These Otters were far away. The photo is a crop from a GH2 photo at 275mm.
These Otters were far away. The photo is a crop from a GH2 photo at 275mm.
At last, a half-decent (not full-decent) shot a full zoom with the 100-300. Unfortunately, to get the speed I needed to set iso to 1250 which introduces so much noise it does tend to destroy the resolution.
But I am at least encouraged by the feather detail and if the expected sun does appear over the next couple of days I may even be able to lower the iso and still maintain the aperture speeds necessary to get sharper results.
That shot at 1250 looks pretty clean to me.....and sharp. A bit more sun will definitely help (ISO and shutter speed)....but I would say that it's a keeper.
Definitely worth waiting for some sunshine and the ability to use a much slower iso - these were at iso400 and 320 respectively, both at 1/200 ... oh and spot metering as well. All on GF-1.
And I'd like to say that never has a post on an internet forum had me so interested in a lens........ The only limiting factor for me would be that I perhaps don't shoot long enough, often enough to justify the price (my Olympus 40-150 gets used a few times a year at most and I'm generally happy with the results plus rarely need to shoot longer). I find the bokeh from the Panasonic lens very attractive and imagine the OIS would be useful on my E-PL1.
First pic with 100-300. it arrived thurs. so I went out and gave it a shot.
Ooc, no pp.
G-1 iso 400.
This time on a GH1:
Jake, taken at 1/15th sec @ 265mm:
Nice kitten shot.....handheld at 1/15.
I have heard comments that the OIS doesn't make that big a difference at 300mm.
What do you think?
Owl From Living Desert Palm Springs CA
300mm f 5.6 1/320 handheld
Last edited by mark1958; 28th December 2010 at 07:36. Reason: added image
1 Member(s) liked this post
>and the extra stops in sensitivity bring out the best.
Yes having higher ISO available helps. Still often use it now with the GH1 to have one camera with this focal range available fast.
Louis, these look very hood. Is the second one, the one with the boats, as sharp as it seems? Would it be possible to post a 100% crop?
I am getting to like this lens very much. A bit of an afterthought, I threw it with my GF-1 into the top of my backpack when I went out to photograph fields today not expecting much from its performance. I was really surprised to find the number of keepers I captured with this lens. These are two of them.
iso200 108mm f5.6 1/200 - LR3.3>B&W>CS3>Lab Space>Soft Light>Nik Sharpener>Resize
iso200 100mm f5.6 1/250 - LR>levels>CS3>Lab Space>Soft Light>Nik Sharpener>Resize
Beautiful photos, Louis. This lens looks like an increasingly viable option.The camera shop was sold out last time I visited (and I ended up buying the 7-14 instead) but it's now on my list.
Downtown Gilroy (GH2 + 100-300mm)
>You've got me looking at the 100-300...
That is dangerous :-)
So I finally got my GH2 and had some time to compare the GH2/100-300mm to my Canon 1DsII with 100-400mm L. The results were very surprising to me. The Panasonic GH2/100-300mm combo was stunningly good, and absolutely held its own to the Canon Combo.
Everything on a tripod (Gitzo 3 series) using remote release, Image stabilization off, and mirror lockup for the 1DsII. Auto focus was used for both, but the focus point was set for the same flower (the one shown in the images below). Images shot indoors with natural light at about a distance of 15-20 feet. Images captured in Raw formats, opened with Lightroom 3 with no sharpening or noise reduction applied. They both sharpen up a lot with some small local contrast addition using Dfine, but that is subjective so I left that out. Here are some crops from shots taken at about 200mm on the Panasonic and 400mm on the Canon. I took shots at f/5.6, but the canon images were ever so slightly blurred. I am guessing I was too fast with the shutter release after mirror lockup, so I do not think that shot was indicative of the lens/camera combo. So I used the f8.0 shots taken below. My first reaction was wow, the Panasonic really had equal or even slightly better detail. The panasonic enjoys a slightly greater depth of field which we would expect. The color renderings were really different and surprised me with both cameras being on auto and the lighting did not change in the few minutes between shooting with each setup. The canon is much warmer. The one area which will be hard to see in these is the shadows. The Canon has some banding, while the Panasonic is, to my eye, cleaner. I will have to see if I can show that later. Overall, I am very impressed with the GH2 and the 100-300mm.
Full image from GH2/100-300mm:
Crop from GH2/100-300mm at 200mm f/8.0
Crop from 1DsII/100-400mm at 400mm f/8.0
Last edited by CPWarner; 1st January 2011 at 18:34.
I have been shooting my G1/GH1 side-by-side with my Canon 1DMk3/1DsMk3 on photo trips for almost a year now. My results (prints up to 17X22) have proved that the Panasonic M4/3 can be very good when compared to a system costing almost 10X. That was mainly for outdoor shooting, landscape type of shots with tripod and decent lighting.
For any fast actions photography that demands critical AF, I still fall back to my Canon system to be sure to have high % of keepers. The AF performance of the GH2 improves a it over g1/GH1 but it is not there yet.
The Panasonic GH2/200mm will have quite a bit more DOF than the Canon 1DsMk2/400mm. Assuming everything else being enough, it is no surprises that the Panasonic shots appears to be 'sharper'. I still have not been able to get my own 100-300 lens yet. My copy of Canon 100-400 is probably the worst performers, especially shooting wide open, among my other Canon super tele lenses.
$ for $, the Panasonic is the best for me today. I am finally committed to the M4/3 system. Can't wait to get my order of the Panasonic 100-300 and the Voigtlander 25f0.95 !!
+$ for $, the Panasonic is the best for me today. I am finally committed to the M4/3 system.
Don't forget: Weight by weight and size by size
'Cp' that is a very interesting comparison. Quite surprising really. I bought the 100-300 because, what they hey, it is fun to have such a large telephoto which is so portable and compact but I am beginning, like you, to be very impressed. Especially since using it as a landscape lens.
I am very impressed too by these comparisons!
I am still arguing for myself to further go with M43 or NEX. The NEX hight still have a certain advantage at higher ISO, but if I compare the complete "package" I can get today with the GH2 and the much broader selection of lenses, then the M43 seems to become the winner.
Life is an ever changing journey
I agree with most of the comments, but the the increase in DOF is not as much as has been made out to be on the web. I have looked at that carefully here and I do not believe that the difference in detail and sharpness are a function of the DOF in this case. The advantage I have is a whole series of images with different F stops to compare. My take was they were very similar. Given some other comments on the 100-300 in this thread, one would not expect this lens to hold up at all to an L lens selling for over $1000. But it did.
The big surprise for me was the shadows. There is banding in the 1DsII's shadows, and none in the GH2. Given the comments on the lower ability to recover highlights in the GH2, I suspect that the Panasonic biased their data to allow for more shadow recovery and less highlight recovery than Canon.
AF is definitely improved with the GH2. It is night and day different. Not as good as the best out there, but I do not shoot sports or birds in flight that much, so I can give that up at this point.
Overall, on a tripod, this is quite a combination. I will have to work on handheld technique with it a bit more, but that is looking good as well. I already enjoy the low weight/compact aspects of the system, and now it is growing in capability. I agree with being eager to get my Voigtlander 25mm f0.95!
I was nicely surprised of the images from my borrowed 100-300 lens. Even with the GH1, it retains so much details and it is more than I expected. With the GH2's new sensor, the new lens definitely shines even better. Yes, it is a keeper for sure. Shooting at the 300mm focal length takes some more practice to show the full potential of the lens.
>more than I expected.
I second that.
>going to try m4/3 for all shooting but am interested in following your thoughts on it since you work with so many systems.
2011 will tell. So far I am quite happy. But also that I plan to use an AF100 for video (comes hopefully this week) gives m4/3 a center role.
Doubt the NEX will ever have the lens selection sure you can use adapters and legacy lenses but who wants that not me.
Went out to the jump zone this afternoon....I wanted to become more familiar with this lens on the GH2 with moving targets.
I tried a number of various sized single focusing points vs. multiple and AF-C vs AF-S. These are AF-S, single shot, single focus point, +2/3EV @ 300mm, handheld (of course). I didn't get many keepers w/ AF-C.....even when I went the "spray and pray" approach. Possibly this was due to the random (or actually less predictive) motion of the parachutists.
I am also finding that the stiff (not smooth) zoom ring is loosening up nicely over time.