Olympus 75-300mm marked as “discontinued” at BH.


The Olympus 75-300mm just got marked as “discontinued” at BHphoto (Click here). And the Black version is completely gone from Amazon too (Click here). The next MFT related announcement from Olympus is scheduled for late January and there may be a new version of the lens coming soon?

  • long tele will be useful

    Current 70-300mm is expensive, slow, not brillant at the long end.

    There is necessary faster tele, much better at the long end. And not such big. I tried Pana 100-300 with OMD and it is too big (without grip for OMD) and uncomforatable.
    And not necessary x4,3 zoom (70-300), maybe x2,5 it enough. For example 90-250mm f/4. If I buy long tele, quality of long end is more important than wide end.

    • MrHappy

      From the latest Olympus News letter “Or explore our new M.ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II lens.” :-)

  • Sören

    Hopefully, such a long Tele lens should have a Tripod Mount…

    • Anonymous

      Still mud slinging arent ya? still bitching and moaning about everything arent ya? LOLIf you think you know how things should be made, why dont you make them instead of going on here bitching and moaning about products?

    • Homer

      Still mud slinging an bitching and moaning about things arent ya? If you think you know how things should be made then why are you here? why dont you go and make the products instead of bitching and moaning?

      • Sören

        What is you problem, Homer?
        There are companies that design tripod-mount rings for such tele-zooms, but the big zoom handle on the 75-300 leaves no space to attach anything…
        And I don’t make products because I am no engineer, I am a photographer and the engineers should design photographic equipment for the users needs. And the OPTION of attaching a tripod mount to a 600mm (@FF) lens is such an example.
        No go and have a beer instead of writing stupid comments.

      • olympan

        @Home….get a life and stop tormenting people about your negativity. Slandering and insulting people doesn’t make you big, it only means you don’t really know what your talking about

  • Well, at least the m.zuiko 75-300 is sharper than the Pana 100-300 at 300mm.

    My guess is that Olympus will replace the lens because it was too expensive and therefore not very successful.

    I’d rather expect a cheaper lens and not necessarily a faster one.

  • Famas

    I hope it means that MFT version of 50-200 mm F2.8-3.5 is coming.

  • Hubertus Bigend

    What 75-300? You mean the M.Zuiko, not the (FT) Zuiko, right?

    Coming from the RSS feed, I can see it only after I open the article by guessing from the image, and even then I have to know how both look like to be sure.

    Regarding the news, a better and wider-aperture version of the M.Zuiko would indeed be a good thing, so if that’s what “discontinued” means, it would be good. The Panasonic 300mm zoom isn’t really good either, and the lack of serious telephoto lenses is still one of the few reasons I didn’t buy into Micro Four Thirds yet.

    • Hubertus Bigend

      Hah! Sorry! I forgot the FT lens is 70-300, not 75-300…!

  • peevee

    Well, I guess it did not sell well, given that Pana 100-300 was cheaper, brighter, and included OIS useful for Panasonics and even PENs.
    I wonder why Oly did not reduce lens prices in response to competition? It seems somebody in their marketing or whoever set the price just afraid to lose face or something when it is clear the product is overpriced for the market.

    Then, weather-sealed version makes more sense with this thing, as it is only for outdoors.

  • Hey, this is great news. I think the quality of the 100-300 is not too bad, but it is huge. I bought it, because it was cheaper than the Oly, although I sometimes think, that 100 is too long. Starting with 75 is much more versatile. But with better sensors coming (with higher res) a shorter lens like the rumored 50-200 would be even more interesting for me! (-> a little cropping if needed) If it is fast it would also be different to Panas 100-300 and 45-200.

  • Lily

    Whatever the replacement is, I hope it’s weather-sealed. /broken record

  • Wild

    Olympus 70-300mm, slow and expensive, is not successful lens.

    Equivalent 600mm – for wildlife mainly.
    Therefore important is:
    – not slow, f/6.7 or f/6.3 is very slow, f/5.6 is minimum, f/4 wil be better
    – wide end is not so important, mainly for find target and zoom for maximum close-up, optical quality at 300mm (equv. 600mm) is much more important then 100mm (equv. 200mm)
    – weather-sealed, for forest, rain and other wet conditions

    If you want cheap and bad optical quality ultrazoom, there ale a lot of compacts with equivalent even >700mm.

    • Anonymous

      The Olympus 70-300 (4/3) is actually quite cheap (€430 or so); I assume you refer to the m43 75-300 which is expensive (€890??). The max aperture of the 75-300 is f6.3. My experience of the 75-300: slow AF at 300mm, strange colors at 300mm (which are fixed in Lightroom). If a new lens is 250mm, it must be of high optical quality and admit 2x TC with reulting aperture max 5.6 to be of interest. I assume this implies 250mm/4?? (Factor sqrt(2) = 1.4).

      • Anonymous

        Attaching a 2x teleconverter will increase aperture by 2 f-stops. To get an f/5.6 with a 2x teleconverter attached you’d need a f/2.8 lens. The Zuiko 300mm f/2.8 for 43 weighs 3,2kg.

        The reality of life is, unless substantial software correction is used, a telephoto lens is not going to be substantially smaller than the 43 version. So if you want the aperture and quality of a 50-200 f/2.8-3.5 you’re going to get only a fraction lighter lens with m4/3.

        For example, the Panasonic 100-300 is only 95 grams lighter than the 43 Oly 70-300mm, which has more useful range and 1:2 macro.

        The Olympus 75-300 is indeed 185 grams lighter (further 90 grams from the Panasonic) but its also dimmer than the 4/3 version (f/4.8 vs f/4.0 at short end, f/6.3 vs f/5.6 at the long end) and has no macro.

  • Liz

    I have recently bought the OMD5 and it is wonderful though he CAF is completely useless for shooting anything moving. Having said that I am keen to get a micro telephoto and have been comparing comments on the 75-300 vs the Panny 100-300. The OLympus looks a better buy in that it seems to be sharper.

    If the 75-300 is being withdrawn to replace it with a better model, a copy of the full size 50-200, or 90-250 or even a modestly priced 300mm prime that would be wonderful.

    Are you listening Olympus?

    • LOL! Useless for tracking moving subjects?

      Maybe go talk to Bryce about that. He can set you straight.


    • MAFAv8r

      Bought one for my wife, so I can keep my 50-200 with 1.4 TC for when the next camera comes out. It is actually amazingly sharp for something so cheap and small. I kept more of hers on the OMD than mine using the E5, on our current holiday recent trip. It cost me $700 AUD in Singapore. because it is not part of the special Aussie deal n lenses.

  • JF

    That 75-300 mm was slow and far too expensive, it must not sell very well…Something around 90-250 f3.5-5.6 more affordable would make more sense…

  • Not an exact replacement for that lens, but I’d personally like a slightly improved version of the kit 40-150mm f/4-5.6 zoom:

    – Make if 60-150mm (that makes it 2.5x instead of 3.8x, so smaller and cheaper, easier to get better optical performance throughout).

    – Make it constant f/4, that one f-stop at the long end would be handy (it would make it a bit bigger and more expensive, but not that much)

    – Improve the optical performance at the long end

    – Weather seal it

    So instead of a 190g, $300 lens (but much cheaper when bundled with a camera as a second kit), we could have a 250g, $450-$500 one, just slightly bigger, but quite more useful.

  • This is an area that desperately needs attention in m43, IMO. I think we have a serious advantage with the 2x crop factor; I don’t understand why there isn’t already a 300mm prime f4 or 5.6. If I were into birding, this would be my system hands down if there were a good 300mm or even 400mm prime.
    I just sent back the Panasonic 100-300mm because it was unacceptably soft at 300mm. I’d actually like the range to use for street photography. But oh well. I can wait for something better.

    • Anonymous

      In April last year, I saw some great bird shots taken with an OM-D E-M5 and a Canon 800mm/5.6. Of course, such a lens is out of range for me (€12 000, or so), but pro wildlife photographers would probably prefer more than 300mm at the tele end.

      • Steve

        The vast majority of Canon birders use the 100-400 or 400 prime for birding. The 500mm+ lenses represent a much smaller subset of birding lenses in use.

        Also, the existing Canon 100-400 and 400 lenses are getting very old now and could be easily surpassed in IQ by a current m43 300mm prime. The Canon 400mm prime came out 20 years ago and was designed for film. And many of these birders are 50+ so something with better IQ but smaller/lighter would be a bit seller even if it were initially more expensive as new lens designs usually are.

      • Tron

        There’s a good chance we’ll see the Pana 150mm f2.8 get a 2x teleconverter that does 300mm f4. It would certainly be sharp as hell and very portable compared to FF.

        • Steve

          2x TCs are never that sharp. A 300mm prime would be much better.

        • JL

          2x 150mm f2.8 will make a 300mm f5.6 lens. A doubler takes two stops… With a 1.4x converter you’ll get a 210mm f4 lens. Not bad, either one – if the IQ is good.

        • Anonymous

          I owned the EC-20 for 4/3 that was considered exceptionally sharp.

          The reality was that unless you mounted it on the 1,5kg 150mm f/2 or the 3,2kg 300mm f/2.8 there was significant degradation of performance.

          Also, a 2x teleconverter loses 2 f-stops, so a 150mm f/2.8 becomes a 300mm f/5.6

          Also, most of those Canon 400mm prime users DO own a 2x teleconverter. I don’t know any birder that doesn’t have a TC to go with their primes.

    • Steve

      Yup, a 300mm prime would give an significant size/weight advantage to m43. This is especially true with the lastest sensors in the GH3 and E-M5 that now match Canon APS-C. Canon is by far the #1 birding lens and before anyone responds, CDAF is not critical for most birder as most of them do static bird shots. I am surprised m43 hasn’t figured this out yet.

      I have had great success with my 100-300 at 300mm when stopped down to f7.1, but I would upgrade in a heartbeat.


      • Anonymous

        There is already an excellent 300mm prime for the 4/3 sensor – the 300mm f/2.8 which weighs 3,2kg and costs $7000.

        Changing the flange distance (4/3 to m4/3) isn’t going to make the lens any smaller. Well, OK, it’ll go from 3,2kg to maybe 3,0 kg. Won’t be cheaper for sure.

  • The m.FT 70-300 is still showing as available at the olympusamerica online store, if anyone is interested :-)

    • Steve

      Only the silver version is currently available.

  • Anonymous

    My Zuiko 75-300 has fast AF at 75mm, but *not* at 300mm!! Furthermore: if I focus at 75mm and then zoom, the focus is totally lost!!, unlike for my Nikkor 70-300 mm, where zooming had built-in support for staying in focus during zooming.

  • Betiko
  • Betiko
  • Mister_Roboto

    Hopefully it won’t just be an “R” upgrade :/

  • The asking price for this is the reason I’m holding on to my Zuiko 70-300. The current m.zuiko is just too expensive. I do hope Olympus releases a new nicely priced rev 2 version of this, cause all other alternative with the same zoom length are just huge and not very portable.

  • Hans Kloss

    The worst tele in m43. Nobody will cry. I’m waiting for similar telezoom as 70-300/4-5.6 in 43…

  • Bob

    “Discontinued” at B&H doesn’t usually mean discontinued, as in never available again. They’ve flagged numerous Panasonic lenses as “discontinued” in the last year, only to have them show up again a month later.

    I suspect it’s some logic in their automated system. If a certain period of time elapses without the distributor providing a date for the next available shipment, or something like that, it gets flagged as discontinued.

    I’ll give odds it shows back up in their inventory in the next month or so.

    • Steve

      Olympus direct has also cancelled orders for the black version as well. No longer available was the reason.

  • HappyCamper

    Please sir Mr. Olympus, what we all want is a weather sealed 14-150mm 3.5-5.6. The perfect hiking lens.

    The 14-150mm 4.0-5.6 is not nice, too slow, open to moist… and quite ugly…

    • Anonymous

      I agree. A new version of the 14-150 would be nice.

  • Eric

    Best be a high image quality 50-200 at the same price point. Considering the build/image quality package, the 70-300 was priced on the far side of extortion.

    • SteveO

      +1. The 75-300mm was always too slow and absurdly over-priced; you can pick up a new 4/3’s 70-300mm, which is faster, for less than half the price, or 1/3 the price when on rebate. Or the exceptional weathersealed f2.8-3.5 50-200mm for the same price. Ridiculous.

      Also, why aren’t all Olumpus mFT lenses introduced after the E-M5 intro weathersealed? Two lenses so far are, the mediocre 12- 50mm and the 60mm macro. What good is a weathersealed body without weathersealed lenses?

  • Ian

    I spoke to an Olympus rep (Pete) when they did a mFT demo in Berkeley at The Looking Glass a few weeks back. He told me that they’re planning to re-release the lens with identical quality at a cheaper price. He also mentioned that they’re banking on mFT being the future of the company FWIW. He mentioned that he doesn’t get information or samples of new products until roughly 4 months from their announcement date. He was a nice person. Very friendly.

  • Nothing wrong with the 70-300 if you know how to use it.

    • If you use the Force, you can get tack-sharp piccies at 300 mm! ;-)

  • avds

    Mind you, the first “related posts” listed next to this post is a pretty old ramble suggesting the Panasonic 7-14 was discontinued based on a similar B&H listing and even suggesting a new version was coming, too.

    Nevermind, the old and good 7-14 is alive and kicking. I’m afraid B&H listings are not to be trusted in that respect in the first place. Who knows, maybe the suppliers change a single digit in part number due to some minor upgrade of the housing or electronic parts of the lens that have nothing to do with how the lens looks or performs – and bah, all or some of the sites automatically list the old part number as “discontinued”, for a good reason indeed.

  • avds

    The Panasonic’s 100-300 huge strength, beside its being quite a good optical performer at a considerably lower price than this, is its OIS which makes it a fun hand held lens at very long focal lengths (if you don’t mind its half-a-kilo weight which easily overwhelms most or all m43 cameras). I hardly believe the PEN’s could deliver the same level of stabilization for this lens and I wonder if even the EM5 could handle it beyond 200mm…

  • 4 years after introducing m43 there are sill only the kit zooms and as alternatives the (too) high priced pana lenses with limited zoom range that I would never recommend to use with an body from Olympus because of CA or the slow 43 lenses. Is this a joke? If there would be a 14-54 3.5-4.0/4.5 and a 50-200 also 3.5-40./4.5 for about $700 these zooms would sell like hot pancakes, and also they would be more sold cameras.

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

What are Cookies?
A cookie is a small file of letters and numbers that is stored in a temporary location on your computer to allow our website to distinguish you from other users of the website. If you don't want to accept cookies, you'll still be able to browse the site and use it for research purposes. Most web browsers have cookies enabled, but at the bottom of this page you can see how to disable cookies. Please note that cookies can't harm your computer. We don't store personally identifiable information in the cookies, but we do use encrypted information gathered from them to help provide you with a good experience when you browse our website and also allow us to improve our site. You can watch a simple video from Google to find more information about cookies.

Cookies used by our Website
The 43rumors website, 43rumors.com, uses the following cookies for the collection of website usage statistics and to ensure that we can . These are anonymous and temporary. By using our website, you agree that we may place these types of cookies on your device.
Read how Google uses data when you use our partners' sites or apps: http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/partners/
Google Analytics Cookie Usage on Websites: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/analyticsjs/cookie-usage?csw=1#cookiesSet Addthis cookies: http://www.addthis.com/privacy.
Disqus cookies: https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466235-use-of-cookies.
Vimeo cookies: http://vimeo.com/privacy.
Youtube cookies: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/171780?hl=en-GB

Disabling/Enabling Cookies
You have the ability to accept or decline cookies by modifying the settings in your browser. Please note however that by deleting our cookies or disabling future cookies you may not be able to access certain areas or features of our site. For information about how to disable cookies in your browser please visit the About Cookies website.