Panny 100-300 vs. 4/3 50-200 SWD

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by jgmankos, Mar 14, 2015.

  1. jgmankos

    jgmankos Mu-43 Regular

    Apr 9, 2012
    Slatington, PA
    Anyone actually compare these two lenses tit-for-tat? How does the AF on the 4/3 lens really work with a converter on an m43 body? I've found GREATLY varying reviews...I've seen some people say the AF is worthless and others say it's great.
  2. jeffryscott

    jeffryscott Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 2, 2010
    I've thought a lot about this same question recently as I nearly always use my 50-200 SWD with the 1.4 on and have wondered how the 100-300 would compare, as you don't lose much speed at the long end (280 @ 4.8 with the 1.4).

    As for the 50-200: AF, both SAF and CAF, is quite good on the E-M1 and overall I'm happy with the combo, though I lust for the 40-150 2.8, but would miss the extra reach. The 50-200 is a simply outstanding lens in my mind: sharp throughout its range, weather sealed, and high build quality. But it is big and extends when you zoom. Also, if you don't have an E-M1, not sure how the AF works (edit: I see you have a EM10 and now 5 mark II, I don't think I'd bother with the 50-200).

    I suspect the 50-200 combo is better optically, but at a cost of size, weight and convenience. But it does have the clear advantage of a much faster lens when not using the 1.4 ( for example indoor or night sports or other similar activities where a faster lens is required).
  3. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    The 50-200 lens will tend to "jitter" its way to focus on the E-M10 (which is what it does on the E-M5) but focuses very nicely the E-M1 as it uses on sensor PD-AF pixels which is how this lens best works.
  4. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I had a 100-300 and was never really happy with the results from it. It lacks contrast at the long end and of course it's pretty slow. I now have a 50-200 (but not TC) and it's a completely different proposition IQ wise - much better contrast and sharper too. It's also notable faster too - but of course it stops at 200mm. The weigh/size is a step up from the 100-300 too.

    AF on the E-M1 is pretty good, esp after firmware 3.0.
  5. JoJo

    JoJo Mu-43 Veteran

    Mar 19, 2013
    Atlanta, GA
    I used the Oly 50-200 with my E-M5 with pretty good results BUT inconsistent results. Now the Pany 100-300 is my go to lens. I would say that the image is about the same. I really like the Pany 100-300 and can't understand why it is so cheap!!!
  6. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Maybe because the Olympus 75-300 is better! ;) That would be, better than Panasonic 100-300!
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2015
  7. VooDoo64

    VooDoo64 Mu-43 Veteran

    Jul 17, 2010
    Zagreb - Croatia
    Davor Vojvoda

    no its not, 50-200 is much better than 75-300, BUT you need PD-AF for 50-200 and only E-M1 of m43 body have PD-AF and ony with E-M1 50-200 will work how it should., if you have E-M5 or 10 you need to use it as manual lens for manual focus and than is also great - i used 50-200 over a year on my e-m5 and it was my favorite lens but i focus manualy every shot...

    50-200 have far better iq than 75-300
  8. Ross the fiddler

    Ross the fiddler Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Maybe my above comment will make more sense now that I've edited it. Of course I know the 50-200 is have far better iq than 75-300! That's why I bought one recently.
    • Like Like x 1