New Lens (70-300 zuiko)

[AnthonyB]

I just ordered the 70-300 (4.0-5.6) zuiko lens and im just wondering if anybody has any opinions on it , I will mainly be using it for wildlife photography

 

[LightSpeed]

It's probably as good or better than the other lenses in this class. Common complaints are that it's heavy. People are complaining about something that weighs a pound and 4 ounces. Personally I like heavy. Heavy gives you a quality feel. The people complaining about heavy have no idea of the main benefit that a heavy lens gives. You see when you push the shutter release on your camera an actuation occurs, this actuation creates torque which in turn moves the camera. A heavier lens dampens this effect for a more steady shot especially when hand holding.

Shooting with a camera is much like shooting for accuracy with a rifle. A rifle creates recoil. In an accuracy situation you want to minimize recoil,"and how do you do that? With weight. Mercury tubes, muzzle breaks, muzzle weights, weighted tuners and whatnot. A common mistake made with cameras when hand holding is jerking the shutter release button and abruptly moving the camera and lens. You want to think of your shutter release button as a fine Timney or Arnold Jewel, trigger. Gently squeeze with steady pressure while slowly exhaling. This is how you get good sharp hand held images at 1/30 sec shutter speeds.

People complaining about a camera, and a lens and a couple of pounds need to hit the gym.

 

[Stradawhovious]

Shooting with a camera is much like shooting for accuracy with a rifle. A rifle creates recoil. In an accuracy situation you want to minimize recoil,"and how do you do that? With weight. Mercury tubes, muzzle breaks, muzzle weights, weighted tuners and whatnot.

Yeah, but you're not going to want to lug all that crap with you in the field when hunting......

To continue the parallel, From a bench for accuracy, I use an 18lb rifle. My field rifle (for hunting, kind of like shooting wildlife with a camera) weighs less than half that. Stuff gets heavy quick when you have to carry it around. Even stuff that would otherwise seem light.

The right tool for one job isn't always the right tool for another.

Just sayin'.

Let us know what you think of the lens when you get it!

 

[LightSpeed]

Shooting with a camera is much like shooting for accuracy with a rifle. A rifle creates recoil. In an accuracy situation you want to minimize recoil,"and how do you do that? With weight. Mercury tubes, muzzle breaks, muzzle weights, weighted tuners and whatnot.

Yeah, but you're not going to want to lug all that crap with you in the field when hunting......

To continue the parallel, From a bench for accuracy, I use an 18lb rifle. My field rifle (for hunting, kind of like shooting wildlife with a camera) weighs less than half that. Stuff gets heavy quick when you have to carry it around. Even stuff that would otherwise seem light.

The right tool for one job isn't always the right tool for another.

The extra weight as you know allows for holding the camera more steady, as well. It's a one pound 4 ounce lens as opposed to a 14 ( rough estimate on a lighter version) ounce lens. That bit of extra weight does more good than harm, in my opinion.

 

[Stradawhovious]

The extra weight as you know allows for holding the camera more steady, as well.

True........ well....... partially true. If that weight is at or right up near the body yes. Put that same weight out at the end of the lens, and its not going to do you any favors unless you're on a tripod or monopod.

Same with the rifle. Put a 12 oz muzzle brake out at the end of a 24" barrel and you won't hold MOA to save your life without a bench or sticks. Stick 1.5lbs of lead in the stock, and you will be on target all day.

It may not be a lot of weight, but depending on how its dispersed it can surely make a difference.

 

[LightSpeed]

The extra weight as you know allows for holding the camera more steady, as well.

True........ well....... partially true. If that weight is at or right up near the body yes. Put that same weight out at the end of the lens, and its not going to do you any favors unless you're on a tripod or monopod.

True enough. Especially the references to benchrest. On the other hand though, one would typically hold the camera with the right hand while supporting the lens with the left hand , much like you'd discharge a rifle. The camera to lens balance is good and weight distribution in this case would not seem to be an issue.

 

[Olympus E300]

While I haven't put my 70-300mm lens through vigorous testing yet (time is tight these days) I have found that it is a very nice lens. I to like the "heft" to it and like others, I find the "heft" adds to the lens (if nothing else it projects a sense of quality). As mentioned I haven't had much time to get outdoors with this lens - I really wanted to this hunting season, however, my divorce got in the way (still is). As a result I've only been able to find the time to shoot indoors (my kids mostly). For that reason, today I just bought the Zuiko 14-54mm f/2.8-3.5 series I.

What little experience I do have with the 70-300mm and the knowledge that I have of it, I would definately buy it again if something were to happen to my current one.

Cheers!
- Daniel

 

[AnthonyB]

Thanks guys, as for the extra weight it doesnt really bother me that much,I mainly like the macro capabilities, for the price (hopefully) I cant go wrong with it

Soon as it gets here I will post some shots ant let you know what I think of it, granted I'm no pro but I try to be lol

 

[medic24]

I'm happy to finally see another olympus user!

 

[AnthonyB]

Yea there isn't very many of us lol