I love how.. even here in late 2021... that when I look up lens reviews ..I still get David Thorpe's videos fed to me at the very top.... You are missed so very much and yet forever with us as our journey goes forward..
David, I just purchased this lens thanks to your reviews. And while I'm on that topic, thanks for all your M43 reviews. It has made my switch from Canon/Sony easier and more confident. Keep up the great work. Cheers
I bought the Olympus 75-300mm a year ago to help me get better shots of the moon. Since then I've found that it has other uses -- especially at places like the zoo or on the beach when you need the extra reach. With enough light, you can get great shots with this lens. Everyone one I hand it to to play with just smiles. Thanks for your perspective on the Panasonic version. I haven't tried it yet.
Dustinrhoades The long zooms give you a wonderful flexibility in what you can do with them, often, as in your case things you hadn't previously thought about. The big thing is that in the MFT system, these lenses are of a size and weight that makes them perfectly practical to carry around with you.
@@davidedmunds You can get the Panasonic for £100 less if you shop around. HDEW cameras have them, for example. The Panasonic is definitely better if you can run to it, every little bit of speed columnist at such long focal lengths. Have no worries about auto-focus, all Micro Four Thirds lenses will work on all Micro Four Thirds bodies. basically, it's a standard. However, with your Panasonic body, you'll get dual stabilization, the body and lens together, with the 100-300 ll - worth having at such focal lengths.
Yes, I didn't mean to sound patronizing, Richard, it's hard to judge the level of knowledge that anyone might have so I try to be as straightforward as possible. That sound fabulous with the Canon. The short backfocus of the M43 means that about any lens can be adapted, wonderful. Especially, because we're only using the central part of the lens circle of lenses like that 55-250, so any edge fall off is irrelevant. I'd love to see your telescope stuff.
Hi David, I think the 100-300 is much underrated. I am very happy with the results I get with the lens on my GH3. In good light at f8 it produces some good close ups of butterflies and in less than perfect light I open it up to f5.6 and are happy with most of my shots especially of birds in shaded tree foliage.
Yes, I was referring to the equivalent focal length that will show up in the final image, but thanks for taking the time, David. I finally got my GH3 in, after 2 months of backorder, and it is indeed amazing what you can do with long lenses. I have recently returned from a nature trip and had a great spot to film birds in the rain. I used the cheap Canon 55-250mm with a canon adapter, and the 500mm equivalent frame was absolutely beautiful. Next up.....a big ass telescope w/camera mount!
+Mona Baumgarten Hi Mona, yes this lens will function perfectly on any MFT camera. It's maybe a tad slow for klive bands but given reasonable light it will cope. In less good light you can bump up the ISO speed. This introduces noise but that can add to the atmosphere in music pix.
Thanks Moody Blues and for your criticism too. I speak as clearly as I can but I do tend tend to talk too quickly. It's not only non-native speakers who say so. Every time I make a video I try to slow down and then forget. Your post will help me to keep it in mind though, which is handy. What I really need is someone like you producing me, telling me to slow down when I speed up! Are you a Moody Blues fan? I did an album cover For Justin Hayward and used to work with often Denny Laine.
Still love my MFT gear despite acquiring many other digital and film cameras and lenses due to GAS. This could be my next MFT lens purchase. Second hand prices for this lens are so reasonable now - almost a decade after this video was made. Hey, this is the very first video I watched with you in it. Now I can say HI when you cycle along somewhere in Kent with your camera bag on your electric Brompton. Take Care and hope you have had your Covid Jab.
Thanks for your good wishes! Yes, had the jab, the first one. Prices are very good on the 100-300mm right now, as you say. Why they vary I don't know but good to buy at the bottom of the market!
Hi David, Thanks for the review, just ordered one from Amazon, should be playing with it next weekend. I have 35-100, now getting 100-300 for the long end, I just have to get 14-35 for the wider shots, and then I will be all set. Your review has influenced me on purchase decision, thanks again.
Nice video, I've picked up a Mkii version today. Not my 1st but I missed the Leica 100 400 I sold it for, now sold also. Hopefully a use to cost ratio will justify my re purchase.
Any news regarding the new version of this lens? Do you think you will be able to to a good comparisation of the older and this newer lens? =) All best!
It's a 100-300 whatever camera you manage to put it on. The focal length doesn't change whatever you do. But it does have the same angle of view as 200-600 on a full frame camera which is what you mean, I guess.
I agree. M43 is already quite a big player but with life span of 5 years or so it isn't surprising that there is still not a complete range of lenses for it. Remember that you can use almost any Nikon/ Canon etc lens on it - 300mm 2.8? You don't have full automation but with practice that really doesn't matter. Panasonic are bringing out a 150mm 2.8. I understand. That with a converter should help you. But if tech quality was my main priority I'd say that FF is a better choice - lenses and all.
+Steinar Knai Sorry, didn't see that before I wrote the previous reply. If the animals are still you'll be ok, then. The Panasonic is the better of the two and topped down to f/8 shouldn't give too much cause for complaint. The bit extra speed will still be handy, even on a support.
Great review thanks for spending the time doing this. Just ordered the lens on the back of this. I'm taking it to the Olympics to complement my standard m4/3 lenses - I'll let you know how I get on with it. Thanks again !
Thanks for the informative and articulate review, David. I'm just moving into M43. I started with the 14-45 and have the 20 1.7 coming this week :). Next, maybe a 45-175 or this 100-300, which does looks like an appealing lens.
I dropped my alloy bodied GF1 from 1m onto concrete and hard floors at least 3 times, one time the original 14-140 mark 1 on it hit the concrete face first without cap and didn't break, got a series of dents in the plastic rim. Another time the corner of the camera body hit the deck and it did bend slightly, but everything still worked fine. I can't recall how the third drop went, but I still have it and it still works, and the lens still works too, on my new GH5 and my new-to-me GM1 :-) Many engineering plastics are a superior material to alloys though due to what you mention, their ability to deform and rebound, not true of alloys. Whether that's a good thing inside depends on how the PCBs are mounted and connected to each other as if anything relies on the body for support it will be wracked by a flexing body. I wonder what your thoughts on that are, now? Just checked, my GH5 is magnesium, and it would appear the GM1 is, too?
I'd have thought that a metal frame with plastic where appropriate was best - as with most top line cameras today. The all metal construction of the film Nikon Fs was very tough but a sharp bash could ruin it because it passed right through to the precision mechanics of the camera. With today's camera having so much solid state electronics in them, it's hard to make comparisons. I'm no engineer but given like for like pricing I'd stake the reliability of modern cameras as being better than the old ones. But a well maintained Nikon F would serve for many, many years and was very tough.
Hi David great video thank you, having watched this and a number of other reviews I have just purchased a 100-300 and I am really pleased with it. As you said its not brilliant at 300 f/5.6 but at around f/8 at 260/270 I thought it was really nice. The manual focus ring is a little stiff at the moment so hopefully that will get better with time but yeah all in all its a nice addition to my kit. I already have the 12-35 f/2.8, a 35-100 f/2.8 so ideally I would have like to go for the 100-400 but wow what a difference in price :( anyway, keep them coming David love your stuff thank you :)
Thanks, David! As I said in the review, to justify the price of the 100-400 you need to use it a lot. The 100-300 performs very well and is good enough for most of us. The bigger one is icing on the cake, really!
It's very compact for its focal range and I always found the performance very respectable. The beauty of a lens like this is that you can almost always find room for it in your camera bag.
Like stephen, I just logged on to compliment you on this video. I especially like the final roundup. Please allow me a tiny tiny criticism. I'm not a native speaker, so my impression is you speak fairly fast. Your great intonation makes up for it though. I just got this lens together with the Roesch mount for my trip to Africa next month. :) Thanks again. I thoroughly enjoyed your video.
Hi David, have you used this lens handheld at a zoo? I bought the 14-140 mk2 lens recently and was slightly disappointed with the images I got from a trip to Twycross zoo. I didn't yearn for extra reach (although it would be nice), but I couldn't seem to get the shutter speed fast enough to freeze slight movement of the animals without bumping the ISO up to 1600 and above. My options are this 100-300 mk2 or the Olympus 40-150 f2.8 although the Panasonic is obviously preferable due to it's cheaper price! Any input on this lens suitability at a zoo would welcome. Camera is a GX80
Hi James - I haven't used this lens specifically at a zoo but I used it extensively out and about . Being such a very long lens it would be fearsomely big and expensive to make a wider aperture version so you are at at the mercy of the light. The GX80 is good at 1600 ISO but for detailed stuff of animals I wouldn't want to go much above that, I agree. The 100-300 is still relatively slow at the longer end and little different to the 100-400'a aperture at 300mm I have to say, the 40-150mm f/2.8, with the 1.4x extender is the best choice. The lack of stabilization doesn't matter because the GX80 IBIS is well up to the job. But that f/2.8 aperture is a game changer. In situations where you would using ISO 1600, you'll be able to use ISO 400 or 800 with the extender. It doesn't have the reach of the other two lenses it is true but you can easily try out the suitability by using those at up to 150/210 mm. The other thing I would say is that the 40-150 in the long run may be a cheaper option. It would require a step change in lens technology to better it and there's not even a glimpse of that on the horizon so I regard mine as a lens for life. There's talk of a Panasonic 50-200mm f/2.8-4 at some point but the spec doesn't signal any advantage over the Olympus to me.
Thanks for such a detailed reply David, yes I agree in the longer run the 40-150 would probably be cheaper - if only to stop me buying every slow telephoto lens and then deciding I need the 2.8 aperture anyway!
+Harry Bunn (GRVOTV) Yes, in general but probably reaching its limits at the 300mm end. What is a shame is that the in lens stabilization on this one won't work in tandem with the body stabilization.
Yes, must be some technical problem because they'd do it if they could, I'm sure. Unless they thought it would dilute sales of the 100-400. But I wouldn't think that's the reason.
Just love your reviews - you know your stuff and just so fun to listen to and you make perfect sense and not an extreme pixel peeker :) can't wait to see more videos soon - I am likewise waiting on my GX7 and 35-200 F2.8 from Japan - should get the lens tomorrow but B&H says GX7 expected Oct 2nd to ship that is if they did not sell out by the time I ordered, I hope it does not go on back order. I am going to look to the 100-300mm Have Sony HX50v with 30x or about 600mm but like a bit more IQ
Thanks David. I think i'll go for this lens on a GH4 body for wildlife. It'll work with the IS system and isn't too expensive. Yeah I know - the Olympus body equivalent doesn't need lens IS, but doing 4K video really appeals - both for the video performance and stills-grab-from-video ability. With a reasonable 50mm lens in addition, this setup will take me long enough time to perfect for 4K video to be in wide use in home TV's... I'd like to thank you for your erodite and elegant videos, they've convinced me to spend $2000 instead of wasting $1000 on so-so gear. :)
First time I've been thanked for costing someone money :-) Seriously, I'mt old that 4K video downsampled to FHD gives a boost in quality. I've been using 4k Photo Pre-Burst on some martins building their nests, and I've got pix I'd never have got any other way.
lol.. Yes so true. Walking through bush and something happens, with camera in hand you quickly take a 4K burst. While the stills may not be the absolute best, the scene may very well be and at least you recorded it in reasonable quality
I already have a 14-42 zoom and the Olympus 45mm so I didn't feel there was any point in having a third lens with this focal length. The 100-300 is a logical jump and I do find the long end of this lens handy at times. Otherwise, the 45-175 would have been a good choice. Basically, I'd have one of each if I could but lousy money holds me back!
Nice review, just subscribed. I got this lens recently for my GH4 and have yet to test it properly. Just wanted a lens that could be good for wildlife videos starting out and had IS and I am on a budget, so went for it. I will be primarly using it for 1080p videos, using an Atomos Ninja 2 and setting the GH4 to 4K and its HDMI to downconvert to 1080p 4:2:2 10-bit. On the one test I did so far using the GH4, the 100-300mm on a tripod, I did notice the lens produces very noticeable rolling shutter and wobble if zoomed in when I tapped the tripod and will have to figure how to get it the camera and lens stable enough to avoid that. You are right about sharpness drop off. I noticed at 300mm the lens did get softer and was sharpest at 100mm and a little less so but still decent to 250mm between f/5.6 and f/8.0 then it gets softer at 300mm and I have seen reviews of people mentioning it. I did check out DXO Mark on this lens: www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Panasonic/Panasonic-LUMIX-G-VARIO-100-300mm-F40-56-MEGA-OIS-mounted-on-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH3__842 and they only have tested it on a GH3, which I don't think there would be much difference in quality using it on a GH4, but they said it only produced 5MP sharpness on the GH3 which isn't particularly sharp, but for me, if I am shooting video to an Atomos Ninja 2 with the 4K downconvert, I should get decent video quality since even though starting at 4K is 8.3MP, more detail than what the lens is reported to pick up, downconverting to 1080p which is 2.1MP only should make the results look fine since its less MP than the sharpness of the lens even if the camera is starting out recording more.
I don't think you'll have any sharpness problems with video. Theoretical performance is one thing but in real life with a 12x magnification factor atmospheric conditions can be more important than the nuances of lines per mm.
wonderful review David! thank you for sharing as usual. I am currently using an OMD do you think the olympus 70-300 is a better choice or does the panasonic wins in the long lens race? Thanks!
Thanks, Gil. I haven't tried it but it is optically identical with upgrades to the stabilization and AF. I personally wouldn't worry about upgrading it but certainly if I was biying now I'd buy the new one. I'll see if I can get hold of pone.
I'm struggling with the same decision. If only the Panny version would come down $100 it would be an easy choice i.e. f4 - f5.6 and dual IS, with included hood.
I have the G9 with Olly 75-300. With the G9's ibis, it's still quite prone to "twitches" in videos. I wonder if with the Dual IS that the panny 100-300 ii would bring into play even these "twitches" would be ironed out?
No, that's not changed. Olympus lenses natively have less purple fringing than Panasonic usually (I can't imagine why) so maybe they want to emphasize the difference!
just received this lens and loving it so far. Do you use ND, polarizer, or other filters with this lends and in what settings? I usually at least get the very basic almost imperceptive protective filter. Thanks for ideas and the recommendation of this lens. For my budget as a hobby photographer, this lens is great and already getting shots I've never been able in the past at a distance and semi-macro. Thanks.
Very nice review, thank you! One question: there is a specific issue in the bokeh. Best to see in the photo of cyclists - it's like the wall of trees would twist clockwise. I have the same issue at my Sigma 50-150 for APS-C and it makes me want to smash it in the bin. Stoping down usually helps but then the depth of field goes lost...unfortunately this would mean a big NO for this Lens. Is there some correction possibility? Thanx!
No hood. I was reading the other day that the 75mm f1.8, an expensive lens, doesn't come with a hood. You really do need a hood with most lenses so Olympus are effectively under reporting the price of their lenses. The 70mm one, they want around $60 for it I believe'
Hello, I have a Lumix Panasonic G2, can I use the lens with my camera too? And I'm trying to find a good lens to take pictures at events, such as taking pictures of bands live, would this lens be good for that? Because I probably won't need flash with it.
+Robin Leow Hi Robin - This lens won't operate with dual IS and apparently there are no plans to upgrade the firmware. Possibly the design is not compatible.
I just got this lens and I have noticed that the barrel has a little bit of wiggle in it. It zooms smoothly, it just simply has a wiggle which I have never noticed on any other lens. Is that normal? The wiggle is present whether it is zoomed or not.
I haven't got a 100-300mm to hand but with a quick check on my Olympus 12-40 and Panasonic 14-140 both a show a small amount of wiggle. The 50-100, on the other hand has none at all. A small amount is normal, I think and nothing to worry about. I think that with time and wear and tear most lenses will develop a little looseness but it shouldn't affect performance.
I see that this was uploaded 2012, are you still using this lens? I have an older GH1 and want something alittle more than the standard 14-140. the 100-300 suits my requirements. but new zealand pricing puts the lens in the, *i dont need it* basket.
Yes, was using it the other day. It has no competitor, really. It's just over £400 in the UK which is reasonable for such a lens. Is it so much more expensive in NZ? There's the Olympus 75-300 which is a bit cheaper here but presumably that's still expensive in NZ. Could you get one sent from Japan?
+Aurelie Nani While it's true that the μ4/3 size advantage is less with long telephotos, I'm not sure you're comparing like with like. If I've got my crop factors right, at 250mm x 1.6 the Canon gives a 400mm equivalent, so the Panasonic 100-300 has 50% more reach at (300mm x 2=) 600mm equivalent. The direct comparison to the Canon 55-250 zoom is the Panasonic 45-200, which is considerably smaller than the 100-300, and for a slight focal length penalty (350mm equivalent) the Panasonic PZ 45-175 is even smaller than that. I don't use long telephotos much, but my 45-200 is light enough to carry all the time "just in case", and small enough to sit upright in a single lens compartment of my rucksack (unlike my old Nikon 75-300 which had to go flat, occupying two lens compartments).
+Aurelie Nani In general, Micro Four Thirds lenses are smaller than FF or APs-C but no, with a tele on they are not pocketable. Even so, take a look at the optically excellent Panasonic 35-100 f/4-5.6. There's nothing like it anwhere else.
I'm struggling to decide whether or not to spend the extra $200 on v2 of this lens vs the slower Olympus 75-300mm. Of course I'm going to get the Panny ultimately when I'm done torturing myself. I'm not sure, but I think the Depth from Defocus on a Lumix body(GX85) only works with Lumix lenses. Then there's the weather sealing on the new lens, and the included hood....
@@DavidThorpeMFT Lol. I was hoping you would give me your erudite opinion David. Do you think the Lumix 100-300mm is the way to go with a Lumix body despite the $200 differential? Of course as soon as I buy it, it will drop in price like a rock.
@@datapro007 I think it is. You have the dual stabilization, weather proofing, (marginally) faster focusing. If I already had the earlier version I wouldn't bother to upgrade but buying anew, I'd get the latest one. Your G85 can certainly take advantage of the improved lens. Optically, it's the same but even so, yes I think it is worth it.
This lens didn't do Dual IS, so the lens would likely be better than the camera. Just leave them both on would be best anyway. The GX8 will sort it out. The newer lens version does support Dual IS and had has better C-AF performance too.
Optically they are identical. The dust proofing, stabilization and AF are improved. If I already had one I wouldn't bother to update. Buying used, you 'd save a lot of money with the older one with little loss in usability unless you regularly used the lens to its extremes.
The stabilization is effective but it can only do so much. Used at the long 300mm end, this lens has 12x magnification over normal. Up to 150mm I reckon hand-holding is OK but much over that and I prefer a tripod or maybe monopod at a push. (On a tripod, switch off the stabilization.)
I have the first version of this lens (the one with the yellow letters) and it makes my em10 mark II slower to shoot, i works well enough on AF-S but when i switch to AF-C it hunts a lot for focus and slows the frames per second, any tips?
Not really, Jorge. Switch off stabilization to save processor cycles is all I can suggest. The newer version focuses better, I am told but I haven't tried it.
Hello David, I have a problem choosing between the Oly 75-300 vII and the Pana 100-300 for my EM1 kit. It is to be used for shooting stag late night and early morning (am I too optimistic?) and otherwise for wildlife in zoo and wild conditions. Which one is better and is any of the two good enough? Thanks in advance for your help :) Kindly Steinar
+Steinar Knai Hi Steinar - neither of these lenses is at their best at the long end that you are likely to be using.and both are fairly slow at 300mm. The f/5.6 of the Panasonic is usefully quicker, though. Late night and early morning...hmmm. You don't make life easy, do you :-). Have you thought of a Metabones adaptor? With a Nikkor 300mm f/4.5 (just as an example) that gives you a 210mm (420mm equivalent) f/3.2, just a half a stop down from f/2.8. There's not such a big difference in image size between 210 and 300mm but is is a heck of a lot faster and will be much better in low light conditions. Manual focus is easy with this configuration and the older Nikon and Canon optics, already superb, are further enhanced by the Metabones. Just a thought.
+David Thorpe Well, I have thought it through further and thanks for your comments, but I think the 40-150 f2.8 with the convertor is the better option for me; And I'll just wait for the 300 f4 from Olympus, which I think is coming this fall. Agree?
+Steinar Knai The big Olympus zoom and converter is an unbeatable combination and would be first choice for your purposes. It's expensive but you are unlikely to want to get rid of it all the while you use MFT so in the long run so it's worth it.
Hi Sumit. Yes, 100%. MFT is a standard and all equipment within it will work with everything else. The main thing to watch for is that since Olympus build stabilization into the body, their lenses are not stabilized if used on a Panasonic body other than the GX7. But this lens is Panasonic and has stabilization built in.
David, I just took this lens to Yellowstone and loved its performance. I did wish it had a mount. I found this link www.roesch-feinmechanik.de/29701.html. There are a couple of videos about it elswhere, but I thought it might be useful for you.
Arthur Collins Thanks Arthur. I've actually had one of these for a long while. Beautifully made and something the lens should have had as part of is design. It makes the lens a lot steadier on a tripod because of its better balance. The only downside is that you have to remove the GH3/4 battery grip if you have it fitted because it fouls the tripod mount.
Thank you for very informative video! Can you help me to select the telephoto lens for my EM5 MarkII? I am considering one of two lenses: Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300 and M. ZUIKO 75-300. What do you know about focus speed of Pan100-300 on OMD body? Thank you very much!
Thanks Viktor! Both lenses perform well with the Olympus maybe having a slight edge but not enough to sway judgement. Focusing is the same speed on both makers bodies with either lens, no worry there at all. Since you have an Olympus body it is tempting to go for the cheaper Olympus lens as you don't need the stabilization. However, if you are going to be photographing difficult subjects like birds, the Panasonic does have a an f/5.6 at the long end compared to f/6.7. It's not huge but it's that that would make me buy the Panasonic ultimately.
Many thanks for your quick and comprehensive response! It inclines me to Panny. What is your opinion regarding the sharpness of both lenses at 300 mm? I found discrepant conclusions about it.
All long zooms are at their worst at the long end and these two are no exception. However, for neither is their worst bad. Performance for both at 300mm is pretty much the same for both, whatever difference their is wouldn't be enough to sway a decision.
You make the assumption that everyone knows as much as you. I don't make that assumption. I have mail from folk who had the impression after reading about focal length equivalence and so on that the actual focal length must change. So, I answered Andy's question in a way that covers both eventualities. I never assume that people know everything. There's a lot that I don't know but I don't feel the need to be rude when someone does their best to explain it to me.
(FYI, I don't know alot about cameras before I ask this question.) I'm going to get a GH4, so will this lens zoom when I actually zoom in with the camera, not the lens? (Sorry if it's confusing)
No problem! - there's no zoom control on the GH4 camera body. Zooming with the 100-300 is by turning the zoom ring manually only. There's no motorized zooming at all with this lens.
The comparison to a Tamron 200-500 f/2.8 is pointless. That lens makes the Sigma 50-500 f/4.5-6.3 and the recent Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3 look like MFT lenses, both of which are more suitable comparisons.
nemac23 I don't understand what you mean. The comparison is humorous, a joke, for fun. I say that they are not comparable myself in the video. You're not telling me you took it seriously, surely?
Sorry mate must have missed the joke. Thought I'd drop a couple realistic FF alternatives for anyone interested though they are twice the price of the 100-300!
nemac23 No problem. That Tamron is one heck of a lens, I'd love to try one - after I've been on a body building course! And thanks for the added info. A 100 - 1000 equivalent - what an amazing lens that would be, Specialist but if you are shooting birds from a hide, say, it would give you great coverage.
Something near that could be had with a D7100 in cropped mode, but again the 50-500 is twice the price of the 100-300. However, the D7100 could be paired with a 70-300 VR and would achieve a 15.4MP image @ almost 140-600 equivalent in cropped mode. That combo would be cheaper than an E-M1 + 100-300 for example (B&H prices). Here's a comparison of the combos though I imagine the results might look different if cropped mode was taken into consideration: bit.ly/1xxOb2f
Looking for a long zoom for my future G85 / GH5 (IBIS), how does this compare to an Olympus 75-300? I'm worried about the inconsistent quality of the panasonic zoom rings, and the softness at 300. Now the G85 has IBIS, I think the 75-300 may be a better option. My thinking is that the 12-60 + 75-300 would give me nearly a full range, with just two lenses. I plan on taking this setup high on mountains, instead of my old FZ150 superzoom (where I love the 25-600 zoom range!). Thank you!
With the stabilization problem out of the way the only disadvantage of the Olympus is the slightly slower speed. It sounds like your best choice to me given that its optical performance is overall better.
David Thorpe I thought you had one, you mentioned it in your private gear. There was a link where you mentioned among other things beginner's gear range finder gear personal gear landscape gear etc.
David Thorpe it is a matter of whether you get the shot at the end of the day or not true birders swear by the 600mm one guy even said I switched from sony to canon because of the 600mm unfortunately he never heard of the mft system I guess. He paid something like 2k for the lens and the weight is a no no.
I love how.. even here in late 2021... that when I look up lens reviews ..I still get David Thorpe's videos fed to me at the very top.... You are missed so very much and yet forever with us as our journey goes forward..
I agree, really miss you Dave.
Best regards from Stockholm.
Same here in May 2023
he was the real ambassador for micro four thirds and photography. you can feel his passion in every video
2022 , even when you’ve gone to heaven, still inspiring people!❤
David, I just purchased this lens thanks to your reviews. And while I'm on that topic, thanks for all your M43 reviews. It has made my switch from Canon/Sony easier and more confident. Keep up the great work. Cheers
BackFocus11 Nice of you to say so and much appreciated. Thanks.
Thanks for showing the lens performance at different zooms. The paparazzi shot was perfect. I now know this is enough zoom for my use.
I bought the Olympus 75-300mm a year ago to help me get better shots of the moon. Since then I've found that it has other uses -- especially at places like the zoo or on the beach when you need the extra reach. With enough light, you can get great shots with this lens. Everyone one I hand it to to play with just smiles. Thanks for your perspective on the Panasonic version. I haven't tried it yet.
Dustinrhoades The long zooms give you a wonderful flexibility in what you can do with them, often, as in your case things you hadn't previously thought about. The big thing is that in the MFT system, these lenses are of a size and weight that makes them perfectly practical to carry around with you.
@@davidedmunds You can get the Panasonic for £100 less if you shop around. HDEW cameras have them, for example. The Panasonic is definitely better if you can run to it, every little bit of speed columnist at such long focal lengths. Have no worries about auto-focus, all Micro Four Thirds lenses will work on all Micro Four Thirds bodies. basically, it's a standard. However, with your Panasonic body, you'll get dual stabilization, the body and lens together, with the 100-300 ll - worth having at such focal lengths.
I logged on just to say what a great review this is. This is how all reviews should be. Brilliant!
Yes, I didn't mean to sound patronizing, Richard, it's hard to judge the level of knowledge that anyone might have so I try to be as straightforward as possible.
That sound fabulous with the Canon. The short backfocus of the M43 means that about any lens can be adapted, wonderful. Especially, because we're only using the central part of the lens circle of lenses like that 55-250, so any edge fall off is irrelevant. I'd love to see your telescope stuff.
Hi David, I think the 100-300 is much underrated. I am very happy with the results I get with the lens on my GH3. In good light at f8 it produces some good close ups of butterflies and in less than perfect light I open it up to f5.6 and are happy with most of my shots especially of birds in shaded tree foliage.
Thanks!. I'm waiting on my GX7 - and really looking forward to it.
Thank you
This is great David, I also picked up this lens with my new GX8!
Nice! It's a lot of reach in a small lens.
Yes, I was referring to the equivalent focal length that will show up in the final image, but thanks for taking the time, David.
I finally got my GH3 in, after 2 months of backorder, and it is indeed amazing what you can do with long lenses. I have recently returned from a nature trip and had a great spot to film birds in the rain. I used the cheap Canon 55-250mm with a canon adapter, and the 500mm equivalent frame was absolutely beautiful. Next up.....a big ass telescope w/camera mount!
+Mona Baumgarten Hi Mona, yes this lens will function perfectly on any MFT camera. It's maybe a tad slow for klive bands but given reasonable light it will cope. In less good light you can bump up the ISO speed. This introduces noise but that can add to the atmosphere in music pix.
I just ordered this lens for my panasonic G7.
+wyo russ You won't be disappointed. And absurdly small for such a powerful optic.
Thank you!
Thanks Moody Blues and for your criticism too. I speak as clearly as I can but I do tend tend to talk too quickly. It's not only non-native speakers who say so.
Every time I make a video I try to slow down and then forget. Your post will help me to keep it in mind though, which is handy. What I really need is someone like you producing me, telling me to slow down when I speed up! Are you a Moody Blues fan? I did an album cover For Justin Hayward and used to work with often Denny Laine.
Very helpful video. I use the Panasonic 100 - 300mm Mk11 lens with Panasonic Lumix G85 and am pleased with the results.
Glad it was useful - the newer version that you have has improved the focusing and has dual stabilisation, worthwhile improvements in usch a lens.
Still love my MFT gear despite acquiring many other digital and film cameras and lenses due to GAS. This could be my next MFT lens purchase. Second hand prices for this lens are so reasonable now - almost a decade after this video was made. Hey, this is the very first video I watched with you in it. Now I can say HI when you cycle along somewhere in Kent with your camera bag on your electric Brompton. Take Care and hope you have had your Covid Jab.
Thanks for your good wishes! Yes, had the jab, the first one. Prices are very good on the 100-300mm right now, as you say. Why they vary I don't know but good to buy at the bottom of the market!
Glad you liked it.
Hi David,
Thanks for the review, just ordered one from Amazon, should be playing with it next weekend. I have 35-100, now getting 100-300 for the long end, I just have to get 14-35 for the wider shots, and then I will be all set. Your review has influenced me on purchase decision, thanks again.
One more great review David. Thanks for making my shopping decision much easier.
Glad it was useful - thanks!
Now we have the Sigma Sport 150-600mm... Most awesome lense, love it for Airshow
That really is a powerful lens. Need some good stabilization to keep that beast still!
Nice video, I've picked up a Mkii version today. Not my 1st but I missed the Leica 100 400 I sold it for, now sold also. Hopefully a use to cost ratio will justify my re purchase.
Im looking forward until you release your review of the 2017 version of this lens. Will you do such a review? Regards, Fredrik
I'd like to - have to see if I can get hold of one.
Any news regarding the new version of this lens? Do you think you will be able to to a good comparisation of the older and this newer lens? =) All best!
I'll do my best!
As always, sharp and informative!
It's a 100-300 whatever camera you manage to put it on. The focal length doesn't change whatever you do. But it does have the same angle of view as 200-600 on a full frame camera which is what you mean, I guess.
Hope you're enjoying it!
still today it's a great video :)
I agree. M43 is already quite a big player but with life span of 5 years or so it isn't surprising that there is still not a complete range of lenses for it.
Remember that you can use almost any Nikon/ Canon etc lens on it - 300mm 2.8? You don't have full automation but with practice that really doesn't matter.
Panasonic are bringing out a 150mm 2.8. I understand. That with a converter should help you. But if tech quality was my main priority I'd say that FF is a better choice - lenses and all.
Hello again, I should add that it is of course to be used with a mono or tripod only , even at the short end because of the relative slowness.
+Steinar Knai Sorry, didn't see that before I wrote the previous reply. If the animals are still you'll be ok, then. The Panasonic is the better of the two and topped down to f/8 shouldn't give too much cause for complaint. The bit extra speed will still be handy, even on a support.
Great review thanks for spending the time doing this. Just ordered the lens on the back of this. I'm taking it to the Olympics to complement my standard m4/3 lenses - I'll let you know how I get on with it. Thanks again !
yes. simply YES.
All the best always, be safe.
Thanks! 🙂
Thanks for the informative and articulate review, David. I'm just moving into M43. I started with the 14-45 and have the 20 1.7 coming this week :). Next, maybe a 45-175 or this 100-300, which does looks like an appealing lens.
I dropped my alloy bodied GF1 from 1m onto concrete and hard floors at least 3 times, one time the original 14-140 mark 1 on it hit the concrete face first without cap and didn't break, got a series of dents in the plastic rim. Another time the corner of the camera body hit the deck and it did bend slightly, but everything still worked fine. I can't recall how the third drop went, but I still have it and it still works, and the lens still works too, on my new GH5 and my new-to-me GM1 :-) Many engineering plastics are a superior material to alloys though due to what you mention, their ability to deform and rebound, not true of alloys. Whether that's a good thing inside depends on how the PCBs are mounted and connected to each other as if anything relies on the body for support it will be wracked by a flexing body. I wonder what your thoughts on that are, now? Just checked, my GH5 is magnesium, and it would appear the GM1 is, too?
I'd have thought that a metal frame with plastic where appropriate was best - as with most top line cameras today. The all metal construction of the film Nikon Fs was very tough but a sharp bash could ruin it because it passed right through to the precision mechanics of the camera. With today's camera having so much solid state electronics in them, it's hard to make comparisons. I'm no engineer but given like for like pricing I'd stake the reliability of modern cameras as being better than the old ones. But a well maintained Nikon F would serve for many, many years and was very tough.
Hi David great video thank you, having watched this and a number of other reviews I have just purchased a 100-300 and I am really pleased with it. As you said its not brilliant at 300 f/5.6 but at around f/8 at 260/270 I thought it was really nice. The manual focus ring is a little stiff at the moment so hopefully that will get better with time but yeah all in all its a nice addition to my kit. I already have the 12-35 f/2.8, a 35-100 f/2.8 so ideally I would have like to go for the 100-400 but wow what a difference in price :( anyway, keep them coming David love your stuff thank you :)
Thanks, David! As I said in the review, to justify the price of the 100-400 you need to use it a lot. The 100-300 performs very well and is good enough for most of us. The bigger one is icing on the cake, really!
Hi David. Just got the 100-300 and the focus ring is quite stiff. Have yours got better?
Thanks David. I think this lens is still a good choice, and often you can find used copies for a bargain.
It's very compact for its focal range and I always found the performance very respectable. The beauty of a lens like this is that you can almost always find room for it in your camera bag.
Nice to hear, thanks.
You'll enjoy it, Will
Like stephen, I just logged on to compliment you on this video. I especially like the final roundup.
Please allow me a tiny tiny criticism. I'm not a native speaker, so my impression is you speak fairly fast. Your great intonation makes up for it though.
I just got this lens together with the Roesch mount for my trip to Africa next month. :)
Thanks again. I thoroughly enjoyed your video.
Hi David, have you used this lens handheld at a zoo? I bought the 14-140 mk2 lens recently and was slightly disappointed with the images I got from a trip to Twycross zoo. I didn't yearn for extra reach (although it would be nice), but I couldn't seem to get the shutter speed fast enough to freeze slight movement of the animals without bumping the ISO up to 1600 and above. My options are this 100-300 mk2 or the Olympus 40-150 f2.8 although the Panasonic is obviously preferable due to it's cheaper price! Any input on this lens suitability at a zoo would welcome. Camera is a GX80
Hi James - I haven't used this lens specifically at a zoo but I used it extensively out and about . Being such a very long lens it would be fearsomely big and expensive to make a wider aperture version so you are at at the mercy of the light. The GX80 is good at 1600 ISO but for detailed stuff of animals I wouldn't want to go much above that, I agree. The 100-300 is still relatively slow at the longer end and little different to the 100-400'a aperture at 300mm
I have to say, the 40-150mm f/2.8, with the 1.4x extender is the best choice. The lack of stabilization doesn't matter because the GX80 IBIS is well up to the job. But that f/2.8 aperture is a game changer. In situations where you would using ISO 1600, you'll be able to use ISO 400 or 800 with the extender. It doesn't have the reach of the other two lenses it is true but you can easily try out the suitability by using those at up to 150/210 mm. The other thing I would say is that the 40-150 in the long run may be a cheaper option. It would require a step change in lens technology to better it and there's not even a glimpse of that on the horizon so I regard mine as a lens for life. There's talk of a Panasonic 50-200mm f/2.8-4 at some point but the spec doesn't signal any advantage over the Olympus to me.
Thanks for such a detailed reply David, yes I agree in the longer run the 40-150 would probably be cheaper - if only to stop me buying every slow telephoto lens and then deciding I need the 2.8 aperture anyway!
+Harry Bunn (GRVOTV) Yes, in general but probably reaching its limits at the 300mm end. What is a shame is that the in lens stabilization on this one won't work in tandem with the body stabilization.
Yes, must be some technical problem because they'd do it if they could, I'm sure. Unless they thought it would dilute sales of the 100-400. But I wouldn't think that's the reason.
I must do that. I keep meaning to update my Why I Use Micro Four Thirds video too but then a new toy comes along and I somehow get diverted.
Nice of you to say so. I enjoy making the videos but it's knowing they are appreciated that's the icing on the cake.
Just love your reviews - you know your stuff and just so fun to listen to and you make perfect sense and not an extreme pixel peeker :) can't wait to see more videos soon - I am likewise waiting on my GX7 and 35-200 F2.8 from Japan - should get the lens tomorrow but B&H says GX7 expected Oct 2nd to ship that is if they did not sell out by the time I ordered, I hope it does not go on back order. I am going to look to the 100-300mm Have Sony HX50v with 30x or about 600mm but like a bit more IQ
Thanks David. I think i'll go for this lens on a GH4 body for wildlife. It'll work with the IS system and isn't too expensive. Yeah I know - the Olympus body equivalent doesn't need lens IS, but doing 4K video really appeals - both for the video performance and stills-grab-from-video ability. With a reasonable 50mm lens in addition, this setup will take me long enough time to perfect for 4K video to be in wide use in home TV's... I'd like to thank you for your erodite and elegant videos, they've convinced me to spend $2000 instead of wasting $1000 on so-so gear. :)
First time I've been thanked for costing someone money :-) Seriously, I'mt old that 4K video downsampled to FHD gives a boost in quality. I've been using 4k Photo Pre-Burst on some martins building their nests, and I've got pix I'd never have got any other way.
lol.. Yes so true. Walking through bush and something happens, with camera in hand you quickly take a 4K burst. While the stills may not be the absolute best, the scene may very well be and at least you recorded it in reasonable quality
Yes, any M4/3 camera.
I already have a 14-42 zoom and the Olympus 45mm so I didn't feel there was any point in having a third lens with this focal length. The 100-300 is a logical jump and I do find the long end of this lens handy at times.
Otherwise, the 45-175 would have been a good choice. Basically, I'd have one of each if I could but lousy money holds me back!
Thanks so much, Stephen. Made my day.
Nice review, just subscribed. I got this lens recently for my GH4 and have yet to test it properly. Just wanted a lens that could be good for wildlife videos starting out and had IS and I am on a budget, so went for it. I will be primarly using it for 1080p videos, using an Atomos Ninja 2 and setting the GH4 to 4K and its HDMI to downconvert to 1080p 4:2:2 10-bit. On the one test I did so far using the GH4, the 100-300mm on a tripod, I did notice the lens produces very noticeable rolling shutter and wobble if zoomed in when I tapped the tripod and will have to figure how to get it the camera and lens stable enough to avoid that.
You are right about sharpness drop off. I noticed at 300mm the lens did get softer and was sharpest at 100mm and a little less so but still decent to 250mm between f/5.6 and f/8.0 then it gets softer at 300mm and I have seen reviews of people mentioning it.
I did check out DXO Mark on this lens: www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Panasonic/Panasonic-LUMIX-G-VARIO-100-300mm-F40-56-MEGA-OIS-mounted-on-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-GH3__842 and they only have tested it on a GH3, which I don't think there would be much difference in quality using it on a GH4, but they said it only produced 5MP sharpness on the GH3 which isn't particularly sharp, but for me, if I am shooting video to an Atomos Ninja 2 with the 4K downconvert, I should get decent video quality since even though starting at 4K is 8.3MP, more detail than what the lens is reported to pick up, downconverting to 1080p which is 2.1MP only should make the results look fine since its less MP than the sharpness of the lens even if the camera is starting out recording more.
I don't think you'll have any sharpness problems with video. Theoretical performance is one thing but in real life with a 12x magnification factor atmospheric conditions can be more important than the nuances of lines per mm.
wonderful review David! thank you for sharing as usual. I am currently using an OMD do you think the olympus 70-300 is a better choice or does the panasonic wins in the long lens race? Thanks!
Sounds like Alan Ford giving a lens review. :-) Very helpful and comprehensive information. So thanks for that. :-)
I'd love to see a review of the new one if you can get your hands on one.
Yes, I'd like to try one - have to see if I can get hold of one.
Yes, on FF/ 35mm it has the same angle of view as a 200-600mm.
Great video again thanks for making it
splendid review! thanks so much
Don Koblitz Thanks, Don
Any correction would have to be in post processing and none too easy I'm afraid.
Hi David. I hope you are doing well. I would love to hear your impressions on the newer version of this lens.
Thanks, Gil. I haven't tried it but it is optically identical with upgrades to the stabilization and AF. I personally wouldn't worry about upgrading it but certainly if I was biying now I'd buy the new one. I'll see if I can get hold of pone.
@@DavidThorpeMFT Thank you for the reply.
Im thinking of getting this lens for a GH5s.
It should work well. The compact size and low weight make it so much easier to manoeuvre than most lesnes of its magnification.
Hey David would you recommend this over the Olympus 75-300mm II?
I'm struggling with the same decision. If only the Panny version would come down $100 it would be an easy choice i.e. f4 - f5.6 and dual IS, with included hood.
As the 100-400 mm lens is out of my budget, do you think the 100-300 mm despite its age now is good value for money?
+wonderfullifetgb It was never the very best of MFT lenses but I never had a problem with it and I'd happily use it. Yes, pretty good value.
RIP David.
I have the G9 with Olly 75-300. With the G9's ibis, it's still quite prone to "twitches" in videos. I wonder if with the Dual IS that the panny 100-300 ii would bring into play even these "twitches" would be ironed out?
I'm surprised Olympus cameras don't correct purple fringing with Panasonic lenses. Did that change since this video was made?
No, that's not changed. Olympus lenses natively have less purple fringing than Panasonic usually (I can't imagine why) so maybe they want to emphasize the difference!
just received this lens and loving it so far. Do you use ND, polarizer, or other filters with this lends and in what settings? I usually at least get the very basic almost imperceptive protective filter. Thanks for ideas and the recommendation of this lens. For my budget as a hobby photographer, this lens is great and already getting shots I've never been able in the past at a distance and semi-macro. Thanks.
Unfortunately he passed away
Are the lens compatible with the olympus mark IV
Very nice review, thank you! One question: there is a specific issue in the bokeh. Best to see in the photo of cyclists - it's like the wall of trees would twist clockwise. I have the same issue at my Sigma 50-150 for APS-C and it makes me want to smash it in the bin. Stoping down usually helps but then the depth of field goes lost...unfortunately this would mean a big NO for this Lens. Is there some correction possibility? Thanx!
Haha! Glad you found the review useful.
ace review! thank you!
Does it come with the hood? I am starting to get annoyed with Olympus for not supplying a hood as standard
No hood. I was reading the other day that the 75mm f1.8, an expensive lens, doesn't come with a hood. You really do need a hood with most lenses so Olympus are effectively under reporting the price of their lenses. The 70mm one, they want around $60 for it I believe'
Hey David thx for the spectacular videos you've help me so much !!!
My question , does the 100-300 shoot as far as a cannon 200-600 mm ?
Sun Sin Thanks Sun! Yes, on an MFT camera, the 100-300 gives the same angle of view as a 200-600 on a full frame.
just wondering why you did not choose the 45-175mm?
Hello, I have a Lumix Panasonic G2, can I use the lens with my camera too?
And I'm trying to find a good lens to take pictures at events, such as taking pictures of bands live, would this lens be good for that? Because I probably won't need flash with it.
David Thorpe always makes me laugh with his real life comparisons (Paparazzi) Lol..
:-)
Only the extending part and the zoom ring is plastic. The main body is a light metal alloy.
Would this lens be good for a church live stream? (on a GH5). Tripod is planned to be about 80-100ft away from the stage.
It's got some crazy zooms but maybe
at 7:17, what are you referring to? I think you say an extended telly function? a 2.6 magnification?
It's the Ex Tele. Conv function in the Panasonic _Motion Picture_ menu. Works for up to FHD video.
Can you do a study using this lens on the current dual IS Lumix GX8 in terms of image quality ? Thanks.
+Robin Leow Hi Robin - This lens won't operate with dual IS and apparently there are no plans to upgrade the firmware. Possibly the design is not compatible.
This is actually a 200-600 on the GH2, right?
Hi, Does this, and the 12>35 f2.8 have full time manual focusing in auto focus mode - which I find really useful?
I just got this lens and I have noticed that the barrel has a little bit of wiggle in it. It zooms smoothly, it just simply has a wiggle which I have never noticed on any other lens. Is that normal? The wiggle is present whether it is zoomed or not.
I haven't got a 100-300mm to hand but with a quick check on my Olympus 12-40 and Panasonic 14-140 both a show a small amount of wiggle. The 50-100, on the other hand has none at all. A small amount is normal, I think and nothing to worry about. I think that with time and wear and tear most lenses will develop a little looseness but it shouldn't affect performance.
I need this lens. saving bucks for it takes me ages.
+FRIED CHICKEN Yes, the price is reasonable for what it is but reasonable can still be a lot of money :-(
I see that this was uploaded 2012, are you still using this lens? I have an older GH1 and want something alittle more than the standard 14-140. the 100-300 suits my requirements. but new zealand pricing puts the lens in the, *i dont need it* basket.
Yes, was using it the other day. It has no competitor, really. It's just over £400 in the UK which is reasonable for such a lens. Is it so much more expensive in NZ?
There's the Olympus 75-300 which is a bit cheaper here but presumably that's still expensive in NZ.
Could you get one sent from Japan?
doesn't seem much smaller than my APS-C canon 55-250
I like the lumix camera their size, but once you put a tele on it, the size benefit is negated
+Aurelie Nani While it's true that the μ4/3 size advantage is less with long telephotos, I'm not sure you're comparing like with like.
If I've got my crop factors right, at 250mm x 1.6 the Canon gives a 400mm equivalent, so the Panasonic 100-300 has 50% more reach at (300mm x 2=) 600mm equivalent. The direct comparison to the Canon 55-250 zoom is the Panasonic 45-200, which is considerably smaller than the 100-300, and for a slight focal length penalty (350mm equivalent) the Panasonic PZ 45-175 is even smaller than that.
I don't use long telephotos much, but my 45-200 is light enough to carry all the time "just in case", and small enough to sit upright in a single lens compartment of my rucksack (unlike my old Nikon 75-300 which had to go flat, occupying two lens compartments).
There is a huge size advantage, look up a 600mm full frame lens.
+Aurelie Nani In general, Micro Four Thirds lenses are smaller than FF or APs-C but no, with a tele on they are not pocketable. Even so, take a look at the optically excellent Panasonic 35-100 f/4-5.6. There's nothing like it anwhere else.
I'm struggling to decide whether or not to spend the extra $200 on v2 of this lens vs the slower Olympus 75-300mm. Of course I'm going to get the Panny ultimately when I'm done torturing myself. I'm not sure, but I think the Depth from Defocus on a Lumix body(GX85) only works with Lumix lenses. Then there's the weather sealing on the new lens, and the included hood....
Well you're doing a good job of talking me into it whether you buy it or not :-)
@@DavidThorpeMFT Lol. I was hoping you would give me your erudite opinion David. Do you think the Lumix 100-300mm is the way to go with a Lumix body despite the $200 differential? Of course as soon as I buy it, it will drop in price like a rock.
@@datapro007 I think it is. You have the dual stabilization, weather proofing, (marginally) faster focusing. If I already had the earlier version I wouldn't bother to upgrade but buying anew, I'd get the latest one. Your G85 can certainly take advantage of the improved lens. Optically, it's the same but even so, yes I think it is worth it.
@@DavidThorpeMFT Thank you David! I value your input.
So,You're saying,that it would work better with lens O.I.S rather than with dual O.I.S on my gx 8?
This lens didn't do Dual IS, so the lens would likely be better than the camera. Just leave them both on would be best anyway. The GX8 will sort it out. The newer lens version does support Dual IS and had has better C-AF performance too.
Nice one,mate! I'll just search for mk2 version.
Do you know if there are any significant differences between the first and second generation?
Optically they are identical. The dust proofing, stabilization and AF are improved. If I already had one I wouldn't bother to update. Buying used, you 'd save a lot of money with the older one with little loss in usability unless you regularly used the lens to its extremes.
@@DavidThorpeMFT so the elder one is OK for me.
Thank you very much!
Hey, would this work on a Panasonic Lumix G2?
Do you think it is difficult to shoot in handheld with this long lens?
The stabilization is effective but it can only do so much. Used at the long 300mm end, this lens has 12x magnification over normal. Up to 150mm I reckon hand-holding is OK but much over that and I prefer a tripod or maybe monopod at a push. (On a tripod, switch off the stabilization.)
I have the first version of this lens (the one with the yellow letters) and it makes my em10 mark II slower to shoot, i works well enough on AF-S but when i switch to AF-C it hunts a lot for focus and slows the frames per second, any tips?
Not really, Jorge. Switch off stabilization to save processor cycles is all I can suggest. The newer version focuses better, I am told but I haven't tried it.
Hello David, I have a problem choosing between the Oly 75-300 vII and the Pana 100-300 for my EM1 kit. It is to be used for shooting stag late night and early morning (am I too optimistic?) and otherwise for wildlife in zoo and wild conditions. Which one is better and is any of the two good enough? Thanks in advance for your help :) Kindly Steinar
+Steinar Knai Hi Steinar - neither of these lenses is at their best at the long end that you are likely to be using.and both are fairly slow at 300mm. The f/5.6 of the Panasonic is usefully quicker, though. Late night and early morning...hmmm. You don't make life easy, do you :-). Have you thought of a Metabones adaptor? With a Nikkor 300mm f/4.5 (just as an example) that gives you a 210mm (420mm equivalent) f/3.2, just a half a stop down from f/2.8. There's not such a big difference in image size between 210 and 300mm but is is a heck of a lot faster and will be much better in low light conditions. Manual focus is easy with this configuration and the older Nikon and Canon optics, already superb, are further enhanced by the Metabones. Just a thought.
+David Thorpe Well, I have thought it through further and thanks for your comments, but I think the 40-150 f2.8 with the convertor is the better option for me; And I'll just wait for the 300 f4 from Olympus, which I think is coming this fall. Agree?
+Steinar Knai The big Olympus zoom and converter is an unbeatable combination and would be first choice for your purposes. It's expensive but you are unlikely to want to get rid of it all the while you use MFT so in the long run so it's worth it.
Is it compatible with Panasonic GX7?
Hi Sumit. Yes, 100%. MFT is a standard and all equipment within it will work with everything else. The main thing to watch for is that since Olympus build stabilization into the body, their lenses are not stabilized if used on a Panasonic body other than the GX7. But this lens is Panasonic and has stabilization built in.
would you use OIS on a tripod if windy?
Yes, I would. If it was effective would depend on the strength and speed of the wind so a bit of experimentation might be necessary.
David, I just took this lens to Yellowstone and loved its performance. I did wish it had a mount. I found this link www.roesch-feinmechanik.de/29701.html. There are a couple of videos about it elswhere, but I thought it might be useful for you.
Arthur Collins Thanks Arthur. I've actually had one of these for a long while. Beautifully made and something the lens should have had as part of is design. It makes the lens a lot steadier on a tripod because of its better balance. The only downside is that you have to remove the GH3/4 battery grip if you have it fitted because it fouls the tripod mount.
Very nice find! I'm getting the 100-300mm soon, and this would be a very good enhancement. Will contact them, thanks :)
Thank you for very informative video! Can you help me to select the telephoto lens for my EM5 MarkII? I am considering one of two lenses: Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300 and M. ZUIKO 75-300. What do you know about focus speed of Pan100-300 on OMD body? Thank you very much!
Thanks Viktor! Both lenses perform well with the Olympus maybe having a slight edge but not enough to sway judgement. Focusing is the same speed on both makers bodies with either lens, no worry there at all. Since you have an Olympus body it is tempting to go for the cheaper Olympus lens as you don't need the stabilization. However, if you are going to be photographing difficult subjects like birds, the Panasonic does have a an f/5.6 at the long end compared to f/6.7. It's not huge but it's that that would make me buy the Panasonic ultimately.
Many thanks for your quick and comprehensive response! It inclines me to Panny. What is your opinion regarding the sharpness of both lenses at 300 mm? I found discrepant conclusions about it.
All long zooms are at their worst at the long end and these two are no exception. However, for neither is their worst bad. Performance for both at 300mm is pretty much the same for both, whatever difference their is wouldn't be enough to sway a decision.
You make the assumption that everyone knows as much as you. I don't make that assumption. I have mail from folk who had the impression after reading about focal length equivalence and so on that the actual focal length must change. So, I answered Andy's question in a way that covers both eventualities.
I never assume that people know everything. There's a lot that I don't know but I don't feel the need to be rude when someone does their best to explain it to me.
(FYI, I don't know alot about cameras before I ask this question.)
I'm going to get a GH4, so will this lens zoom when I actually zoom in with the camera, not the lens? (Sorry if it's confusing)
No problem! - there's no zoom control on the GH4 camera body. Zooming with the 100-300 is by turning the zoom ring manually only. There's no motorized zooming at all with this lens.
9 lumixg1g2 g3 g4
The comparison to a Tamron 200-500 f/2.8 is pointless. That lens makes the Sigma 50-500 f/4.5-6.3 and the recent Tamron 150-600 f/5-6.3 look like MFT lenses, both of which are more suitable comparisons.
nemac23 I don't understand what you mean. The comparison is humorous, a joke, for fun. I say that they are not comparable myself in the video. You're not telling me you took it seriously, surely?
Sorry mate must have missed the joke. Thought I'd drop a couple realistic FF alternatives for anyone interested though they are twice the price of the 100-300!
nemac23 No problem. That Tamron is one heck of a lens, I'd love to try one - after I've been on a body building course! And thanks for the added info. A 100 - 1000 equivalent - what an amazing lens that would be, Specialist but if you are shooting birds from a hide, say, it would give you great coverage.
Something near that could be had with a D7100 in cropped mode, but again the 50-500 is twice the price of the 100-300. However, the D7100 could be paired with a 70-300 VR and would achieve a 15.4MP image @ almost 140-600 equivalent in cropped mode. That combo would be cheaper than an E-M1 + 100-300 for example (B&H prices). Here's a comparison of the combos though I imagine the results might look different if cropped mode was taken into consideration: bit.ly/1xxOb2f
Where is it made?
Japan
Is there any cheaper version that's similar to this for lumix g series?
No, not really. There's a Mk2 now, so you might get hold of this one, the original, a bit cheaper.
David Thorpe have you tried the mk2 one? Is there any significant difference?
@@mooabdzar3972 The new one can do dual stabilization and the focus speed is improved. They are also weather sealed. But optically they are identical.
Looking for a long zoom for my future G85 / GH5 (IBIS), how does this compare to an Olympus 75-300?
I'm worried about the inconsistent quality of the panasonic zoom rings, and the softness at 300. Now the G85 has IBIS, I think the 75-300 may be a better option. My thinking is that the 12-60 + 75-300 would give me nearly a full range, with just two lenses. I plan on taking this setup high on mountains, instead of my old FZ150 superzoom (where I love the 25-600 zoom range!).
Thank you!
With the stabilization problem out of the way the only disadvantage of the Olympus is the slightly slower speed. It sounds like your best choice to me given that its optical performance is overall better.
David, Thank you!
will you review olympus 300mm f4
I don't get any help from Olympus so have to buy all my gear. I'd love to review the 300mm but it is very expensive. I'll try to borrow one, if I can.
David Thorpe I thought you had one, you mentioned it in your private gear. There was a link where you mentioned among other things beginner's gear range finder gear personal gear landscape gear etc.
No, I include the 300mm in my 'dream' kit entry. I have little use for a 300mm so just use a 1980s Nikon 300mm f/4.5 with an adapter.
David Thorpe it is a matter of whether you get the shot at the end of the day or not true birders swear by the 600mm one guy even said I switched from sony to canon because of the 600mm unfortunately he never heard of the mft system I guess. He paid something like 2k for the lens and the weight is a no no.
I like that too. But no, neither do, unfortunately.
Im a trombone player and i can attest to his analogy. Hmm…maybe i should take my horn in and have it modded 😂