Oly 300 f4 pricing

[pede59]

remember: one of the reasons the Oly 300/4 is delayed is that they decided to add OIS to the lens.

That's not been confirmed as far as I know.

Amazing that so many still rotates that rumor as no one has given any confirmations, and even the "Simon" from 43rumors (over 99% accuracy with details) has said it doesn't have such.

alright, maybe shouldn't justify a rumored price with a rumored feature. Will just wait until the lens is out and talk about facts then ...

 

[Cjar]

[No message]

 

[Roger Engelken]

M43 Rumours are saying a "spring" (June ) release for the 300 at between 1799 - 1999 euros.

If true, I think Olympus have got the pricing wrong. That's about 50% more than a Canon 300 f4 LIS ... that would pay for an adaptor; and of course there are plenty of good used Canon 300s to be had.

Can't see the justification - both (presumably) use exotic glass as required and the Canon has the added cost of incorporating IS.

Of course this delay could mean Panasonic will beat Olympus to launch, which will put further pressure on Oly.

 

[nzmacro]

Those must be some pretty slow birds if you can get acceptable results with manual focus. In the end it all boils down to what everyone finds acceptable.

I don't use or own any AF lenses except for a kit lens here somewhere ;-)

Birds in action’s albums | Flickr

www.flickr.com

All manual focus with the NEX-7 or the EM10.

All the best and really maybe the birds are slower here than the rest of the world ... or do you mean you are slower at MF

Danny.

 

[Clayton1985]

Oh man, if it is June next year, I am going to migrate to a different system for my birding.

this just sucks, the Nikon 7200 and the 300 f4 pz is beginning to look more and more attractive.

dont care about the cost, love my em1, but missing tomany shots with old, mf lenses. The only 75-300 don't really satisfy me.

i hope it still comes in November.

 

[John King]

Oh man, if it is June next year, I am going to migrate to a different system for my birding.

this just sucks, the Nikon 7200 and the 300 f4 pz is beginning to look more and more attractive.

dont care about the cost, love my em1, but missing tomany shots with old, mf lenses. The only 75-300 don't really satisfy me.

i hope it still comes in November.

--
"Anything worth doing is worth doing poorly until you learn to do it well."
-- Zig Ziglar
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126558841@N07/

I've probably got this wrong. The Nikon D7200 is APS-C format, so that a Nikon 300mm would be the same as a 200mm on M43. The Nikon would need a 450 to equal the new 300!

Peter Del

The D7200 is 24mp which should also be considered since you could crop to 16mp to equal the E-M1.

It doesn't actually work like that ... ;-)

--
Regards, john from Melbourne, Australia.
.
Please do not embed images from my web site without prior permission
I consider this to be a breach of my copyright.
-- -- --
.
The Camera doth not make the Man (nor Woman) ...
Perhaps being kind to cats, dogs & children does ...
.
Galleries: http://canopuscomputing.com.au/gallery2/v/main-page/

Bird Control Officers on active service.

 

[RichRMA]

Pixel density on m4/3rd sensors is now the equivalent of 80mp on a FF (thanks to Panasonic's new sensor). This lens needs to be like a Zeiss OTUS to deliver what is needed to perform when they measure it at 60lp/mm, which no other manufacturer does. Otherwise, you end up with a mediocre lens. Since all 300mm f/4.0 lenses need to be 3 inches across, its going to be the same size as lenses from Canon and Nikon or Sony designed for APS or FF sensors.

 

[Denjw]

this?

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

Even the mock up 300mm f4



no longer appears on the Olympus M.Zuiko PRO site:

Loading…

cameras.olympus.com

It only appears on the Lens Lineup road map





So who knows?

As Oly has delivered on their other PRO lens I am prepared to wait and not speculate on specs and prices.

Cheers

Dennis





--

http://dwehner.zenfolio.com/

 

[photohounds]

[ snip ]

Of course this delay could mean Panasonic will beat Olympus to launch, which will put further pressure on Oly.

--
Colin K. Work
www.ckwphoto.com
www.pixstel.com

Interesting to see if that pricing is true. Sounds a tad expensive, but if its quality is like their 300/2.8 with its 10 micron machining tolerance it might be right.
.
.. birders will love such a lens.
.
Have you seen a 600mm f4 Canon lens up close?
You can stand it on the lens hood and use it to LEAN ON!
4 Kilograms, 450mm long - plus about 220mm for the hood!
Time to WORK OUT ..

--
Isn't it a marketing man's dream that measurebators demand sharp lenses and THEN complain if > 95% of an image is not OOF?
I recovered from equivalence disease when I went from FULL frame (6x7cm) to MINIATURE format (35mm).
Decades later ... Cynical MARKETING MEN now call Miniature 35mm: "full (marketing) frame", and the easily fooled now pretend it is "full" and everything else is "empty". FMF Fools ..
.
Customers want results, not "format psychobabble".
.
General Pics:
http://photohounds.smugmug.com/
Oly and other .. Gear test samples - even RB-67 shots!:
http://photohounds.smugmug.com/Gear-tests
How DO OMDs cope with dim-light action and smoke?
http://photohounds.smugmug.com/Performing-arts - and at the longer end
http://photohounds.smugmug.com/Gear-tests/Zuiko-40150-f28-PRO/
.

 

[photohounds]

[ snip ]

It's really not surprising that a specialty lens for a niche system is expensive. It's totally expected. With a pricing like that, I actually think it's pretty good. Provided it's optically superb, like their 150/2 for 4/3 system was. And Oly has a pretty good track record with their PRO line, so I'm pretty sure this one will be a masterpiece.

Of course this delay could mean Panasonic will beat Olympus to launch, which will put further pressure on Oly.

I wonder about that. Quite a bit different lenses, aimed at different customers.

OFF your high (presumably FMF) horse, please sir.
.
Firstly, ALL camera sales are being utterly FLOGGED by sales of phones, many of which which have more than acceptable results for the most common photographic purposes (casual people and record shots).
.
Secondly, for many former buyers, their 8MP P&S does not NEED replacement.
.
Thirdly, the niche you are deriding is expanding (ever so slightly) in a declining market.
.

[IMG width="400px" alt="Facts don't support a "rising dslr" sales" claim - au contraire! DSLRS are becoming what my Mamiya RB-67 became - LEGACY."]https://photohounds.smugmug.com/Gear-tests/Audio/i-CfqFqs9/0/X3/camera-sales-1947-2015-X3.jpg[/IMG]
Facts don't support a "rising dslr" sales" claim - au contraire! DSLRS are becoming what my Mamiya RB-67 became - LEGACY.

.
It could be argued that enthusiast photography ITSELF is becoming Niche.
People demanding that last bit of performance., prepared to lug HUGE GEAR (Like FMF DSLRS or my old MAMIYA RB-67) always WERE a Niche, now they represent a Niche within a Niche
.
Get used to it and enjoy your photography instead of trying to pretend the inevitable isn't happening
.
That "inevitable" is that smaller equipment provides more than enough quality for less than ultra critical and scientific needs and that leaves probably ONE sale in a thousand going forward.
.

--
Isn't it a marketing man's dream that measurebators demand sharp lenses and THEN complain if > 95% of an image is not OOF?
I recovered from equivalence disease when I went from FULL frame (6x7cm) to MINIATURE format (35mm).
Decades later ... Cynical MARKETING MEN now call Miniature 35mm: "full (marketing) frame", and the easily fooled now pretend it is "full" and everything else is "empty". FMF Fools ..
.
Customers want results, not "format psychobabble".
.
General Pics:
http://photohounds.smugmug.com/
Oly and other .. Gear test samples - even RB-67 shots!:
http://photohounds.smugmug.com/Gear-tests
How DO OMDs cope with dim-light action and smoke?
http://photohounds.smugmug.com/Performing-arts - and at the longer end
http://photohounds.smugmug.com/Gear-tests/Zuiko-40150-f28-PRO/
.

 

[RichRMA]

I can see where a high price could come from. That lens design is highly complex.

 

[Astrotripper]

[ snip ]

It's really not surprising that a specialty lens for a niche system is expensive. It's totally expected. With a pricing like that, I actually think it's pretty good. Provided it's optically superb, like their 150/2 for 4/3 system was. And Oly has a pretty good track record with their PRO line, so I'm pretty sure this one will be a masterpiece.

Of course this delay could mean Panasonic will beat Olympus to launch, which will put further pressure on Oly.

I wonder about that. Quite a bit different lenses, aimed at different customers.

OFF your high (presumably FMF) horse, please sir.

?????

Firstly, ALL camera sales are being utterly FLOGGED by sales of phones, many of which which have more than acceptable results for the most common photographic purposes (casual people and record shots).

What does that have to do with specialty lenses for niche markets?

Secondly, for many former buyers, their 8MP P&S does not NEED replacement.

Again, how is that relevant? You're not trying to tell me that 8MP P&S can replace an E-M1 with Olympus 300/4 mounted on it, do you?

Thirdly, the niche you are deriding is expanding (ever so slightly) in a declining market.

Deriding? What are you talking about? Do you even know what that word means?

 

[Astrotripper]

Also, maybe (please correct me if I'm wrong) the quality of a lens for the 4/3 sensor has to be better than that of a lens for a FF in order to give the same IQ (and more expensive to obtain)

I would assume this was the case in the past. But with the increasing resolution of larger sensors, the same can be said for new lenses for APS-C and FF. Modern lenses for those formats need to be made good enough for current and future high resolution sensors that are getting close to MFT in terms of pixel density. So I would say they need to be made with similar precision and technical quality as MFT lenses. And since more glass is involved, they will also be more expensive to make.

And like with anything, there's progress in the field of optics as well. New coatings, novel use of optics, new materials, new manufacturing processes. Some things probably got much cheaper over the time, while others allow to reach quality that was very hard with old technologies. And so on. It's all probably much more complicated than seems from outside.

Maybe the new Nikkor 300/4 is a good example of all that. A modern lens packed with new technologies, quite a bit more expensive (and better) than its older sibling. I think it's going to be a new trend. We'll see some old lens designs replaced by modern versions that offer better performance on those shiny new cameras, at a higher price point.

 

[Colin K. Work]

But in the end Olympus are not the tooth fairy and although the fans will wish a price that they can make themself afford they surely don't want Olympus to sell the 300/4 at a loss and risk financial disaster. I tend to like my favourite suppliers to make a profit so that they can stay in business and keep making product that delights me.

 

[Astrotripper]

But I prefer to pay for actual materials and labour

It doesn't work that way. No company will sell you their stuff for the cost of materials and labour. At least no company that wants to turn a profit. And do you think the R&D and prototyping stage is free? I bet by the time everything is ready for production, the project already cost Olympus couple of million bucks.

Of course, but that cost applies to everything - where did the R&D cost go for the other PRO lenses which came in at lower than generally expected prices?

It boils down to the expectations I would guess. I think it's much trickier to put a price tag on such a specialty lens, than the 12-40 for example. And people will have different expectations, depending on who you ask. It's the same with the 8/1.8 fish-eye. For me, it's the most interesting lens in the whole PRO lineup, and the only one I really want. And a one that I will eventually get. Contrast that to many others, that don't even see a point of such a lens existing, much less being sold at a premium price.

But you've got a point with the R&D cost for other lenses. I would guess the difference is that Olympus is expecting the market for this one to be significantly smaller and the price reflects that? Probably the same with the fish-eye.

And you know what? I wonder if this rumor is not deliberately spread by Olympus to see the reaction.

And while we're at asking questions. Why is this 300/4 so late I wonder? It's been announced ages ago, and every time we're hearing about it, is in the context of it being "delayed". I'm kinda curious what's going on there behind the scenes. Was there some design change in the process or something?

The new 300/4 from Nikon is 2000 EUR, so why is Olympus introducing their 300/4 for the same or lower price such a huge deal? [...]

The Nikon is introducing new technology. Yes, it may be a superior lens worth the extra price. I agree we need to wait and see.

And we still don't know all that much about the Oly lens. Maybe they do in fact have an ace up their sleeve and it does use some new technology or something (why does it take so long?). Who knows.

Here were Olympus has to put up or shut up. If they want to attract the professional market, they have to take on the competition on their own ground.

You mean they should have announced 300mm f/2 for $10,000?

Well they already have the 300 2.8. This fills a major gap. But yes, in due course, if Oly has the pro aspirations they claim, some pretty extreme lenses will be required.

You know, I wonder about that. I mean, sure, you're right assuming they want to enter that market. But I'm not so sure if Olympus really wants to aspire to the highest level of the pro market. The one that is dominated by Canon and Nikon, with their $15k lenses. I actually doubt it's even possible for them to penetrate that. And with professional photography business shrinking (photojournalism for example), there's less and less clients for such lenses.

Again, we're talking sub 2000 here. Less than any pro-grade FF body. Less than a lot of pro-grade FF lenses.

I'm not bothered by the actual price. If its better than the Panny and meaningfully better than an adapted lens, I'll buy it. But I think Oly is making a mistake. If the price is maybe 30% less, it would fly off the shelves - at this price point I think they'll struggle

A fair point. I think that if they'll miss the target and end up pricing it too high (the market will quickly verify that), they'll just drop the price or make some other promotion. Like bundling the lens with TC or something. What I'm hoping for is that the rumor is true in that the price will be sub-2000. If they launch at >2000, than yeah, I would fully agree with you. It's kind of a psychological barrier I guess.

While an adapted lens may not be as good, when the money for glass gets serious, another very real option is to buy a different body. So the Canon (or Nikon) lens option could lead to people going back to DSLRs to do the job.

[...]

But where your argument fails is the economic calculation. Why do you think spending $2000 for a Nikon body and a 300/4 lens is more cost effective than spending $2000 on a lens for your existing system? [...]

Except with DSLR I don't have to buy new. Now it might not be fair to compare a new Oly lens with a used Canon L, but the reality is that's a viable option which Oly should take into account.

Good point. But you usually can't compete with second-hand market. Regardless of who you are and at what price you want to launch your product. Even Canon releasing new versions of their lenses can't beat that no matter what they would do. The only thing they can do is deliver a superior product that offers extra value vs the older and cheaper or second-hand alternatives. It's the same for Olympus.

But that's also one of the reasons why I don't think Olympus wants or even can penetrate the pro market at the highest level. That's why this 300mm is f/4 and below $2k (assuming it is) and not f/2.8 for $5k. They have some experience in that regard, with the 4/3 system.

 

[Phocal]

It was refurbished, but I got an extra 4 year warranty on top of the 3 month warranty it came with!

The IQ is quite nice. With the 1.4x and the 2x TC are great, and the rear polarizer is great too.

Did you get a return with full refund warranty? That photo is soft and would end up in my trash bin, there is nothing sharp about the eye at all.

 

[Clayton1985]

Oh man, if it is June next year, I am going to migrate to a different system for my birding.

this just sucks, the Nikon 7200 and the 300 f4 pz is beginning to look more and more attractive.

dont care about the cost, love my em1, but missing tomany shots with old, mf lenses. The only 75-300 don't really satisfy me.

i hope it still comes in November.

--
"Anything worth doing is worth doing poorly until you learn to do it well."
-- Zig Ziglar
https://www.flickr.com/photos/126558841@N07/

I've probably got this wrong. The Nikon D7200 is APS-C format, so that a Nikon 300mm would be the same as a 200mm on M43. The Nikon would need a 450 to equal the new 300!

Peter Del

The D7200 is 24mp which should also be considered since you could crop to 16mp to equal the E-M1.

It doesn't actually work like that ... ;-)

Yes it actually does ;-)

 

[Phocal]

M43 Rumours are saying a "spring" (June ) release for the 300 at between 1799 - 1999 euros.

If true, I think Olympus have got the pricing wrong. That's about 50% more than a Canon 300 f4 LIS ... that would pay for an adaptor; and of course there are plenty of good used Canon 300s to be had.

Can't see the justification - both (presumably) use exotic glass as required and the Canon has the added cost of incorporating IS.

Of course this delay could mean Panasonic will beat Olympus to launch, which will put further pressure on Oly.

 

[ilsiu]

And you know what? I wonder if this rumor is not deliberately spread by Olympus to see the reaction...

If that's the case, my reaction is the rumored price is too high. Needs to be no more than $1500. Do you hear me, Olympus

 

[Dan]

I said this moons ago at $1495.99 its a winner and anything approaching $2,000 it's a dud.

Of course the lens needs to perform...you can't sell garbage just because it's cheap especially when it's labeled PRO.

Anyhow, time will tell...at $1495.99 I probably order one within a week of it's release at $2000 I am probably buying something for my Nikon system.

The 200 - 500 f5.6 Nikon seems to be getting very favorable reviews and costs even less than $1495.99...maybe I should just get that and crop a little or crop a lot and have 1500 mm lens like folks like to think this 300 is a 600.



Dan