For the 300mm... panasonic 100-300 or nice 300 prime legacy lens

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by threebees, May 6, 2013.

  1. threebees

    threebees Mu-43 Regular

    37
    Mar 13, 2013
    Hello, the "This or That" section in my favorite. So here I come with a doubt:

    If you are especially interested in the 300mm, but seeing that prices are not really good for 300mm legacy primes...

    would you buy a 100-300 Panasonic? Is that long end so soft?

    Lightweight + IS + versatility VS quality...
     
  2. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    The 100-300 is a tad soft at 300 and wide open, but it isn't too bad and with a bit of post processing can usually be fixed up. Personally I'm ok with it. OTOH, I've not had lots of success with legacy lenses and have yet to find one with acceptable sharpness wide open (but I haven't tried a legacy 300). The lack of AF on a lens that's likely to be used for moving subjects would be an issue for me too. Finally, the OIS on the 100-300 is pretty good - again something almost essential in a long lens.

    So, for me the 100-300 would win hands own. YMMV of course!...
     
  3. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    Can you catch focus with MF for your subjects?

    Are you willing to put a lens that's probably three-four times the size of the Panny zoom on your camera?

    I have the excellent Nikon 300/4 AF-S lens and wouldn't consider putting it on an m4/3 body, but YMMV. And, it is not that soft at the long end.
     
  4. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    3 or 4 times? Maybe if we are talking 300 2.8's. I had a Canon 300mm F4L that compares as follows:
    100-300
    126mmm x 74mm 520g

    Canon 300
    207mm x 85mm 1050g

    Double the weight, 50% bigger until you zoom out the Panasonic. Although I never did a direct comparison, I wasn't happy with the panasonic at 300mm. I feel even wide open the Canon was sharper than the panasonic stopped down. However a bigger issue depending on your use may be IS, unless you have an Olympus you may have some trouble getting sharp pictures in anything but really good light.
     
  5. threebees

    threebees Mu-43 Regular

    37
    Mar 13, 2013
    Most of the shots at 300 mm will be with tripod so I wouldn't mind stabilization. This makes me think that maybe I can look also at the zuiko 75-300.

    I had the zuiko 70-300 for a long time on a 4/3 camera without stabilization and doing manual focusing because auto was too slow. My shots were not as sharp as I wanted them to be and I missed a lot of moving animals, especially those coming to me. Though I loved that lens and used it a lot, I don't want to repite experience with slooow wrong focus and blurred images. That's the reason why I think I should go for a prime and carry with a tripod. But then I think that there has been a huge step since my almost 10 years old camera, and also with lenses.

    I suppose it's better a soft one than a lens that I can't carry with me
     
  6. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    All my 300mm shots are handheld or sandbag supported. I actually rate the 100-300 pretty highly, but only evaluate 'performance' based on post-processing RAW files in a processor that has a lens profile for it (DxO Optics Pro), which results in a significant boost in sharpness over the out of camera Oly JPG. It's not much worse than my Canon 100-400 was, has a lot more reach, and is much, much smaller and lighter.

    Then again, I'm not a dedicated tele shooter. It's an occasional wildlife lens for me.
     
  7. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    I'm not sure I'm following you on IS. A non-native lens isn't going to provide any sort of IS. On a Panasonic body, the 100-300 offers OIS; on an EM-5, you can choose between OIS and IBIS.
     
  8. heli-mech

    heli-mech Mu-43 Top Veteran

    959
    Mar 9, 2012
    Vancouver Island, Canada
    Andrew
    I was trying to say that a legacy lens on a panasonic would result in needing very good light to handhold, on a olympus body you have IBIS even with a legacy lens. With my OM-D I routinely handheld my 300mm legacy at 1/100, and even have some sharp shots as low as 1/30! In fact the extra weight of the legacy prime actually aids in steady handholding.
     
  9. jnewell

    jnewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jun 23, 2011
    Boston, MA
    OK. I'll stick with the Pan 100-300, but YMMV.
     
  10. slothead

    slothead Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 14, 2012
    Frederick, MD
    Soft is a relative term. For me, the 100-300 is not soft.

    P5050466a3_zpsd445b0e8.
     
  11. tradesmith45

    tradesmith45 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Dec 13, 2012
    Oregon
    threebees, could you tell us what kind of subjects & settings your interested in for 300mm?

    I've got the Oly 75-300mm zoom & am waiting to score a 300 or 400mm prime for wildlife photography.

    FYI shutter shock induced blur is an issue for all long tele shooting w/ mft & some DSLRs. You'll want to avoid shutter speeds between 1/200 to 1/20th regardless of which native/adapted lens choice you make. A tripod or monopod will help only a little unless you use a really heavy tripod.
     
  12. ShrubMonkey

    ShrubMonkey Mu-43 Regular

    58
    Apr 6, 2012
    Totally agree, it's up there with my old 5D2 and 100-400mm combo I used to use. The IS has proven to be fantastic.
     
  13. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    100% agree with this - even the 100-400 bit!
     
  14. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    100% agree. I did some rough testing of the lens's IS vs the IBIS in the OM-D and I reckon the lens IS is slightly better.
     
  15. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Yep, agree. Smoother EVF image, and seems to perform slightly better for me.
     
  16. threebees

    threebees Mu-43 Regular

    37
    Mar 13, 2013
    Sorry for not writing these days.
    Thanks to all!

    Answering tradesmith45, subjets would be slow moving animals most of the time and will try to shoot with tripod. For moving animals (mostly big birds) I would have enough with something good at 150mm.

    So probably that will be it, a good around 150mm with autofocus and a good legacy prime for more quiet photography.

    Cheers!
     
  17. STR

    STR Mu-43 Veteran

    222
    May 16, 2013
    Took this an hour ago @300mm using the Panny. It seems to work best at f/8 at that length.
    P10009552.

    127mm f/8
    P1000963.

    That looks sharp to me. It's not on the level of the Panasonic constant aperture zooms, sure, but it was half the price of one of those too.
     
  18. juangrande

    juangrande Mu-43 Top Veteran

    805
    Dec 2, 2012
    COLORADO
    This is helimech's 300 f4L ( f5.6) 100% cropped. OMD on a monopod. He will rue the day he sold this lens!!:eek:
     
  19. threebees

    threebees Mu-43 Regular

    37
    Mar 13, 2013
    STR, you have convinced me with the 300mm photo. Great shot!

    Now you are all confusing me again :rolleyes:
     
  20. GaryAyala

    GaryAyala Mu-43 Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    SoCal
    I found the P100-300 acceptably sharp across it's entire range:
    (All handheld)


    #1
    GRAB0092.
    OM-D w/P100-300 @ 300mm, 1/125, f/5.6, ISO 1600

    #2
    GRAA0409.
    OM-D w/P100-300 @ 300mm, 1/350, f/5.6, ISO 1600

    #3
    P7100189-X2.
    OM-D w/P100-300 @ 223mm, 1/2000, f/5.1, ISO 200

    #4
    P7080138-XL.
    OM-D w/P100-300 @ 223mm, 1/45, f/5.6, ISO 400

    Gary
     
    • Like Like x 1