How does this lens compare to the Olympus Zukio 70-300 f4.0-5.6 Lens? As far as I can tell, the 70-300 is a faster lens, but the 75-300 costs more!
1069237
Sharper by a discernible amount. Lighter! Faster focusing. 70-300 maintains a significant advantage in close focusing though. I have both lenses. If you want to shoot bugs and flowers, 70-300 is the way to go. Birds, sports, the moon, 75-300.
1069238
I can't speak to that, but I'm fairly finicky about the glass I use (I mostly shoot olympus m4/3 primes), and I really like this 75-300 lens. With good light, you can get some stunning images of wildlife, landscapes, and the moon! I've even used it indoors (with the olympus 600r) and gotten some fantastic shots as well. Olympus used nice glass in this lens. While it's not going to be on my camera every day, it's great for specific applications.
1069239
The original Olympus lens was desgined for the 4/3rds cameras and not the Micro 4/3rds.You'll need an adapter to get the lens to mount and depending on the adapter you may or may not have autofocus. With the newer 75-300 you are up and running as soon as you pop the lens on your Micro 4/3rds body.
1069240
I not used the earlier model, but Olympus claims that the 75-300mm is an improved version. All of the review say the same. It is a good lens, especially considering the small size and weight. A couple of tips: avoid shooting at either widest or longest zoom (shoot at 80-275mm), shoot at f8 and use a tripod or monopod to steady the shot and it takes very good images.
1069241
I believe the 70-300 is for the older 4/3 standard, & would require an adapter for a micro 4/3 camera, which would slow its focusing considerably.
1069242
The Zukio 70-300 f4.0-5.6 lens is a Four Thirds Lens for the Olympus E- DSLR Systems, while the Zukio 75-300 f4.8-6.7 is a Micro Four Thirds lens, a smaller and more compact lens for the Olympus OMD systems. Yes the 70-300 is faster, but it is bigger. I had that lens with my E-510, and while it works great with a tripod it's hard to handle without one. However, I can easily manage the 75-300 with my OM-D E-M5 camera and I get excellent results.Hope this helps.Ulf Wolf
1069243
I own both. This is sharper and faster to focus than the 70-300. With either lens, "faster" is not a consideration. Both lenses are sharpest at f8 and require plenty of bright light. BTW, the lens hood from the 70-300 works on this version for those wondering...
1345982
I'm starting to think Sony has something to do with this. It is my understanding that Sony owns a piece of Tamron, and Tamron makes some lenses for Sony (55-200 and 18-250). It may be that Sony does not want this lens to compete with it's 70-300 G since the Tamron is nearly half the price. I was looking for this lens to replace the 70-300G, after two bad copies I got rid of it, it's not worth $800.
1239752
The 85 is going to give you a tighter shot. I have the 35 and it is a beautiful lens. I would highly suggest Rokinon, great glass for the price!
2186825
Actually, most reviews show the Sony 28-70 to be a better lens. Sony 28-70 is sharper at most focal lengths, has less vignetting. The only benefit of Zeiss 24-70 is that's 4mm wider.
1790371
Yes, the two lenses are worlds apart. The 70-300 is a top quality 'prosumer' lens, intended for advanced amateurs and pros on a budget; worth every penny! The 55-200 is an affordable, 'entry level' lens and an excellent value.
1337629
Image quality between the 24-70 and 28-75 is leaps and bounds. The 24-70 is just as sharp as Canons 24-70 version. Not to mention having VC. Definitely worth it if you have the money. I owned the 28-75 and it was a great lens for what is was but the 24-70 is such a step up in my opinion. Cheers
578159
Hello Paul, I have the Sony nex 5 camera and I need a lense with a higher zoom, which do you recommed??the 350 dollar one or the 800 dollar one?? and what is the difference between the too??Thanks
1773306
I have the Oly 45 and 75, and the panasonic 25 and 12. The 75 is regarded and one of the finest lens around, and its very sharp, but its $900, and the focal length isn't always practical. For the money, the 45mm is my favorite. Its inexpensive and very sharp. When you hold it in your hand, honestly, it looks a little cheep but the results are excellent.
1316305
Yes. They are about the same although you lose a stop of aperture with the 70-300. The maximum aperture is f/5.6 instead of f/4. The 70-300 lens is only f/4 near the 70mm end. Otherwise, optically in terms of sharpness, it's about the same.
1809711
since the aperture (f) is the same for both, the difference is the zoom. the 75 starts magnified more and can zoom in more than a 50-250. so 75-300 starts closer to the object and ends farther
1773305
There is no rival to the 75mm 1.8 Olympus Lens currently. It's a great short-telephoto/portrait lens and it is not too bulky. The f2.8 12-40 PRO lens is sufficiently good that it is - in my opinion - somewhat wasteful to have additional wide angles unless you really need a F1.8.
2166216
Hi, the lens is Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 14-42mm 1:3.5-5.6 II R. Anyway, I've tried both and seems like there's no difference at all. I recommend that after you bought this camera, buy other lens to use instead of this one.
305766
The 28 1.8 is sharp starting at f2.2 and better corrected. At 1.8 it is a little soft. Distortion is better than 28-300 and the lens is significantly lighter but just as well made.
1380192
Partially in response to Paula J's answer below, I have had both lenses. The 70-300L is actually sharper in the center than the fixed 300L prime. The 300L prime is sharper on the edges and corners. If you want the F4 aperture at 300mm, then you have to go with the prime. If you don't need this, then newer 70-300L. It is lighter, more compact, has a better image stabilizer and gives you the versatility of a zoom.
155653
The Sony is a LITTLE better lens, but a lot more expensive. Neither is crazy sharp. Both are sharp enough for most people in most circumstances.
704391
Many say the 75-300 isn't a very good lens but I disagree. I own one and have excellent results with mine. I also own the t3i and it's an excellent camera for both stills and video... now that I have it I won't go to any other... why? The t3i has everything I want in a camera.
403395
Yes, the length changes depending on the focusing distance. The 300mm f4 has internal focusing and also focuses closer. I found the 300 to be a much better lens overall even though the field of view is narrower. Of course it is more expensive but I love it.