# First pictures of the massive Samsung S 300mm f/2.8 lens!



## Quest for Light (Sep 16, 2014)

http://www.mirrorlessrumors.com/first-pictures-of-the-massive-samsung-s-300mm-f-2-8-lens-5140


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 16, 2014)

This plus the NX1, I bet Canon is in mortal terror of losing the entire sports market. 

Or not.


----------



## 123Photog (Sep 16, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> This plus the NX1, I bet Canon is in mortal terror of losing the entire sports market.
> 
> Or not.




An empire is brought down piece by piece. 
Years ago there was no competition at all, beside Nikon.


----------



## arcanej (Sep 16, 2014)

Is there a MTF chart for this lens anywhere?


----------



## 123Photog (Sep 16, 2014)

arcanej said:


> Is there a MTF chart for this lens anywhere?



it´s a prototype. i doubt they give out MTF charts yet.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 16, 2014)

So...we're not yet sure if there even _is_ competition. Gotcha.


----------



## Hillsilly (Sep 16, 2014)

I would have spelt "super sonic" as "supersonic", but otherwise, that's one cool, shiny badge on top. Any word on price, AF speed or image quality?


----------



## infared (Sep 16, 2014)

Interesting that Samsung picked White for the barrel.
I would take the new 400mm F/4.0 DO II any day...


----------



## TexPhoto (Sep 16, 2014)

OMG it is so Massive! 

I don't get the massive part. Looks like a very normal 300mm f2.8. Also is that a good thing? Massive?

Anyway good for them. i hope it's a good lens.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 16, 2014)

infared said:


> Interesting that Samsung picked White for the barrel.



There are some that would like to be seen with a white lens.


----------



## Woody (Sep 16, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> OMG it is so Massive!



Having seen the massive lenses produced for mirrorless cameras, I am beginning to question the whole point of trying to keep cameras small. This is particularly true when it comes to mirrorless cameras with crop sensors.

Olympus 40-150 f/2.8, Sony 70-200 f/4 OSS (for FE mount), Fujifilm 50-140 f/2.8, Samsung 50-150 f/2.8, Samsung 300 f/2.8 come to mind.


----------



## weixing (Sep 16, 2014)

Hi,
Is the camera too small or the lens too big?? 

Anyway, no distance scale and seem like the tripod collar is not removable...

Just wonder how much does it cost???

Have a nice day.


----------



## I_Miss_Minolta (Sep 16, 2014)

Huh?

Did I just sign up to CANON rumors...or SAMSUNG rumors?


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 16, 2014)

I_Miss_Minolta said:


> Huh?
> 
> Did I just sign up to CANON rumors...or SAMSUNG rumors?



Well you signed up for Canon Rumors but chose to select a sub-forum "Third Party Manufacturers"


----------



## I_Miss_Minolta (Sep 16, 2014)

Right, "Third Party Manufacturers" -- for CANON.


----------



## Steve (Sep 16, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Interesting that Samsung picked White for the barrel.
> ...



Sony's superteles are white, too. I think when you make your lenses white it means "we're really super serious about photos, guys. Super. Serious." I'm gonna guess $8k intro price. 

Like I said earlier, it seems like Samsung is swinging for the fences with this line. It's not gonna make even the slightest dent in Nikon/Canon's bottom line right now, but in a few years? Who knows. If that on-sensor hybrid PDAF is a performer, the BSI sensor is a noticeable improvement over Canon/Exmor crop sensors and they crank out a competitive lens lineup they could start turning heads. I wouldn't put money on it, but you never know. Samsung went head to head with Apple and is standing strong, sooooo.....


----------



## PureClassA (Sep 16, 2014)

I guess if they want to beat Canon they have to start by acting/looking like them... Screw that, spray paint those barrels Orange and make a statement.


----------



## mackguyver (Sep 16, 2014)

If they start up a CPS rival, then Canon might start getting worried. Until then, most pros won't have any interested because they depend on the support that Canon/Nikon provide. That's a big reason that Sony hasn't gotten much traction.


----------



## Khalai (Sep 16, 2014)

Steve said:


> Sony's superteles are white, too. I think when you make your lenses white it means "we're really super serious about photos, guys. Super. Serious." I'm gonna guess $8k intro price.



The whiteish colour is not just for good looks. It prevents the lens from thermic expansion (e.g. from prolonged sunlight exposure), which would lead to misaligments in the barrel (even a few microns can make or break it). At least, that's what the Canon has been proclaiming for years...


----------



## Vern (Sep 16, 2014)

Looks a bit 'retro' to me - kind of like a beta test of the Canon Version 1, 300 2.8. Tough focal length to compete in given the quality of the Canon 300 2.8 II, but I wish them well. More companies making high-quality lenses (benefit of the doubt given) is a good thing for photographers.


----------



## raptor3x (Sep 16, 2014)

Khalai said:


> Steve said:
> 
> 
> > Sony's superteles are white, too. I think when you make your lenses white it means "we're really super serious about photos, guys. Super. Serious." I'm gonna guess $8k intro price.
> ...



Reduces thermal expansion, it can't prevent it.


----------



## Khalai (Sep 16, 2014)

raptor3x said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > Steve said:
> ...



That's what I meant, just didn't say it properly, thanks


----------



## dolina (Sep 16, 2014)

Samsung is a big enough gorilla to take on Canon, Nikon and Sony. More power to them as it will only drive Canon to give better products at better price points


----------



## Steve (Sep 16, 2014)

Khalai said:


> The whiteish colour is not just for good looks. It prevents the lens from thermic expansion (e.g. from prolonged sunlight exposure), which would lead to misaligments in the barrel (even a few microns can make or break it). At least, that's what the Canon has been proclaiming for years...



That's the reason Canon has given but I have a sneaking suspicion that they paint 'em white so they show up better on TV cameras at major sporting events. I think branding was a much bigger concern for Canon early on than thermal expansion.


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 16, 2014)

Haha right and sonys 300mm is really threatening canon/nikons sport market. : : :

Sony is a lot closer than Samsung at best.


----------



## Aglet (Sep 17, 2014)

Woody said:


> Having seen the massive lenses produced for mirrorless cameras, I am beginning to question the whole point of trying to keep cameras small. This is particularly true when it comes to mirrorless cameras with crop sensors.
> 
> Olympus 40-150 f/2.8, Sony 70-200 f/4 OSS (for FE mount), Fujifilm 50-140 f/2.8, Samsung 50-150 f/2.8, Samsung 300 f/2.8 come to mind.



because if you want small lenses, they are available, and they're small.
Can't beat physics tho, bigger lenses do what only bigger lenses can do, with commensurate IQ results.


----------



## Khalai (Sep 17, 2014)

Steve said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > The whiteish colour is not just for good looks. It prevents the lens from thermic expansion (e.g. from prolonged sunlight exposure), which would lead to misaligments in the barrel (even a few microns can make or break it). At least, that's what the Canon has been proclaiming for years...
> ...



Sony has also white lenses, now Samsung. AFAIK even Nikon had some white versions of superteles. So I don't think that it's just a "brand" thing to increase awareness.


----------



## Steve (Sep 17, 2014)

Khalai said:


> Sony has also white lenses, now Samsung. AFAIK even Nikon had some white versions of superteles. So I don't think that it's just a "brand" thing to increase awareness.



Well, for some reason "heat expansion" isn't a problem for Nikon or Sigma superteles so I'm gonna go with the white lens being a brand thing. Canon was able to equate "white lens" with "quality product" so that's why you see companies like Samsung going with white. Sony's white lenses are holdovers from Minolta, who were also trying to do the same thing in the mid/late 80's.


----------

