Hey Shawn, you mentioned in your video that you could sync your lens and camera (i have the OMD-EM1). Please tell me the exact setting your use to sync both so they work together. Thank you. Your video was really informative.
Cue the equivalency arguments. Lets get one thing straight: all 300 mm lenses have the same depth of field given the same camera to subject distance and aperture. Depth of field depends only on those three variables: focal length; distance to subject and aperture. This is physics: sensor size has no effect. Where the sensor size does make a difference is in the field of view, that is, the angle subtended by the lens. Because the sensor is only a quarter of the size of a full-frame one, a 300 mm lens on a micro four-thirds camera has the angle of view of a 600 mm lens on a full-frame camera, But the depth of field remains that of a 300 mm lens, simply because it is a 300 mm lens. This is, of course, deeper than the longer lens because the wider the lens' focal length, the deeper the field of view. In practice it would show the same depth of field as a 600 mm full-frame lens stopped down two stops (because reducing the f stop deepens the depth of field). Whether this is an advantage or disadvantage depends on whether one wants a shallower depth of field or not. For exposure purposes, the 300 mm Olympus acts as an f4. Another factor in the equivalency argument is the total light that falls on the sensor. The 600 mm full-frame lens has a frontal element four times the area of the 300 mm and so lets in four times the amount of light. When stopped down, at every aperture the area of the iris is still four times that of the 300 mm lens, because the f stop is a function of the focal length and the diameter of the aperture opening. However, the amount of light falling on every square millimetre of both the full-frame and the M43 sensors is the same regardless of the sensor size, hence the exposure settings would be the same for both lenses. It is a related fact that because the larger sensor receives more light in total, it will be less noisy at any given ISO than a smaller sensor, all other things being equal. I hope this clears things up.
LOL wish I had read down feather I just said the same thing only one reviewer I have found that explains it correctly here is a link to the info so if you have to demonstrate you can have this so no one can compline lol www.four-thirds.org/en/special/lens_knowledge.html
Two corrections: 1) You forgot to mention the 12-100 F4 in the Pro series. 2) That lens also has built-in stabilization therefore the 300mm isn't alone with that feature.
I really try to be positive, but sometimes that's harder than others. Overly positive review? Ya think? Nothing negative about the lens? I don't shoot Olympus, but I have nothing against the brand. In fact, I've looked at their recent releases just to get an idea. I would think this lens would be utilized for Sports/Action/Wildlife first and other things second. So what didn't you include that I would have liked to have seen (especially since there are many other channels reviewing the same lens): 1. AF speed for the above primary uses when combined with Olympus cameras. 2. Weight when you are hand-holding for prolonged periods of time while performing S/A/W photography. 3. Price considerations for a micro 4/3rds system. 4. Performance: Chromatic aberration? Does it handle flare well? Coatings? Weather sealed? (some of these may be additional plus points). 5. Color rendition. 6. Bokeh - maybe overvalued by some, but especially important in this format. 7. This lens appears to be one you attach the camera to (instead of the other way around). In Sum, future videos would have better usefulness and credibility if you used the item (in this case lens) for what it was designed for and balanced your opinion or have another reviewer on your video give the downside. Every lens has issues. If you didn't find any, you just didn't look hard enough.
@@Farmalando Lots of people say this but who cares? You need to double both to make a real comparison to full frame. F4 tells you NOTHING useful. If you have a 10x crop factor and most of that light doesn't hit the sensor then that light gathering is useless and not helpful information so the f number by itself is pointless if you don't factor the crop in.
hello shawn.. I’m a Photograph of sports events and my question is next can I use the 40-150 mm F/2.8 lens with the 1.4 teleconverter will give me the same image quality as the 300mm F/4.0 lens? thank you greetings from Mexico
I'm curious - how does it isolate the subject from the background. If I use it for sport, will the subject stand out against a nice blur? Samples would be fab!
WOW lucky me.. I ordered the 45mm F1.8 and waiting for it to be shipped.. So 75mm and 45mm both do the same job "I assume 75mm does it better due to it being more expensive?" 45mm will be enough right? I don't need to get 75mm? if so then, my next lens should be 60mm f2.8 Thanks ^^
yay happy! Sorry to bother you more but have you done a video about 45MM F1.8 and/or 60MM F2.8? I'd love to see such accurate and informative review such as yours :)
The lens is not 600mm it is still 300mm. You use the 2x(lens size) to allow you to gauge the angle of view almost all reviewers say this because they really don't understand what they're talking about here is a link to information if you're interested. www.four-thirds.org/en/special/lens_knowledge.html
+digiDIRECT Other than Daniel Cox photos online I haven't seen any good photos coming from the Panasonic 100-400mm. Hopefully you review can change that perspective for me.
Cody Robinson the panasonic lens is not very sharp at 400 mm- not useless but pretty lackluster IMO. The olympus is sharper than the panasonic at any focal length, it is pretty much the sharpest m43 lens i've ever seen, and it is a stop faster. The tradeoff is that you can't zoom out to frame your target and it is significantly more expensive. So the panasonic is more useful and the olympus is more specialized. If you want maximum performance, the panasonic will be not fulfilling your dreams- if I had money for one of them, I'd buy the olympus.
Hi Shawn. I would like to compliment you on your vlogs. You cover the subject matter very thuroughly aside from if this lens has full electronic pass through into the Panasonic camera bodies. So I will make that first on my list of questions. 1. Does this lens link electronically to the Panasonic DC-G9 for O.I.S. auto focus etc... 2. Are you in any way related to the actor Steve Buscemi? I ask because there's a likeness there, but I can't quite put my finger on it. I think it might be your face and voice. Right on. He kicks butt! 3. Have you watched his performance in the movie Reservoir Dogs? Pretty harsh language but in my personal opinion, that was one of the finest performances that I have ever watched. I only hope that he isn't one of those President Trump hating poo itch and scratch skidmarks in Hollywood. They can't all be bad. Plus, that would suck! And he makes the movie Armegedon slightly more interesting as well. And finally number 4. I own a number of the Panasonic MFT's lenses, including the 100-400mm f/4-6.3. Is that Olympus 1.4x teleconverter interchangeable with the 100-400mm, or would it drown out too much light? Again, thank you for the vlog. Well done.
Hi J W. Thank you, I'm glad you enjoy the videos. The 300mm will for on the G9, with full autofocus, etc. The only thing it won't have is Pana's Dual I.S. system, because the Olympus lens IS won't be able to talk to the G9 in-body IS. But you will still have separate lens and body IS, so the IS should still be pretty good. The Olympus teleconverter doesn't work on the Panasonic 100-400 unfortunately, for the same reason that Panasonic's converter's don't work on it, due to the protruding lens element. Finally, I'm not related to Steve Buscemi (although many people think that), but I do like Reservoir Dogs ;)
Nikkor 300mm f/4 VR owns this lens in all aspects. It's lighter, smaller and cheaper. Put it on D7200 which has official crop mode (2x) and you have 600mm ekv.
you have totally misunderstood what the d7200 crop mode is and does. it just crops the 24mp down to 16mp to achieve more frames per second. it is not extending the focal range of your lens. all cameras offer the same cropping ability in pp.
+Petr Lunak: I own both lenses. I have a Nikkor 300mm f4 PF VR, which I use most of the time with a Nikon 1.4 TC 111, on my D500 and the Olympus 300mm f4 PRO with the 1.4 TC fitted most of the time on an EM1. I also have a PanaLeica 100 - 400 fitted to my other EM1. The only time the Nikkor 300 PF VR really masters the other two lenses is when used at long range; and that is partially down to sensor size. The Olympus 300mm is beautifully built and the IQ is superb. I must say the Nikkor 300mm is absolutely brilliant and I favour my Nikon system to my Olympus system but only really due to sensor size, not optical quality.
wouldn't buy the 4/3 version. with a mirror design the flange distance and the overall size of the lens was magnified so much, the lens ended up being like 3.5 kg and 30 cm long and costing 6500 bucks, while overall being lower quality than this one.
+Foto4Max Correct. But the actual exposure will be correct. There may be more noise and lower image quality but the light gathered for exposure is the same
+Keiran Bray-Norgate the point is you cant both claim its like a canon 600mm f4 and say its one third the size, to do that compare it to a canon 300mm f4 lens, because this IS a 300mm lens, thats why its so small. if you cheat and say its like a 600mm you must be fair snd say like a 60pmm at f8. In truth it isnt a 600mm on a m43 its a 300mm with equalivant field of view to 600mm full frame. you may as well take a ff 600mm photo, crop it down by 50% and claim its now a 1200mm lens. This whole equalivant ff is just marketing bullshit spread by the information on reviews like this.
+alan ross or maybe it's just easier to say it's a 600mm equivalent so people know what they are getting. Anyone who doesn't know doesn't give a shit about the DoF (beginners for example) dont need to be over informed with info they don't care about or understand. if they exposure and focal length is true but the DoF is off nobody is getting hurt. there's no conspiracy about trying to cover up the real DoF. Stop trying to make an issue when there is none.
dont need to be over informed lol! you mean lied to? oh ok, btw way you started by saying "only for depth of field, not for the amount of light it gathers, so it isn't actually wholly accurate to say either" and ended by saying you dont want any accuracy at all because people dont care, really you need to get your arguement sorted before telling someone 600mm is ok to say but not adjust the f stop, because its NOT about depth of field its about comparison of lenses, either compare it to a canon 300mm f4 or a canon 600mm f8, and you need to make up your mind if you want accuracy or not facts at all!
For a "wildlife" lens like this, you care about the light much more than the depth of field. Having a greater depth of field can be a positive advantage in such situations. Far more important is keeping your ISO low and you shutter speed high. In these terms, it's still an f4.
I like Olympus and micro 43 but this lens is very overpriced. They always "forget" to mention that you can put that 600 F4 on APS-C bodies and you have a 960mm F4 with Canon, which is 125% more pixels on the subject with the same 20MP resolution. Plus better high ISO.
No idea why you'd want a Nikon DSLR, TC and 300mm lens over the Olympus 300mm f4 PRO. I guess you could print larger on the newer Nikons, but how often are you going to print that big?
0:55 nope it is not a 600mm lens the lens is still 300mm the 600mm is the equivalent angle of view you can not magically create magnification 300mm is still 300mm. Source: www.four-thirds.org/en/special/lens_knowledge.html But then believe the misinformation of the manufacture they like telling half-truths or should I say propagating misinformation and let the consumer think they are getting more bang for the buck.
Did he just say it's a constant-aperture f/4 lens? You mean the 300mm fixed-focal length f/4 lens has a constant aperture? :-) It's this kind of statement that makes it clear what kind of qualification you need to review a camera lens on RU-vid. (A polo shirt with a logo on it.)
"Constant aperture" refers to a zoom lens which hold the same maximum aperture throughout their focal length range; e.g. the Canon 24-105 f:4 (though some cheat a bit on that. I'm looking at you Nikon...). A fixed focal length lens only has one possible maximum aperture.
Sir, forgive me in advance . . . but you need to stop 'clapping' your hands when giving your review . . . It is a bad habit, very distracting and unnecessary . .
