Natural Exposures review of the 300f4 and PL100-400 + a Fuji Zoom and a Nikon

Discussion in 'Native Lenses' started by nstelemark, May 18, 2016.

  1. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jan 3, 2014
    Really? Way to hard to make any decent comparisons between them. Would have preferred if he had gotten identical framing for each shot. He says it is to hard because of the different focal lengths but in my honest opinion it is just being lazy.

    From what I can tell on his examples here is my ranking for center sharpness
    1 - Olympus
    2 - Fuji
    3 - Nikon
    4 - Panasonic

    Edge sharpness is even harder to compare but here is my ranking
    1 - Olympus
    2 - Fuji
    3/4 - Nikon/Panasonic (The Panasonic my just edge out the Nikon here)

    He states he will not say how he feels about each lens but does say one came out on top by a large margin. Really curious which one he feels came out on top.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    I said I thought it was interesting :biggrin:. I am not sure what conclusions we can draw from this, but at least all the lenses were shot at the same target.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    I think that answer is pretty clear. :drinks: What I find interesting is the rendering of the black areas of the full res images which really alters the perceived sharpness. The only image that has a different FL is the 100-400 which does not help it out, and this image appears to be overexposed, if anything.

    The Fuji files look sharpened, but that may be an artifact of exposure.

    If you look at the three m43 mounted lenses which I am assuming are all shot on the GX-8, I think the center order you had is correct:

    1 - Olympus
    2 - Nikon (MF)
    3 - Panasonic

    the exposure and FL change on the PL100-400 makes it hard to tell though.
     
  5. riverr02

    riverr02 Mu-43 Veteran

    258
    May 2, 2011
    New York
    Rafael
    Thanks for sharing. Oly looks sharper to be sure, but it damn well better be for the price for the single FL. Panny of course has the flexibility of the zoom and lower price. Good to have options ; )
     
  6. Holoholo55

    Holoholo55 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 13, 2014
    Honolulu, HI
    Walter
    Yeah, interesting, but not as rigorous or scientific a test as I'd like. Still, I think some things emerge. The Fuji and Olympus look very good, with Leica and Nikon lagging a bit. That's about as much as I'd be willing to take from the comparison. :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  7. Rick F

    Rick F Mu-43 Regular

    125
    Jul 5, 2015
    UK
    Rick
    Although interesting to read, to me it was a fairly pointless comparison. None of the lenses are actually in competition with each other. No point in comparing a 300mm prime with a 100-400mm zoom lens & even less interest with the Fuji & Nikon as an Oly user.

    Mind you, the quality of the 300mm did look good, however it's of no practical use for me so I'll continue to wait for the release of the Panny 100-400mm lens in the UK. Will it ever happen?!!!
     
  8. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    I would have liked to see the Canon zooms as we can AF with those lenses.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Rick F

    Rick F Mu-43 Regular

    125
    Jul 5, 2015
    UK
    Rick
    Funny you should say that, I'd been looking at reviews of Canon L series lenses being used with mirrorless cameras before I found this thread.

    The reviewer was using a Kipon adapter with several lenses and seemed to work fine. But I'm unsure if the results of the 70-210 + 1.4X tc would be any better than the Panny 100-400 which is obviously smaller and lighter. I'd be tempted to buy an adapter and look for a Canon 400mm lense if they were as a cheaper alternative to the Panny. I already own a couple of Canon lenses with the 1.4 X converter.
     
  10. nstelemark

    nstelemark Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 28, 2013
    Halifax, Nova Scotia Canada
    Larry
    His video said he was using a Novaflex adapter, FWIW.
     
  11. Rick F

    Rick F Mu-43 Regular

    125
    Jul 5, 2015
    UK
    Rick
    Oh ok thanks. I thought the second video was the Kipon.
     
  12. scottv

    scottv New to Mu-43

    4
    Apr 24, 2016
    Hi, I use the kipon adapter with canon ef 300 f4.0 L and canon ef 500mm f4.5 L and sometimes with a tamron 1.4x teleconverter on an Olympus omd em1 and it works great.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  13. Rick F

    Rick F Mu-43 Regular

    125
    Jul 5, 2015
    UK
    Rick
    Thanks Scott, I'm tempted to give it a try.
     
  14. Clint

    Clint Mu-43 All-Pro

    Apr 22, 2013
    San Diego area, CA
    Clint
    To make a straight up comparison, the photos would have to take into account the crop factors, pixel sizes, and the same view - which really is not as simple as it seems. One way to do that, is to make composite of the full sized photos Daniel Cox shot. His full sized images were downloaded, opened in Photoshop, aligned all images, cropped to very similar view, saved, opened in Widows, tiled, a screen shot made. That image was then reduced to post. And here are the results -
    full.
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  15. MRM

    MRM Mu-43 Regular

    112
    Jun 9, 2013
    Seattle, WA
    Matt
    Is the canon 300 the IS version and how is the iq. I've been thinking about the non IS as its sharp and cheap but I'm worried that it won't af.
     
  16. scottv

    scottv New to Mu-43

    4
    Apr 24, 2016
    I was leery when I bought it as I'd read some horror stories on the net, but I took a chance and I'm happy. Image quality looks fine to me but I don't examine minutely. I'll try and post something later on today or tomorrow. I was very happy that it worked well with the 500mm lens. With a 1.4x I have some serious reach. My 300 has IS but I turn it off and use what's in the camera. If I was going to purchase a 300 for use with Olympus I'd just get the non-IS. When I first got the adapter one quirk was that sometimes the screen would just go black and would not take a photo. Disconnecting the adapter from the camera restored the screen back to normal but it has not done this as of late. It's annoying but I can live with it. The autofocus can hunt a bit sometimes but usually it's pretty fast and accurate as far as I can tell.
     
  17. scottv

    scottv New to Mu-43

    4
    Apr 24, 2016
    Here's a photo shot with the 300mm on Olympus omd em1. It's a JPEG large file with no post processing and no cropping. Just straight from the card. P4191334.JPG