I agree, the Panasonic 100-300 version II will be faster with AF vs the older version I lens. And the f/4-5.6 aperture will allow for lower ISO at the short and long end vs the Olympus 75-300 f/4.8-6.7. That difference is about one stop of ISO, which can be important when shooting at critical higher ISOs for faster shutter speed. As for depth of field, the aperture difference will not be that much at telephoto and super telephoto ranges. Also, the 100-250mm range of the Panasonic produces the best range of optical performance for this lens. Given the very small changes between this lens and its previous generation, it's worth reading our review of that lens, here.) The Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 lens may have a lot of plastic parts, but the lens mount is, thankfully, made of metal. Olympus does not claim any sort of weather resistance for this lens, and indeed you cannot see a rubber seal around the mount (note that no current Micro Four Thirds camera is weather sealed anyway). The Olympus 75-300 mm for sale since the end of 2010. The unique feature of this compact lens’ is its wide zoom range, corresponding to a viewing angle of a 150-600 mm zoom lens on a camera with a full-frame sensor. Couple that enormous zoom range with modest dimensions plus low weight, and you have a lens that you always can take with you, without any shoulder complaints.

At the 75mm end of the zoom range, the diagonal angle of view is 16 degrees, equivalent to that of a 150mm lens in a 35mm system. Going by these only it would appear the Oly is the superior lens until you get to CA @ full extension. As we know, most lenses get soft at the long end and these are no exception, but it looks like the Oly will perform better in the 200-250 range. Still, the CA on the Oly at full extension is pretty significant and I'd expect that to be growing as you zoom. Travel photography means photographing in cities and the small lens doesn’t attract attention. Imagine you sit in a cozy cafeteria and see a bird from a window. If you take out a bazooka-size telephoto lens – everybody in the cafeteria would look at you. This show was actually made from a window Light pollution and fogYou do realise Jimmy that the ois on the 100-300 only works in conjunction with in body ois on Panasonic cameras. The IS on your EM1 Mk2 body will be far superior to the OIS on just the lens itself. Olympus 75-300mm F/4.8-6.7 II has a lot of limitations, but it does create good value, considering its price. It especially useful when you need a compact super-telephoto. It could be a good tool for someone who doesn’t need 300mm often and therefore doesn’t want to buy an expensive specialized lens.

in terms of sharpness, both are very good on the short end (oly at 75 is quite sharp), at max 300, with good technique, both are acceptably sharp. 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.I wonder, too. These lenses do need plenty of light and stability. FWIW, I remember the Olympus lens being more susceptible to shake and vibrations. It was very sharp in most of the range, but struggled in comparison with my other lenses. I could get reasonably sharp images at 300mm, but not easily with the cameras I was using at the time (E-M10, E-M5 II, GX85). And the best images weren't nearly as sharp as what the Panasonic lens gives me hand-held at 300mm with little effort. I tried several copies of the Olympus lens: there was significant copy variation but not affecting sharpness. So I think it's a combination of technique, stabilization, and lens characteristics. I don't use a hood, but have tested with tripods, bean bags, etc. Yeah that's what I was thinking too. Now I just need to figure out how much I value weathersealing... A steep zoom cam then requires more force to turn (leverage is working against you).​I wish they would extend the throw to close to 180 degrees, to reduce the cam angle and thus the effort needed to turn the zoom ring. My advice would be to get either lens second hand and see if it fits your needs. If it does not, use the money you saved towards the Pana / Oly 100-400.

That being said the Olympus 75-300-II is sharper than the Panasonic 100-300 because it doesn't have the moving OIS unit inside. Overall neither is particularly sharp at 300mm. The previous generation of the lens. There isn't a huge difference here: the new lens is a bit sharper at 150mm, CA is improved, and there's slightly less corner shading. Here is my review of Olympus 75-300mm F/4.8-6.7 II, a lens for Micro 4/3 mount.(Full name: Olympus M. Zuiko 75-300mm F/4.8-6.7 II) I can say that there is significant sample variation of the Olympus mkI - the first one I had was poor at 300mm - not sharp at all beyond about 250mm - and I just assumed that was how the lens was. However when I acquired a second copy it was so much better - really biting sharp at 300mm wide open.Diffraction limiting sets in at ƒ/11, though the results at the shorter focal lengths aren't immediately obvious until ƒ/16 or ƒ/22, where we note very soft results across the frame (especially at 300mm).