Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 300 mm F4.0 PRO Lens, Telephoto Zoom, Suitable for All MFT Cameras (Olympus OM-D & PEN Models, Panasonic G Series), Black

Product Information

If 300mm is simply not enough reach, the Olympus MC-14 and Olympus MC-20 are both compatible with the Olympus 300mm f/4.0 IS PRO. These teleconverters multiply the focal length by a factor of 1.4 and 2 respectively.

No, that’s not true. The aperture will be THE SAME. If you measure the exposure trough this lens wide open on any M4/3 camera, and then the same scene with any FF 300 or 600mm lens open to f/4 and mounted on any FF camera – with same ISO you’ll get the same exposure time as on Olympus. Aperture is a physical property of lens, not a sensor. F/4 lens will be always f/4, no matter how big is the sensor inside the camera you’ll mount it on: for example, if I mount my full frame 70-200/2.8 Pentax lens on K-1 II or my APS-C K-3 III – it always will be f/2.8 maximum aperture lens. Theres obviously a lot more to think about with this combination. Im interested to see how its close focusing (down to 1.4 metres would you believe) works for dragonflies and other small subjects like lizards, and theres also still the question of how well the auto focus performs over time compared to equivalent DSLR combos. The stabilisation on the lens combined with the camera body stabilisation continues to amaze me to the point where I rarely take a tripod out with me now. Additionally, when this lens is paired with the newer Olympus bodies like the OM-1, the lens and camera work superbly together with excellent image stabilization and autofocus. The stabilization is most effective when paired with Olympus bodies, where synchronized image stabilization will give you up to 6 stops stabilization. Wildlife photography simply became much easier with a modern lens/camera combo like this. Close Focusing Ability

Thus, it makes sense to say that a 300 f/4 on micro four thirds is like a 600 f/8 on full-frame, when you are talking about equalized viewing size in terms of both DOF and noise/total light gathering! (Not light gathering per unit area) Autofocus becomes slightly slower with the teleconverters, especially in challenging conditions. Again, in my tests, the Olympus 300mm f/4.0 IS PRO on its own focused on the distant wall in 0.52 seconds on average. With the MC-14, that jumped to 0.72 seconds, and with the MC-20, it took 0.87 seconds on average to focus on the same wall in the same light conditions. This difference was definitely apparent when using the teleconverters in real-world situations, too. I would recommend using them only when the light is plentiful. DC-G9 + M.300mm f/4 + MC-14 @ 420mm, ISO 400, 1/400, f/5.6 In the Field: Wildlife Photography This first shot of a swift in flight I'm particularly pleased with and for me confirms that the Olympus MFT set up can now compete with Canon and Nikon for shooting wildlife. At the time these shots were taken, I was still waiting for the teleconverter to arrive, so the shots were with just the 300mm lens, mounted on an Olympus EM-5 MKII. Having used this lens for 2.5 years now, I can second what has been written so far. I would like to add the following positive aspects

Jessops kindly replaced the lens three times and eventually got it nearly right. I am not 100% happy with it yet. I should add that uploading the lower image to my blog seemed to soften it a bit, the image is actually even sharper than this. As a macro and herp photographer, I am also impressed by the 1.4m minimum focusing distance on the Olympus 300mm f/4. At such a close range, this allows for an image reproduction ratio of 1:4, which is much greater than you’ll usually find on a long telephoto lens. Combined with the maximum aperture, this can create a very nice bokeh and a ‘telephoto look’ for portraits of smaller animals. And the 2x crop factor of Micro Four Thirds means you can fill the frame with very small subjects. DC-G9 + OLYMPUS M.300mm f/4 @ 300mm, ISO 125, 1/200, f/4.0 Competition The lens was so sharp, I even found moire on birds feathers, an issue I’d never encountered before! DC-G9 + OLYMPUS M.300mm f/4 @ 300mm, ISO 800, 1/500, f/4.0 BokehAs for the lenses, the Olympus holds its own. It is sharper then both Nikon’s (not surprised by that – all the Olympus pro glass is super sharp. The 300mm F/4 is also designed for optimal use with the tiny Olympus MC-14 teleconverter, which turns it into a 420mm F/5.6 lens, equivalent to a 840mm field of view. The obligatory Moon shot below should demonstrate the difference. I think it’s pretty clear what Nicholas is saying here. It’s not just the DOF that is changed, but also total light gathering capacity. In other words, if all else is equal (i.e. exactly the same subject and distance, light, etc.), a 600 f/4 lens on full-frame will gather much more light than a 300 f/4 on micro four thirds. This matters especially in the case of wildlife: in low-light scenarios, a 600 f/4 shot on full-frame will be much less noisy than a 300 f/4 shot on micro four thirds, where both shots have been equalized to the same viewing size.

Being able to focus so closely, and setting the focus limiter to focus between 1.4m to 4m meant I could capture some dragonflies while waiting for the kingfishers. (My friend Natalia gets full credit for spotting these. That girl has eagle eyes.) The Olympus 300mm f/4.0 IS PRO is admittedly an expensive lens. Does it’s performance make up for the high price tag? Sharpness I found the 300mm f/4 to performed superbly in low light, a problem often encountered by wildlife photographers, because the f/4 maximum aperture is higher than you’ll usually find at 300mm for the M4/3 system. I found myself able to shoot well after sunset and still handhold my shots. At times, I was shooting at slow speeds between 1/60th and 1/100th and still catching crisp photos. The image stabilization system is definitely working hard. Many of these were shot with the MC-14 teleconverter attached to the lens and this certainly enabled me to keep a good distance away from my subjects, especially the deer (although they can spot you a mile off). The teleconverter seems to slow the autofocus down a tad but not to the detriment of acquiring these images.For good measure, I did a simple autofocus test with the OM-1 to see how long it took to focus from the minimum focusing distance to a distant wall. I did the same with the Olympus 100-400 f/5-6.3 and the Olympus 100-300 f/4-5.6. These are my results.

You’re right in the sense that a 300mm f/4 lens will always be 300mm f/4, regardless of the sensor behind it – but the concept of a crop factor is still useful in practical terms. Nicholas is right that it applies to both focal length and aperture. (It also applies to ISO, but with a [crop factorThat was an interesting article, and I was particularly interested in your size comparisons. This lens isn’t on my wish-list since i don’t usually need that focal length, but I thought that your photographs were very good. In fact, it inspired me run around the house taking pictures of all of our cushions. Just kidding – I really did enjoy seeing your photos. There is a minute improvement in sharpness between f/4.0 and f/5.6 which is really only noticeable in lab-like conditions. I was able to take full advantage of the f/4.0 maximum aperture without worrying about paying a price in sharpness. I believe the Olympus 300mm f/4.0 IS PRO is an excellent telephoto lens for wildlife. Aside from the Olympus 100-400 f/4.5 TC1.25X IS PRO, this lens is likely the best lens for wildlife photography for Micro Four Thirds. The only handling flaw I noticed in my time with this lens involves the focus ring. The ring rotates very smoothly, but the lens easily switches from autofocus to manual-only by sliding the focus ring into the manual position. Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.