Olympus EZ-M7530 M.Zuiko Digital 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 Lens II, suitable for all MFT cameras (Olympus OM-D & PEN models, Panasonic G series), black

Product Information

Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III + Olympus M.Zuiko 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 II (300mm, 1/125 sec, f/6.7, ISO200) (Image credit: James Artaius) Olympus M.Zuiko 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 II: Build and handling

I have the same profession as you but I’m near retirement. I live in Sweden. I have worked as photographer many years ago before changing profession but it has always been a great interest of mine. Our kids are grown up and we got a dog that’s forcing us to go for several long walks each day. This gives me a great opportunity to exert photography! What about travel? It may take a bit of both (sport/wildlife), but I believe these aren’t the main focus of a travel photographer (unless you do wildlife safari or something, or specialize in outdoors). A professional super-telephoto lens for a full-frame is thousands of Euros in price and, on average, it is more than 2.5 kg in weight. Too heavy and too expensive for a piece of gear that is used occasionally. Sharpness of the Olympus 75-300 mm in a nutshell: the longer the focal length the lower the sharpness. Here you see a practical example of a jpg image made at a focal length of 300 mm. Not very sharp, but certainly acceptable. I have got mixed feelings about the 12-50mm. It is one of the most versatile lenses I own and serves the purpose of buying the OM-D (E-M5). But it isn’t sharp! I don’t have dogs, but I have two girls below 5yrs 🙂Images were captured in RAW and was examined at 100% magnification in Aperture, Lightroom and Photoshop. I know that the Pana or Oly 100-400mm could be better options, but tbh i don't have the budget for those lenses, i prefer something light/small and 300mm would be more then enaught for my use.

This is one area in which Olympus 75-100 wins hands down with no noticeable CA around hard, high-contrast edges (e.g. tree branches against the sky) compared to my Panasonic 100-300. I've taken images stopped down to f/11 at 300mm for depth of field and the image quality is still very good. Both lenses seem to be less sharp at the 300mm end, but I'm thinking if I can get good results in the 200-250 range, then it is still a worthy upgrade from my current 40-150.If your subject moves fast (birds and animals often do), you have to raise shutter speed. And obviously, with F/4.8-6.7, you are at risk of raising ISO. And Micro 4/3’s main disadvantage is poor high ISO performance. Focusing speed is considerably higher than on the Panasonic lens. The lens also supports the focus peaking/magnification feature of my Olympus bodies which comes in so handy when you have to focus on a subject partly obscured by branches. Hi-res mode. Takes several images sequentially and produces the image of higher resolution. This has the potential to crop and therefore have even more reach. The 100-300 II got a newer focus motor, aperture mechanism, and compatibility with newer IBIS (Dual I.S.2 with Panasonic bodies). So focusing is faster compared to version I and the frame rate is improved. A faster and more accurate AF contributes to sharper pictures. Dual I.S.2 with Panasonic bodies is much more efficient than the IBIS of Olympus cameras at 300mm. Of course, we all need to train ourselves out of the habit of calling them the best Olympus lenses, since the brand is now officially called OM System. The latest lenses, for example, are the OM System M.Zuiko 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro II and the OM System M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/4 Pro.