Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
From the 5min comparison I could make, the Oly 300mm PRO IQ looks clearly in another league (sharpness, contrast, bokeh) but I'm not sure the m4/3 sensors deserve such IQ level.
Personally I'm more happy with a smaller, lighter, cheaper, more flexible lens like the 100-400mm Pana (I would choose a Nikon D750 or D810 and a 300mm f4,0 in second hand + crop or teleconverter if more reach is needed).
Thanks Bart. BTW, which image stabilization are you using, if any?Not a great sample perhaps, but to my eye the PL100-400's output at 132mm is pretty good, certainly good enough for me ... :grin:
Well, I've spent no time yet bothering about the stabilization.Thanks Bart. BTW, which image stabilization are you using, if any?
The in Lens or E-M1 Body IS?
Is there a difference in user experience?
The problem with using a D810 for this is that you need a 300mm plus a 1.4x TC plus crop mode to get the same reach as an E-M1 with the 300mm without TC. Although the image quality of the D810 is amazing, particularly at low ISO, you would rarely be at base ISO with such a combo. ISO 800 and an effective aperture of f/8 would be the norm according to my experience, while the Olympus combo with better IS and wider effective aperture probably would allow ISO 100 or 200 under the same circumstances.From the 5min comparison I could make, the Oly 300mm PRO IQ looks clearly in another league (sharpness, contrast, bokeh) but I'm not sure the m4/3 sensors deserve such IQ level.
Personally I'm more happy with a smaller, lighter, cheaper, more flexible lens like the 100-400mm Pana (I would choose a Nikon D750 or D810 and a 300mm f4,0 in second hand + crop or teleconverter if more reach is needed).
Don't shoot me for saying this, it's just my personal view and I've never been a sport photographer :roll eyes:
I doubt that any current mirrorless camera can compete with the best DSLR bodies when it comes to focus tracking. This is partly technology-related, but I suspect that Canon's and Nikon's experience within this field, with enormous input from thousands of professional users, comes into play as well. This may change in the future, but not any time soon I'm afraid. If you turn the table, there's no way Nikon can compete with the contrast detect AF-C of the GH4 when shooting video. That's Panasonic's domain, and they are he ones with the experience.Yes, I agree.
The m43 is the king of small & lightweight equipment and this is even more true when using long focal lenses.
I knew before buying the Oly Pen F that the pixel quality wouldn't be at the same level as full frame dslr; but I also knew I would never go out with a DSLR + 500mm lens for casual shooting like I now can do with the Pen F + 100-400mm.
But this logic doesn't hold well if the Olympus 300mm F4 comes in the equation.
600mm equivalent / top optical qualities / 22cm long / 1.6kg / 2.600eur are remarquable specs compared to FF DSLR lenses.
The problem is that 2kg in a small bag is not lightweight anymore, and I only use my M43 system when I want to be light so it immediately puts this combo out of the equation.
I'm new to the m43, I don't know how good the AF continuous tracking of an EM-1 is compared to a sport DSLR body, and I don't know neither how the Pen F AF tracking compares with the EM-1.
Maybe after a firmware update and better settings I'll get better results with my Pen F, but for the moment my continuous shooting experience (with of without TR activated, with or without face recognition, etc) is quite disappointing.
To me long focal length lenses (300mm eq. and up) are much more usable on bodies with excellent AF (for sport of course but also nature). This is important and could also be a reason enough not to spend 2.600eur on a tele lens.
But 'maybe' again, the combination of a Oly body + a Oly lens that has a constant f4 aperture will give good AF tracking results when a Oly body + a Pana zoom lens with a slower aperture will ruin your action shots in any other than ideal situations.
In this case I might re-consider my choice as the 300mm f4 Pro lens would then be more usable than the Pana zoom lens.
I seem to think the longer shot is pretty good, too. Maybe my eyesight, monitor, or taste is failing me?Tend to agree with anGy, on the shorter end the lens is good, the longer end indeed less so.
LEICA DG 100-400/F4-6.3 Shot at 132 mm
Aperture priority AE, 1/250 sec, f/8, ISO 400