Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 12 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 689

Thread: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

  1. #51
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    51
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    My OM Zuiko 500mm Reflex is much longer than the Panasonic zoom anyway, but still shorter
    a lovely lens, definitely handholdable on a G1.
    looking forward to a better performance on a GH2 body

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/2776003...57619597198590

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/2776003...57619597198590

    also expecting my copy of the 100-300 to be waiting for me when i finally get home next week!!

  2. #52
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by Tesselator View Post
    Hi cliff,

    Yes, I expect a lot for what is a lot of money - $600. If that's not a lot for you then please send me $600 - every week.



    Hi all,
    I'm being fairly clear about what I'm comparing this lens to. The FD 100-300mm f/5.6, the Tamron SP 60-300mm f/3.8, and other manual focus legacy lenses like it. I guess I'm a particular class of photographer. I evaluate lenses on the bases of IQ performance first and foremost. After that I look at price. And lastly I consider such features as AF, IS, EA, and etc. I don't care how consumers define the various segments of the market. I'm not a marketing agent so that's completely meaningless to me. It's also not very important to me whether people agree with my assessments or not. They are mine and stand for one man's time and effort in making such judgements. That I spend an excessive amount of time doing just this may or may not add weight to my analysis - that's for others to decide. Certainly, I can't be the only one here who wants top drawer performance at bargain prices. I'd find it strange if other here or anywhere didn't.

    As for image samples of this particular lens I haven seen any "great" ones that weren't scaled down and intelligently processed to hide this lens's severe shortcomings! I think the images posted in this thread are perfect examples. The photographer is good - certainly no slouch - but the lens just can perform and it shows. These samples as far as IQ goes are pretty terrible - yes, bad! The first three are very soft and detail-less even though they have both been scaled and sharpened extensively. The 5th and 6th are much better which to me shows that this lens may have a sweet spot around 120mm if it's also stopped down. If one looks at all of these images here and thinks to themselves that they are examples of good IQ then IMHO they either haven't seen the results of a good lens so have nothing to compare to, haven't learned how to analyze images slash what to look for, or are confusing themselves with emotional content - either from the photographer's skill in composing the capture or from the marketing/forum hype that frenzies the consumer fanatics. In any case these samples do not serve as samples acceptable to actually evaluate this lens. They are not 100% crops and at least a few of them have been sharpened to death - which introduces false detail & noise and destroys some of the existing micro-detail.

    In all it is still the result of my evaluation that anyone would be better suited and better equipped via the purchase of a step filter adapter (if needed) and a 2.4x Canon tele-con (telephoto converter) to place on your existing 14-140 kit lenses. The IQ will be slightly better than this 100-300mm Lumix, the OIS will still function perfectly, the AF will still work correctly, and there is no measurable light loss. It will provide about 150mm to exactly 336mm of extension without vignetting and it only costs $60 - as opposed to $600. Hey, if $600 is nothing then there's absolutely nothing to lose with this! It still may not be as good as the Tamron 60-300mm F/3.8 Macro I mentioned but it's guaranteed to provide better IQ than the Lumix 100-300mm. The tele-con can also be added to any other existing lenses of about 55mm or more...

    .
    I recently got the 100-300 and the GH2. As background, I also have various other equipment including my (3rd) copy of the Tamron 60-300, which as you note is one of the best zooms to get to 300. I also have and have had/used other lenses that are or get to 300, 400mm and longer from Canon, Nikon and Leica. For the record, the long lens that was optically the best that I've used is the 400PC Nikkor from the early 70's; the first compact f/5.6 that Nikon produced with exotic elements. Better than any Nikon 400/3.5 or 2.8 or Canon 300/2.8 of any generation. In use it was rather clunky, as it didn't have IF and a long throw rather rough helicoid. I haven't used the Leica 280/4 Apo, which is apparently the class of the field so that lens is excepted.

    I got the 400/5.6 Nikkor in 1976 to replace the 400/6.8 Telyt I had. Optically the Nikkor was way ahead of the Telyt, but operationally it was exactly the opposite. I could follow focus birds near the close focus limit with the Telyt, whereas the Nikkor was best used for subjects that were stationary.

    I now have the Telyt again. No point in having optical excellence if the haptics prevent you from getting the picture.

    All that said, the 100-300 Panasonic is of similar optical quality to the 60-300 Tamron, but the latter is a lot heavier, larger, and operationally a lot harder to use. When testing I got a lot fewer useably sharp shots with the Tamron due to misfocus and/or shake. The only things better about the Tamron is that it is now cheap, it goes down to 60mm and has a useable macro range.

    The Panasonic 100-300 is a lot better than the 45-200 and the 14-140. That it is better than the 45-200 is good, because the latter is just barely acceptable. The 14-140 is also not that good, but some allowances can be made for the range, just as for the 28-300 Tamron which is really not that good either unless you desperately need that range.

    In any case, to judge the 100-300 you should try it or wait until someone you trust does a full test. Until then making statements such as using a teleconverter on the 14-140 will produce better quaility is rather laughable. Whether the lens provides value to you is something completely separate of course, but optically I am quite satisfied.

    As I'm sure you realize, testing a lens that has the angle of view equivalent to a 600mm lens on full frame requires excellent atmospheric conditions; in fact that is probably one of the main reasons you will see poor quality from a number of long lens shots on the internet.

    Henning

  3. #53
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Interesting. Thanks for that Henning! OK, I'll have to reconsider my initial assessments then. :P


    BTW, Which Nikkor are you talking about? I dunno the Nikkor-PC 400mm F/5.6. I know the old Nikkor EDs...

    Is it this one?


  4. #54
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Here are a few size comparisons of the telephotos I have:

    First up from left to right: Panasonic 45-200mm, Panasonic 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6 OIS, Canon FD 135 f2.8, Canon FD 200mm Macro F4, Canon FD 300mm F4, and Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS with lenses retracted:



    Second: same set with lenses extended. Note that the Canon FD 200mm macro is a helicoil focusing and extends with macro focusing. Shown extended for reference.



    Third: Looking at the Panasonic 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6 OIS vs the Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L IS with lenses retracted and wearing their hoods.



    Fourth: Same as last set with lenses extended:



    Panasonic 100-300 on the scale:



    Canon 100-400mm on the scale:



    Up to now, my Canon 1DsII with the 100-400mmL was what I used when I needed something in the telezoom range. The 45-200 was not quite cutting it for what I wanted in terms of image quality in comparison. I recognize that not everyone will care about this comparison or even consider it relevant, but for some it might be useful. I put the Canon FD lenses in for comparison as they are very good single focal length lenses that work well adapted to m 4/3 bodies. The 135mm and 200mm have adapters on them and the 300 does not have an adapter in the photos.

    I did think that it is rather remarkable that the Panasonic is almost 1/3 the weight of the Canon 100-400mm L IS. Note that the Panasonic does not have a tripod mount which does add weight to the Canon. That said, I would rather cary the Panasonic than the Canon. What is next will be to run some comparison of the Panasonic G2 with 100-300mm versus my Canon 1DsII with the 100-400mm. What is interesting to me is whether I can replace the 100-400mm with the Panasonic. Again, not the comparison everyone is necessarily looking for, but relevant to those looking to downsize their gear from a larger DSLR. I will not be able to get to the image comparisons for a week or two, but I do plan on running them.

    One last note: The Panasonic 100-300mm cost $600 while the Canon 100-400mm L is running $1500 with current rebates.

    Cliff
    Last edited by CPWarner; 15th December 2010 at 19:32.

  5. #55
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Cliff

    Very interesting physical comparison. I look forward to your optical comparison in the future.

    LouisB

  6. #56
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by Tesselator View Post
    Interesting. Thanks for that Henning! OK, I'll have to reconsider my initial assessments then. :P


    BTW, Which Nikkor are you talking about? I dunno the Nikkor-PC 400mm F/5.6. I know the old Nikkor EDs...

    Is it this one?

    That's the one. The 'ED' before the ED's.

    Henning

  7. #57
    Senior Member f6cvalkyrie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    1,643
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    29

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Very interesting, Cliff !

    What's the use of a lens that is optically excellent, but that you do not take with you because it's to heavy ????

    I own a Nikkor 300/2.8 IF-ED, I find it optically superb, but, as it brings 2740 gr of weight, and you need to carry a STABLE tripod for it, I use it mainly around the house for shooting birds and the moon.

    For my mobile needs, I'm expecting delivery of an Olympus B300 Teleconverter (one that mounts on the front of the lens) that I'll test on my 45-200mm.
    If not satisfactory, then I'll consider buying the 100-300mm Panasonic lens

    C U,
    Rafael
    E-M1/GH2/G1 Full Spectrum & lots of lenses
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/f6cvalk...th/9226689839/

  8. #58
    Member kai.e.g.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Friuli-Venezia-Giulia, Italy
    Posts
    150
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    I owned that Canon 100-400mm for 24 hours a few years ago. I purchased it 2nd hand, and it exhibited an issue with the zooming action jamming up within hours. Exchanged it for the 70-300 DO (diffractive optics) instead, which is by design a little more compact. I could post a picture of it, but I have nothing to put next to it to give it context.

  9. #59
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by CPWarner View Post
    Here are a few size comparisons of the telephotos I have:

    First up from left to right: Panasonic 45-200mm, Panasonic 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6 OIS, Canon FD 135 f2.8, Canon FD 200mm Macro F4, Canon FD 300mm F4, and Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS with lenses retracted:

    I have the four on the right! I paid less than $600 for all four combined. Of course I had to repair two of them but that was the fun part! (actually it seems the EF just sold a few hours ago... So I [will] have only the three - costing me a total of $160).

    BTW, I think your comparison was very interesting *and* relevant! Nice one!


    Quote Originally Posted by henningw View Post
    That's the one. The 'ED' before the ED's.

    Henning
    Thanks Henning! I'm going to try and hunt one down!

  10. #60
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by kai.e.g. View Post
    I owned that Canon 100-400mm for 24 hours a few years ago. I purchased it 2nd hand, and it exhibited an issue with the zooming action jamming up within hours. Exchanged it for the 70-300 DO (diffractive optics) instead, which is by design a little more compact. I could post a picture of it, but I have nothing to put next to it to give it context.
    I used to own a copy of the 70-300mm DO. I was never really happy with the optical performance of that lens, so I sold it. I also had the 400mm DO for a bit, so I do have experience with the post processing that images created from the the DO lenses require. But neither of the copies I owned gave me the optical performance I was looking for. That could be because I owned earlier versions of those lenses, as there is ample reports on a number of sites that later lenses in the DO range improved optical performance. The new 70-300 L should be an interesting alternative as well, as it is much more compact and gets rid of the push-pull dust pump of the 100-400. Not quite as long a reach, but interesting.

  11. #61
    Member kai.e.g.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Friuli-Venezia-Giulia, Italy
    Posts
    150
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by CPWarner View Post
    I used to own a copy of the 70-300mm DO. I was never really happy with the optical performance of that lens, so I sold it. I also had the 400mm DO for a bit, so I do have experience with the post processing that images created from the the DO lenses require. But neither of the copies I owned gave me the optical performance I was looking for. That could be because I owned earlier versions of those lenses, as there is ample reports on a number of sites that later lenses in the DO range improved optical performance. The new 70-300 L should be an interesting alternative as well, as it is much more compact and gets rid of the push-pull dust pump of the 100-400. Not quite as long a reach, but interesting.
    I didn't use the 70-300 DO lens much before I stopped using the Canon system altogether in favour of smaller systems. I had taken some OK shots with it, but like you say, it was never stellar. My 70-200L f/4 (non-IS) lens completely outclassed it - in fact, looking back on things, I really have no idea why I purchased that DO lens in the first place. Now I'm selling it, and it won't sell for probably half of what I paid for it.

  12. #62
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by kai.e.g. View Post
    I didn't use the 70-300 DO lens much before I stopped using the Canon system altogether in favour of smaller systems. I had taken some OK shots with it, but like you say, it was never stellar. My 70-200L f/4 (non-IS) lens completely outclassed it - in fact, looking back on things, I really have no idea why I purchased that DO lens in the first place. Now I'm selling it, and it won't sell for probably half of what I paid for it.
    I still have the a 100-400, and had the 70-300DO. The 100-400 is definitely better optically.

    I got the DO for its obvious compactness, but in the end it just wasn't worth it. Even with extensive PP the image quality was disappointing. So now I use a 70-200/4 IS as my more compact lens, and am willing to compromise on size on the one hand or even switch to the 100-400 if I need more reach. I feel that the image quality/size and convenience balance is now acceptable.

    I dropped the first 100-400 I had, which was one of the very early ones, a short distance and the IS stopped working. After a couple of weeks at Canon (and I was a CPS member at the time!) I got it back with the AF making a lot of noise and the IS still not working properly. After 3 more trips to Canon I finally got it back in useable condition, but by that time I had lost confidence in it and sold it, getting a new one shortly thereafter, which I still use.

    The performance is hardly that of the Nikkor 400 I wrote about earlier, but that lens was such a bear to handle quickly that I really can't recommend it except to people who only photograph stationary subjects. Acceptable optical peformance and decent handling generally outweigh outstanding optical quality and awful handling. Therefore my satisfaction with the 100-300, which I would consider optically in the same ballpark as the 100-400. It's hard for me to say more at this time because a) I've only had the 100-300 for a short time, b) the lenses cover different angles of view on the G series and the 5DII respectively, and c) the sensor differences are going to seriously blur the optical differences between the two setups.

    Henning

  13. #63
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by CPWarner View Post
    Here are a few size comparisons of the telephotos I have:

    First up from left to right: Panasonic 45-200mm, Panasonic 100-300mm f/4.0-5.6 OIS, Canon FD 135 f2.8, Canon FD 200mm Macro F4, Canon FD 300mm F4, and Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS with lenses retracted:



    Cliff
    A very nice and appropriate comparison. I've used all except the 135, and still have the zooms.

    I don't have the Canon 200/4, but do have and use the Micro-Nikkor 200/4 IF AiS, and use it on both the FF Canon and the m4/3. It works really well on the G bodies as a 400mm equiv. macro, and also as a 560mm equiv. macro with the TC14b converter. Very decent optical quality and excellent handling with the IF. The new Nikon 200 Micro is better optically, but is a lot larger and heavier.

    Henning

  14. #64
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by henningw View Post
    Therefore my satisfaction with the 100-300, which I would consider optically in the same ballpark as the 100-400. It's hard for me to say more at this time because a) I've only had the 100-300 for a short time, b) the lenses cover different angles of view on the G series and the 5DII respectively, and c) the sensor differences are going to seriously blur the optical differences between the two setups.

    Henning
    Henning,

    That is true about the sensors confounding the differences in the lenses. I will be looking at the 1DsII/100-400mm vs the G2/100-300mm. It would not be a true comparison of glass but glass/body combination. If I can get my hands on a GH2, I would really like to add that to the comparison. However, they are very hard to get in the US now. Nobody has stock, so that will have to wait.

    As to the Canon FD 200mm F4 Macro, that is a stunning lens. 1:1 at closest focus, and really sharp images.

    Cliff

  15. #65
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    GH2 on the way! I found a body only that was being sold at list price rather than being sold at way over list. Can't wait.

    Testing will wait until it gets here next week. So far, in a preliminary test, the G2/100-300mm held its own with the 1DsII/100-400mm. I will say that for images taken indoors at moderate distances with a tripod, this produces very good images with equivalent detail to the Canon setup. There are some color differences in the Panasonic vs Canon setups. Pretty impressive. There were some differences, but not as much as I expected. Since I have heard so much good about the GH2, I am going to wait for it to show up before doing more careful tests.

  16. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    944
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Got a chance to take a few pics this morning with the 100-300 on a GF1. It was a bit challenging. The sun was at my back hitting the LCD and I forgot the VF-1 in another bag. I was shooting a little blind.

    This shot is ported straight out of camera through LR w/ no adjustments.

    Panasonic DMC-GF1, f/6.3 @ 300 mm, 1/500, ISO 100



    Here is a 1:1 crop....



    All in all, I am pretty pleased with the results considering I was standing about 25' away, handheld in a slight breeze.

    R

  17. #67
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Very nice image Rich. Wish we had something other than snow and ice to look at here. Sun would be nice too!

  18. #68
    Member slau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    AB, Canada
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    I found the 100-300 is very similar to performance of the 45-200, and I am quite impressed with the new lens. I have been waiting for this lens as I would like to have option not to carry my Canon super tele lenses if I want to travel light. Even with the GH2 body, the combination is not fast (in terms of AF) enough for bird-in-flight. But, I think it is more than capable for general outdoor shots with half decent lighting.

    All the full sized images in the 100-300 gallery were shot in raw and converted to 90% JPG using Lightroom 3.3 with the sharperning off during the Export. While the last 5 shots were handheld, the other shots were shot with tripod under very windy condition. I did exposure adjustment to all the images with the Auto tone and minor fill adjustment:
    http://www.pbase.com/stephenl/panasonic_10_300
    Stephen Lau
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    http://www.pbase.com/stephenl

  19. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    944
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by slau View Post
    Even with the GH2 body, the combination is not fast (in terms of AF) enough for bird-in-flight. But, I think it is more than capable for general outdoor shots with half decent lighting.
    Thanks Stephen for putting these up. I think you summed it up nicely.

    The 100-300 on the GH2 body is so tiny in comparison to the Canon 100-400 on the 7D and will grab the majority of the same shots.

    R

  20. #70
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by Rich M View Post
    Got a chance to take a few pics this morning with the 100-300 on a GF1. It was a bit challenging. The sun was at my back hitting the LCD and I forgot the VF-1 in another bag. I was shooting a little blind.

    This shot is ported straight out of camera through LR w/ no adjustments.

    Panasonic DMC-GF1, f/6.3 @ 300 mm, 1/500, ISO 100
    Rich: WoW! Amazing example of what the lens can do in the right hands.

  21. #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    944
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    Rich: WoW! Amazing example of what the lens can do in the right hands.
    Louis.....like many of my of my photos, there is a large component of luck involved.

    After shooting with this lens over the last several days, I find it to be very versatile......like all m4/3 gear. However, it will be challenged In low light or in very fast action....like almost all gear and lenses.

    If you want fast glass and 8fps, you will pay for it.....in price AND in weight. For $600 and a kit less than five pounds, I have absolutely no regrets.

    R

  22. #72
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,346
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by slau View Post
    I found the 100-300 is very similar to performance of the 45-200, and I am quite impressed with the new lens. I have been waiting for this lens as I would like to have option not to carry my Canon super tele lenses if I want to travel light. Even with the GH2 body, the combination is not fast (in terms of AF) enough for bird-in-flight. But, I think it is more than capable for general outdoor shots with half decent lighting.

    All the full sized images in the 100-300 gallery were shot in raw and converted to 90% JPG using Lightroom 3.3 with the sharperning off during the Export. While the last 5 shots were handheld, the other shots were shot with tripod under very windy condition. I did exposure adjustment to all the images with the Auto tone and minor fill adjustment:
    http://www.pbase.com/stephenl/panasonic_10_300
    Thanks for posting these. They gave me a lot of answers. I played around with them a bit, and except for those taken at 300mm, they all look plenty sharp, even those taken at around 270mm. That is 540mm eqv., and longer than a 70-300mm on a DX format camera. That's good enough for me

  23. #73
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by Rich M View Post
    If you want fast glass and 8fps, you will pay for it.....in price AND in weight. For $600 and a kit less than five pounds, I have absolutely no regrets.

    R
    My feelings exactly!

  24. #74
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    I've seen enough now to think that the 100-300mm is (or can be) pretty good. It's still not for me though. It's just too expensive (for me) for what one gets. The same $600 will buy 2 or 3 killer MF lenses (used) and I seem to be able to snuff the 100-300's output with something like the $150 ~ $200 FD 300mm F/4 L and even match it with something like a $75 ~ $150 Sigma 400mm F/5.6.





    Sigma 400mm f/5.6 @ f/5.6, 1/125s, ISO: 500, Camera: GH1







    Sigma 400mm f/5.6 @ f/8, 1/100s, ISO: 500, Camera: GH1


    I know I've been a nay-sayer on the 100-300 previously in this thread and I guess I have to retract most of that... But the lens is still not for me. Now, if it were $200 ~ $300 I would be wanting one! No, wait... ...I would be having one.



    .

  25. #75
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    As one of my threads over at DPreview was linked to and criticised for showing resized images, i would like to point out that i post images for fun, not to prove this camera or that lens is the best ever since sliced bread, i always post resized and PP images, but i did post a couple of full sized images on request OOC, i bloody hate pixel peeping and don't see the point, you don't hang a 200% picture on the wall or frame one for your desk, i just don't get it guys.

    So just to be clear, my pics are posted for fun, i did undertake quite a lot of work on request, since i had a 100-300 and a GH2 before most of the guys over at DPreview, but those images were post OOC and full sized.

    Tesselator was very critical of my pics and the 100-300, i never understood his violent outburst that he could produce better images with a 10$ lens.

    Actually, beside the image above my post of the cormorant i thought some of the other samples he has shown in various threads to be very average, i saw a shot of a Pigeon that looked so over processed that it was ruined.

    Anyhow, i thought i needed to reply,

    Be good, and take great pics.

    Mark.

  26. #76
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    944
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by Tesselator View Post
    I've seen enough now to think that the 100-300mm is (or can be) pretty good. It's still not for me though. It's just too expensive (for me) for what one gets. The same $600 will buy 2 or 3 killer MF lenses (used) and I seem to be able to snuff the 100-300's output with something like the $150 ~ $200 FD 300mm F/4 L and even match it with something like a $75 ~ $150 Sigma 400mm F/5.6.
    Tesselator.....I have seen some of your bird shots posted here and on other forums using MF lenses on m4/3 camera bodies.

    I have to say that you have amazing ability to be able to focus on the fly (literally) like that. It is a skill to be marveled at.

    The closest I ever came to that was to shoot a relatively more compliant bird using the Konica UC 400/5.6 (and even THAT one missed focus by a hair).



    I agree with you.....there is a LOT of affordable high quality long glass out there in the second-hand market. I own some.....I just don't have the ability to get a high percentage of usable shots out of them.....and it's not just the focus, it is also the stabilization issue.

    So for me, the value equation is pretty simple; $600 for a lens that I can get keepers like this out of...



    OR a bunch of out of focus throw aways.

    I wish I could shoot and capture images like you do......I can't.

    R

  27. #77
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    "violent outburst"?

    We're talking about photo equipment not war or something actually life and death meaningful. Don't get things too far out of perspective now.

    And also you seem to be fabricating reality somewhat here. I don't think I was overly critical of your image at all. It was in someone else's thread. You posted a pigeon and I requested a 100% crop. You posted it and I replied:

    Thanks Mark!
    Yeah, not great - but not as bad as I thought either. Pretty typical for a low-dollar AF hobby lens. (low dollar being $150 ~ $350). So I've changed my opinion from it being the worst lens ever to: It's just over-priced by 200%.

    That's better tho!

    Thanks again for accommodating us with the 100% crop!
    The images that I was being critical about were these:

    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=37093234

    And those are seriously terrible! These were some of the very first samples to appear online from an owner/user of the Lumix 100-300 and these are as well as a few others very much like them from others posted a little later on, the reasons I thought the lens was so bad.

    But allow me to clue you in a little bit. Anytime anyone posts an image online they should be prepared to receive criticism without taking it personally or seeking revenge in other forum venues - which would be very un-adult. If it's "just for fun" their own fun, then they should simply ignore any comments that don't seem "fun" to them. If they are like most people however they can probably benefit by listening to the analysis and critique offered - even if it feels hurtful or uncomfortable at first. If it does feel that way it's probably because you're taking it personally. When you post an image it automatically becomes a subjective thing and leaves the realm of your personage. People are free to hate it, love it, use it as a teaching tool, use it as a indication of the photographer's abilities or camera/lens qualities, and etc.

    That's just how it is. It's not personal unless you make it so... and then it's only personal to you.
    Last edited by Tesselator; 21st December 2010 at 10:25.

  28. #78
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by Rich M View Post
    Tesselator.....I have seen some of your bird shots posted here and on other forums using MF lenses on m4/3 camera bodies.

    I have to say that you have amazing ability to be able to focus on the fly (literally) like that. It is a skill to be marveled at.

    The closest I ever came to that was to shoot a relatively more compliant bird using the Konica UC 400/5.6 (and even THAT one missed focus by a hair).

    http://lanaihale.zenfolio.com/img/s8...97291702-5.jpg

    I agree with you.....there is a LOT of affordable high quality long glass out there in the second-hand market. I own some.....I just don't have the ability to get a high percentage of usable shots out of them.....and it's not just the focus, it is also the stabilization issue.

    So for me, the value equation is pretty simple; $600 for a lens that I can get keepers like this out of...

    http://lanaihale.zenfolio.com/img/s8...07289717-5.jpg

    OR a bunch of out of focus throw aways.

    I wish I could shoot and capture images like you do......I can't.

    R
    I hear ya. I don't think I'm exceptional tho. I mean there was a time just not so long ago when there were no such things as AF lenses nor image stabilization (IS) and there were millions of photographers taking great photographs - even with 300 to 600mm lenses . It does take a little bit of practice but not all that much. Some practice focusing and zooming on cars on a busy or semi-busy street for 30min. will turn an "I can't" into an "I can" right away. But I suppose a lot depends on how one looks at it. I like to ski for example but without practice I don't expect to be very good at it. If someone were to come along and invent automatic skies I probably wouldn't buy into that either. Like AF lenses it would just take too much of the fun out of it - for me. I would much rather struggle a little bit (picking myself up out of the snow or discarding some OOF images) and ultimately receive the reward of feeling and knowing that I had accomplished something (meaning an acquired ability in this case). But to each their own - if someone wants to get automatic skies just so they can easily get around on the hill, visit the lodge, or whatever I'll not begrudge them that. It's just not for me is all. And that's what most of us are doing here... talking about ourselves. What we like, what we don't, what we do/did, what we have, how we use it, sharing our experiences, assessments, etc. etc.

    I have a question for you though. On the subject of IS what's it like at 300mm (600mm equiv.)? I'm currently of the opinion that there is no IS system in existence that can offer enough correction to stabilize an image at 600mm (equiv.). It's all based on shutter speeds and learning to hold the camera - or the more intelligent, using of a tripod! What's your experience with IS at the long end of your new lens? Have you tried it both turned off and turned on and compared the results yet? What's your assessment?

  29. #79
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by mark1000 View Post
    As one of my threads over at DPreview was linked to and criticised for showing resized images, i would like to point out that i post images for fun, not to prove this camera or that lens is the best ever since sliced bread, i always post resized and PP images, but i did post a couple of full sized images on request OOC, i bloody hate pixel peeping and don't see the point, you don't hang a 200% picture on the wall or frame one for your desk, i just don't get it guys.

    So just to be clear, my pics are posted for fun, i did undertake quite a lot of work on request, since i had a 100-300 and a GH2 before most of the guys over at DPreview, but those images were post OOC and full sized.

    Tesselator was very critical of my pics and the 100-300, i never understood his violent outburst that he could produce better images with a 10$ lens.

    Actually, beside the image above my post of the cormorant i thought some of the other samples he has shown in various threads to be very average, i saw a shot of a Pigeon that looked so over processed that it was ruined.

    Anyhow, i thought i needed to reply,

    Be good, and take great pics.

    Mark.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tesselator View Post
    "violent outburst"?

    We're talking about photo equipment not war or something actually life and death meaningful. Don't get things too far out of perspective now.

    And also you seem to be fabricating reality somewhat here. I don't think I was overly critical of your image at all. It was in someone else's thread. You posted a pigeon and I requested a 100% crop. You posted it and I replied:



    The images that I was being critical about were these:

    http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=37093234

    And those are seriously terrible! These were some of the very first samples to appear online from an owner/user of the Lumix 100-300 and these are as well as a few others very much like them from others posted a little later on, the reasons I thought the lens was so bad.

    But allow me to clue you in a little bit. Anytime anyone posts an image online they should be prepared to receive criticism without taking it personally or seeking revenge in other forum venues - which would be very un-adult. If it's "just for fun" their own fun, then they should simply ignore any comments that don't seem "fun" to them. If they are like most people however they can probably benefit by listening to the analysis and critique offered - even if it feels hurtful or uncomfortable at first. If it does feel that way it's probably because you're taking it personally. When you post an image it automatically becomes a subjective thing and leaves the realm of your personage. People are free to hate it, love it, use it as a teaching tool, use it as a indication of the photographer's abilities or camera/lens qualities, and etc.

    That's just how it is. It's not personal unless you make it so... and then it's only personal to you.
    Oh come off your high horse, maybe violent is to strong, but you went on a right rant, completely uncalled for as others pointed out to you, read it again, i pointed out that my thread was linked to in this forum, and i wanted to explain why i never post full sized images, nothing to do with trying to hide things about a new camera or promote something about the same camera.

    I think my post was pretty clear about that.

    And then i post a comment on your picture ( just my opinion, just like you have one too about my pics ) and you throw your toys out of the pram, behave yourself mate, please.

    And what analysis did you offer over at DPreview other than " this is the worst lens ever, i have better 10$ lens's that do better " yeah, great analysis.


    Mark.

  30. #80
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    A couple from the G2 and 100-300

    Both images are resized with BDsizer to 800x600 and PP.

    All the exif is in the images.

    UK Blue tit.



    UK Sparrow.

    Shot through my conservatory double glazing.






    Mark.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  31. #81
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    New forest pony, these ponies are let out to graze across the New forest ( UK ) by people that have a right to graze there animals, the ponies are pretty much left to fend for themselves all year long, once a year there is a roundup and some of them are sold on, this keeps the numbers down to a manageable level.

    G2 and 100-300 all exif is in the image.



    Mark.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #82
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Mark

    Wow! Those are great captures. Far better than anything I have managed yet. I really do have to practise more with this lens. I am particularly struck by the detail in the picture of the sparrow. Can you inform us of the speed, aperture, fov and iso of these two captures?

    Many thanks for posting

    LouisB

  33. #83
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    Mark

    Wow! Those are great captures. Far better than anything I have managed yet. I really do have to practise more with this lens. I am particularly struck by the detail in the picture of the sparrow. Can you inform us of the speed, aperture, fov and iso of these two captures?

    Many thanks for posting

    LouisB
    Thanks, i'm pleased you like them, the exif data is all embedded in the images, if you have a browser ex if reader plug in just right click over the image and select your plug in, i use a free one called Panda ex if reader, if you cant do that then i will get the data and edit my posts for you.

    Mark.

    Just realised you cant go back and edit, so here is the Sparrow exif data.

    Make - Panasonic
    Model - DMC-G2
    Orientation - Top left
    XResolution - 240.00
    YResolution - 240.00
    ResolutionUnit - Inch
    Software - Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
    DateTime - 2010:11:23 13:18:43
    ExifOffset - 204
    ExposureTime - 1/250 seconds
    FNumber - 5.60
    ExposureProgram - Aperture priority
    ISOSpeedRatings - 400
    ExifVersion - 0221
    DateTimeOriginal - 2010:11:23 13:43:17
    DateTimeDigitized - 2010:11:23 13:43:17
    ShutterSpeedValue - 1/250 seconds
    ApertureValue - F 5.60
    ExposureBiasValue - -0.33
    MaxApertureValue - F 5.60
    MeteringMode - Multi-segment
    LightSource - Auto
    Flash - Flash not fired, compulsory flash mode
    FocalLength - 300.00 mm
    ColorSpace - sRGB
    ExifImageWidth - 1957
    ExifImageHeight - 1761
    SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor
    FileSource - DSC - Digital still camera
    SceneType - A directly photographed image
    CustomRendered - Normal process
    ExposureMode - Auto
    White Balance - Auto
    DigitalZoomRatio - 0.00 x
    FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 600 mm
    SceneCaptureType - Standard
    GainControl - High gain up
    Contrast - Normal
    Saturation - High
    Sharpness - Normal

    Thumbnail: -
    Compression - 6 (JPG)
    XResolution - 72
    YResolution - 72
    ResolutionUnit - Inch
    JpegIFOffset - 782
    JpegIFByteCount - 4355
    Last edited by mark1000; 23rd December 2010 at 08:25. Reason: added exif data.

  34. #84
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Mark

    Thanks for the tip on the exif reader. I downloaded and installed opanda exif and now I can see the exif data on your posts. I'm even more impressed that #2 was shot at f5.6 and iso400. But there is still one more question - were these hand-held or on a tripod?

    LouisB

  35. #85
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    Mark

    Thanks for the tip on the exif reader. I downloaded and installed opanda exif and now I can see the exif data on your posts. I'm even more impressed that #2 was shot at f5.6 and iso400. But there is still one more question - were these hand-held or on a tripod?

    LouisB
    Hi, all hand held, i never use a tripod unless i'm shooting the moon, i just cant stand the hassle of carrying them.

    Mark.

  36. #86
    Senior Member peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Tysons Corner, Virginia
    Posts
    490
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by henningw View Post
    In any case, to judge the 100-300 you should try it or wait until someone you trust does a full test.

    Henning
    Hi,

    I don't know how trustworthy this blog is but it's a review I found that was done on Dec 15.

    http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...ga_ois_review/
    Life is an infinite series of moments called..."now".
    My job is to capture them.

  37. #87
    Contributing Editor ustein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Our first test: GH2 at 50mph out of the window. The best vantage point is on Hwy 1 and there is no way to stop.

    Uwe Steinmueller
    -------------------

    Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
    http://www.outbackphoto.com

  38. #88
    Contributing Editor ustein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    I like to have a light & compact lens with this reach (angle of view). I think the quality is good for what it is. Other larger and more heavy lenses would just not be in my bag all the time.

    Shot on some distance from the outside through the window (below the window is water, Monterey Pier)



    It is some fun to explore what a zoom with this range can do:

    Uwe Steinmueller
    -------------------

    Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
    http://www.outbackphoto.com

  39. #89
    Member slau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    AB, Canada
    Posts
    185
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by ustein View Post
    Our first test: GH2 at 50mph out of the window. The best vantage point is on Hwy 1 and there is no way to stop.

    It is 'interesting' that the EXIF viewer shows this shot was from a Canon 5D.
    Stephen Lau
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada
    http://www.pbase.com/stephenl

  40. #90
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    I'm sure it must have been a mistake, maybe CS5 messed up the exif data.

    Mark.

  41. #91
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    One from my new GH2 and 100-300, exif is all there.


    300mm/600mm EFL





    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  42. #92
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    This one is from the GH2 and 100-300 but using the new ETC zoom mode giving an EFL of 1183mm from the 300mm shot.

    Should just mention that i only shoot in JPG too.

    Fat Robin, UK variety.

    Exif is in the image.



    Mark.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  43. #93
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Mark

    Great shots - especially the Robin. Is that some kind of 'marker' ring around his leg?

  44. #94
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    Mark

    Great shots - especially the Robin. Is that some kind of 'marker' ring around his leg?
    Thanks, yes its a ring, they catch and number the birds on the common for their records.

    Mark.

  45. #95
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Mark,

    Great images. I should get my GH2 in today. Looking forward to seeing what it can do given the images you have been posting.

    Cliff

  46. #96
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Mark

    Apologies for questionning you further but you are clearly doing something right with this lens and I am not as far as bird pictures go. Do you have the OIS turned on at 300mm? I'm beginning to wonder if it is a help or a hindrance when hand held.

    I am using GF-1 but I notice you are using a GH-2. Could there really be that much difference between the two sensors with respect to detail and sharpness?

    LouisB

  47. #97
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    Mark

    Apologies for questionning you further but you are clearly doing something right with this lens and I am not as far as bird pictures go. Do you have the OIS turned on at 300mm? I'm beginning to wonder if it is a help or a hindrance when hand held.

    I am using GF-1 but I notice you are using a GH-2. Could there really be that much difference between the two sensors with respect to detail and sharpness?

    LouisB
    Hi, yes OIS is on at all times, are you holding you GF1 out at arms length, if so that will amplify any movement from you 10 times, when i shoot with the GH2 i brace it firmly against my face and carefully control my breathing just before shooting.

    Also don't forget these are resized and sharpened to my taste, so they look better than the OOC shots.

    Mark.

  48. #98
    Contributing Editor ustein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,658
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    >It is 'interesting' that the EXIF viewer shows this shot was from a Canon 5D.

    this is Texture Blended and the bade image was 5D. The main shot is from the GH2 and 100-300mm lens.
    Uwe Steinmueller
    -------------------

    Editor&Owner of Digital Outback Photo
    http://www.outbackphoto.com

  49. #99
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by mark1000 View Post
    Hi, yes OIS is on at all times, are you holding you GF1 out at arms length, if so that will amplify any movement from you 10 times, when i shoot with the GH2 i brace it firmly against my face and carefully control my breathing just before shooting.

    Also don't forget these are resized and sharpened to my taste, so they look better than the OOC shots.

    Mark.
    I'm not shooting at arms length

    But I am probably also being too relaxed about posture and breathing which I think may also be important, if not critical. I also think I will try with my monopod to add some additional steadying.

    I still think it may also be that the GH-2 has a better sensor with better resolution than the GF-1. I would be very happy to get the result you got of the Robin with approx GBP1300 of equipment versus double that for a N or C system and equivalent lens.

    LouisB

  50. #100
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Fun with Panasonic 100-300

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    I'm not shooting at arms length

    But I am probably also being too relaxed about posture and breathing which I think may also be important, if not critical. I also think I will try with my monopod to add some additional steadying.

    I still think it may also be that the GH-2 has a better sensor with better resolution than the GF-1. I would be very happy to get the result you got of the Robin with approx GBP1300 of equipment versus double that for a N or C system and equivalent lens.

    LouisB
    One thing i didn't mention, and you already know this i'm sure, is shutter speed, OIS is ok but not that useful when your shooting a little bird twitching all over the place, i do try to get the best shutter speed i can at all times, well when i remember

    Merry Christmas,

    Mark.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •