lumix 12-32
ramcewan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 2, 2013, 12:36 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

Olympus jacked up several prices about the time of the E-5, just as the system was stagnating. The 12-60 was $795 for a long time and shot up to $999. It was 2008 I think when I bought the 50-200 SWD.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 9, 2013, 7:21 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Mikefellh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
Posts: 1,707
Default

Hate the feel of knurling, prominent on "R" lenses...much prefer the feel of the zoom on the original lenses.

I have to wrap the knurling in rubber bands because I can't stand the feel of it, it makes my skin crawl. I covered the knurling of my Maglight in tape for the same reason.
Mikefellh 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 11:01 PM.