Joined in 2023 
82 
63 About this deal
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. 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. 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. 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.
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. Jessops kindly replaced the lens three times and eventually got it nearly right. I am not 100% happy with it yet. Useful review. I am thinking of pairing it to my recently acquired GH5. I am using a PL100-400 with some good results (better now with the GH5). I just prefer primes - as they will (obviously) always be sharper - and the f4 wide aperture is also a big, big bonus. The 300mm focal length may not sound very long at first, until you consider the 2x crop factor and high pixel density of Micro Four Thirds – it’s a 600mm full-frame equivalent. However, keep in mind that crop factors also apply to aperture; so, using this lens is akin to using a 600mm f/8 on full-frame. I’m not complaining – that’s simply why this lens is so much smaller, lighter, and less expensive than a full-frame 600mm f/4. DC-G9 + OLYMPUS M.300mm f/4 @ 300mm, ISO 500, 1/200, f/4.0 Performance I greatly prefer the Nikon combo as well. Note that I shoot both Nikon and Olympus and own / love the 300 F4. Also note that I do not own the 300pf TV combo. I do have both the Nikon 200-400 F4 and the 80-400.
As 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. I have both a Nikon D810 & Olympus OMD EM1.2 & looking at getting a wildlife lens. The Olympus 300mm f4 is certainly a useful option, but looking at the images in this article, I’m concerned about the quality. Another option for me would be the Nikon 300mm f4 PF with a 2x t/c. This option would be about the same size, weight & price of the Olympus offering, albeit without the excellent Olympus stabilization & without the further option of a 1.4 t/c on top. Now, as this is a user experience as opposed to a generic review you won’t find test charts, corner crops and sharpness comparisons. That’s simply not an effective or enjoyable use of Alpha Whiskey’s 24 hours. I don’t have a gear fetish or spend hours fantasising about features on a lens or camera; I simply like to go out and shoot. Other reviewers of this lens have shot copious examples of its sharpness and I won’t have anything original to add. It’s pretty sharp. This is the fabric of a cushion cover at 100% crop at F/4. The surface was not completely flat and depth of field was shallow enough that some parts of the image are out of focus.
I would like to thank Olympus for loaning the lens to me to try out and write up. I hope I have honoured their generosity with some decent 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. 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) 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 However, keep in mind that crop factors also apply to aperture; so, using this lens is akin to using a 600mm f/8 on full-frame.’That 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. Olympus sure has some sexy lenses can’t argue about that. Maybe I’ll try 4/3 at some point, after I’m done with Fuji. ;) 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 I've now had the 300mm F4 Pro for a little over 3 months. The main development has been that I've upgraded to the Olympus E-M1 MKII as the auto focus capability of the E-M5 MKII just wasn't up to birds in flight, which was something I was keen to have a go at. No one could ever accuse Alpha Whiskey of being a gearhead or techie (or even a photographer for that matter), but I obviously appreciate that certain lenses enable one to capture certain subjects with greater ease and accessibility. This lens was ample proof of that.
Great Deal 
New Comment