100-300 vs 100-400

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by DaveEP, May 12, 2017.

  1. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    817
    Sep 20, 2014
    OK, here we are with GAS time again!

    I'm trying to keep the kit small(ish) and light(ish), but I'm looking for something longer than the 35-100. It's a once in a while thing rather than an every day lens.

    I've been looking for reviews of the 100-300 mkII but can't seem to find them. Lots of the mk1 available of course, including YouTube.

    Also, I've been looking at the 100-400 image on this forum and TBH I've not been over impressed with the shots at 300-400 (they seem soft) but maybe I'm missing something?

    So, anyone used both the mkII and the 100-400? How would you compare them?

    The 100-300 is obviously much cheaper, is the 100-400 really worth it?

    FWIW I'll be using this on the GH5.
     
  2. genesimmons

    genesimmons Mu-43 Veteran

    202
    Feb 12, 2017
    i am on the fence for one of these lenses as well. i will be following this thread. i am in same boat, lots of 100-300 m1 available but not many mark 2, is mark 2 version that much better?
     
  3. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    My understanding is the optics are the same. They updated the motors and added weather sealing and that's about it.
     
  4. Hypilein

    Hypilein Mu-43 Top Veteran

    563
    Mar 18, 2015
    The optics of the 100-300 are indeed the same, but the dual IS makes most pictures (unless on a tripod) come out significantly sharper for everything above 1/500s of a second which is still something you might use this lens at. I posted a comparison on this site, you should be able to search for it.

    I haven't owned the 100-400 so this is just me speculating from tests and pictures. I have found the 100-300 plenty sharp, so I think the bigger merit in the 100-400 is the extra range, focus limiter and tripod mount if you use it on a tripod.

    Personally, I find the 100-300 good enough and would only want to upgrade to something that is faster, but the Oly is way out of my league.
     
  5. davidzvi

    davidzvi Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Aug 12, 2012
    Outside Boston MA
    David
    I went through this last month, but it was more 100-300 vI or vII or something shorter. I owned the vI for a little while and briefly owned the vII. In the end with Panasonic finally releasing the Dual IS firmware for the 45-175 I'm sticking with that. I don't use over 200mm eq often enough to even consider the 100-400 and the 100-300 vII was more $$ than I could really justify, there are just other things I'd rather spend the money on.

    But Dual IS, weather sealing, and the change in the shutter to support FPS are the big differences between vI and vII of the 100-300.
     
  6. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    I have both the ver1 and 2 of the 100-300mm right now here's my thoughts.
    • I haven't done any scientific tests but IQ seems similar (probably within sample variation range) but there does seem to be some contrast difference between the two under some lighting, there is definitely different coatings on the lenses (you can see it just looking at them) so maybe its due to that.
    • IS is definitely better on ver2 at least on a GX/G85, seems at least stop maybe a little more. Several shots looked much better than the ver1 at 300mm that I thought was IQ related but was really a little motion blur on the ver1 shot.
    • Zoom ring is quite a bit smoother on the ver2 (between my copies anyway), still has that plastic on plastic feel but ver1 is very "grabby" when zooming.
    • AF is faster on ver2, haven't had any opportunity to really test it other than static shots but it is noticable.
    • Continuous shooting when stopped down is noticeably faster with ver2

    I have tbe ver1 for sale locally but if the weather cooperates and I will try to take some comparison shots.
     
    • Informative Informative x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Mountain

    Mountain Mu-43 Regular

    173
    Aug 2, 2013
    Colorado
    I had the 100-300 m1 for awhile along side the 100-400. I like both lenses. The 100-400 seems to have produced more keepers for me. I find it to be plenty sharp at all focal lengths, and imagine that a lot of the softness that you have seen is technique related. From the examples that I've seen, the O300 is sharper, but you definitely pay for it. Take a look at Home page | Natural Exposures, Inc. for a pro that shoots m43 with both 100-400 and O300. Lots of good examples of what they are capable of in the right hands.
     
  8. Mountain

    Mountain Mu-43 Regular

    173
    Aug 2, 2013
    Colorado
    FWIW, most of the shots that i post are with the 100-400, always handheld, and usually at 400mm. They're generally heavily compressed and reduced in size before I upload them here, but maybe they'll be helpful to you (disclaimer, I am as far from a pro as one can get)
     
  9. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    817
    Sep 20, 2014
    Thanks for all the replies.

    At this point I'm leaning towards the 100-300 mkII due to size/weight and the fact it's supported as dual IS on the GH5. I'd really like the extra 100mm, but I'm not sure just how much I want that vs how much I want to carry the extra size/weight given that I'm not a wildlife shooter.

    I have seen many excellent images from the 100-400, some of then really sharp, but there have been plenty on the web that seem less than satisfactory. It could be that they have also been high ISO and noisy, though not all.

    I was surprised how small the 100-400 looked in a shop window as I walked by the other day. That got me thinking about using it.

    The downside for both of them is the slow apertures (I like f2.8 or faster) but I suppose for size / weight I'll just have to live with that.

    Still looking.... so if anyone else has any input please let me know!
     
  10. genesimmons

    genesimmons Mu-43 Veteran

    202
    Feb 12, 2017

    would love to see some side by side comparisons. does your panny gxg85 have ibis? the ver2 has sync is which uses both i believe maybe thats why its better on your body. i will be using it on a em1.2 so sync means nothing. is your version 1 listed locally. i am also from bc and i seen one for sale in nanaimo. is that yours
     
  11. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
  12. DaveEP

    DaveEP Mu-43 Top Veteran

    817
    Sep 20, 2014
    Thanks! That's actually quite a lot of difference :)
     
  13. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    Added another 300mm shot this time the subject is in the shadow and they are closer. I think the newer coatings cut down on the "glow" you sometimes can get with the old lens in harsher light.
     
  14. Fred S

    Fred S Mu-43 Top Veteran

    570
    Feb 20, 2012
    Calgary
    Fred S
    I had a Sever case of GAS 2 months ago and picked up a PL 100-400
    I needed a little more reach than my 75-300 II for those small birds
    400 mm f 6.3 shutter 800 50 % Crop ( Hand Held ) I am a little shaky
    I am not disappointed

    Sparrow%2017-02-01_zpsgyntpmdq.
     
    • Like Like x 5
  15. rtc

    rtc New to Mu-43

    1
    Apr 27, 2017
    North West, UK
    The 100-400 is about the size of a Nikon 70-300 (and the Olympus 40-150/2.8) and it is very easy to 'forget' that you're using an 800mm FF equivalent lens, or with such good IS being tempting to 'give it a go'.

    It would be nice if it allowed slightly closer focus, but that's probably asking a lot.