<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: (UPDATED FT5) First picture of the new 75-300mm. More pics from XZ-10</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-first-picture-of-the-new-75-300mm/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-first-picture-of-the-new-75-300mm/</link>
	<description>Panasonic and Olympus Digital Camera News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:21:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: goblin</title>
		<link>http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-first-picture-of-the-new-75-300mm/comment-page-1/#comment-268128</link>
		<dc:creator>goblin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2013 20:12:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.43rumors.com/?p=36371#comment-268128</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[So many comments, so little from people who have seen the current 75-300mm elsewhere than on a photo...

A few things:

- The current 75-300mm DOES exist in both black and white versions, which cost the same price.

- On a picture, the 75-300mm is the ugliest lens ever made, slow aperture and overpriced.

- In hand, the 75-300mm is the ugliest lens ever made, which becomes the ultimate weapon once put on an OM-D.

- Optically, this lens is absolutely second to none, included at 300mm, where it is expected to be most used. Yes, it is way more expensive than the 4/3 70-300mm, but it&#039;s better optically at 300mm (the 70-300mm is good till ~280mm, then gives up in the last 20mm or so. It is light as a feather, it is good, it is small.

- The current 75-300mm IS a fast focusing lens. I don&#039;t see how much faster it should get.

The only caveat is that it is best matched to an OM-D. Simply better stabilization. It is fun on my G3 as well, but compared to my OM-D - I am systematically a few ISO levels higher with the G3, due to the lack of in body stabilization.

From the picture, it can be seen that the new one has the same minimum focusing distance, which sounds like no internal changes. I&#039;m ok with that.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So many comments, so little from people who have seen the current 75-300mm elsewhere than on a photo&#8230;</p>
<p>A few things:</p>
<p>- The current 75-300mm DOES exist in both black and white versions, which cost the same price.</p>
<p>- On a picture, the 75-300mm is the ugliest lens ever made, slow aperture and overpriced.</p>
<p>- In hand, the 75-300mm is the ugliest lens ever made, which becomes the ultimate weapon once put on an OM-D.</p>
<p>- Optically, this lens is absolutely second to none, included at 300mm, where it is expected to be most used. Yes, it is way more expensive than the 4/3 70-300mm, but it&#8217;s better optically at 300mm (the 70-300mm is good till ~280mm, then gives up in the last 20mm or so. It is light as a feather, it is good, it is small.</p>
<p>- The current 75-300mm IS a fast focusing lens. I don&#8217;t see how much faster it should get.</p>
<p>The only caveat is that it is best matched to an OM-D. Simply better stabilization. It is fun on my G3 as well, but compared to my OM-D &#8211; I am systematically a few ISO levels higher with the G3, due to the lack of in body stabilization.</p>
<p>From the picture, it can be seen that the new one has the same minimum focusing distance, which sounds like no internal changes. I&#8217;m ok with that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nikonx</title>
		<link>http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-first-picture-of-the-new-75-300mm/comment-page-1/#comment-268121</link>
		<dc:creator>nikonx</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2013 19:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.43rumors.com/?p=36371#comment-268121</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[F6.7 ?    how to say?  Schadenfreude?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>F6.7 ?    how to say?  Schadenfreude?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Camaman</title>
		<link>http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-first-picture-of-the-new-75-300mm/comment-page-1/#comment-267742</link>
		<dc:creator>Camaman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2013 08:11:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.43rumors.com/?p=36371#comment-267742</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oh-Oh! They are playing the same game, again! :-)

I can see what we have going on here!  

THERE IS NO COSMETIC RING that hides the ugly thread on the front of the lens like the one on current 14-42 kit lens ! ! !

I guess that will be $50 exxxtra!! But it will be metal...;-P]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh-Oh! They are playing the same game, again! <img src='http://www.43rumors.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I can see what we have going on here!  </p>
<p>THERE IS NO COSMETIC RING that hides the ugly thread on the front of the lens like the one on current 14-42 kit lens ! ! !</p>
<p>I guess that will be $50 exxxtra!! But it will be metal&#8230;;-P</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spencer Salva</title>
		<link>http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-first-picture-of-the-new-75-300mm/comment-page-1/#comment-267726</link>
		<dc:creator>Spencer Salva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2013 06:18:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.43rumors.com/?p=36371#comment-267726</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Your F-stop conversion to 35mm equivalence is only relevant for depth of field, regarding light transmission/speed, f/6.7 is still f/6.7, no conversion necessary.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your F-stop conversion to 35mm equivalence is only relevant for depth of field, regarding light transmission/speed, f/6.7 is still f/6.7, no conversion necessary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spencer Salva</title>
		<link>http://www.43rumors.com/ft5-first-picture-of-the-new-75-300mm/comment-page-1/#comment-267723</link>
		<dc:creator>Spencer Salva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2013 06:08:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.43rumors.com/?p=36371#comment-267723</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No, not out of date, just because something can be made better doesn&#039;t make the old version any worse.  As long as you take care of it, the lens you buy today will take just a good photos in 10 years, regardless of whether 1 or 2 or 12 improved or more advanced versions have been released.  Just because someone releases an upgrade doesn&#039;t mean you need it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No, not out of date, just because something can be made better doesn&#8217;t make the old version any worse.  As long as you take care of it, the lens you buy today will take just a good photos in 10 years, regardless of whether 1 or 2 or 12 improved or more advanced versions have been released.  Just because someone releases an upgrade doesn&#8217;t mean you need it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 3/51 queries in 0.016 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 327/369 objects using apc

 Served from: 43rumors.com @ 2013-06-18 06:30:38 by W3 Total Cache -->