PANALEICA DG 100-400mm / F4.0-6.3

[dhsimmonds]

The last few posts reference dual image stabilisation is very interesting, if for no other reason that the 4/3 open platform details as originally set up by Olympus for the E-1, specified if I remember correctly that no competitive advantage should be available to designers of products signing up to their platform should gain any uniquely competitive design advantage. ie Any lens , flashgun etc produced by a partner to the 4/3 partnership must be able to be used on another's camera body etc. So far in approx. ten or more years this has held good and strong with both Leica and Panasonic upholding that principle, albeit Leica pulled out of 4/3 during their difficultes. OK Panasonic went down the lens IS route and Olympus the sensor I.S routes but either could be used on either camera. Probably Olympus gaining here as the Panny lenses could be used on their bodies by switching off the lens IS if so required. Certainly on my Panny 100-300 better results were obtained by using IBIS in favour of lens IS.

Now the ball game has shifted as both lenses reach 600mm or more where IBIS has reached it's limits of usefulness. Panny has already shifted to sensor stabilisation in their latest bodies and continued lens IS on their longest lenses. Oly have made the biggest change, by now offering lens IS on their longest new lens. I suppose that this is a must for them due to the fixed focal length. Dual IS is probably belt and braces for them. For Panny it was a no brainer as they already have both.

It remains to be seen whether the latest firmware for the Oly Pro camera (E-M1) will allow for dual IS when using the Panaleica DG100-400! (dual IS is almost a must as this lens can be used at FL well below 300mm)

There is no doubt that the 4/3 and m4/3 platform continue to provide a fantastic source of excellent lenses and flashguns etc than just about any other platform.

 

[Knorp]

Thanks Bart. I am with you. Unfortunately it doesn't. :facesmack:
So far it only works with 2 lenses, the Oly 40-150/2.8 PRO and the 300/4 PRO.

That would be too bad: but in what way doesn't it work ? Doesn't fit, no AF, no sharp images ?

 

[Knorp]

OK, well thanks for the advice. I've gone with a GX-8 and 12-35/2.8 bundle which comes at a very competitive price, plus GBP 150 cash back and a 5 year warranty (and a free 32GB card which is not one of my liking but hey-ho).

My experience before with m43rds leads me to believe that for a Lumix lens a Panasonic body is probably the best. BTW, I wonder how long it will before I crack and get the 20/1.7, 7-14 and the incredible (I think) DG 45 macro.

Now, I only have the long wait for the 100-400.

LouisB

You can keep cracking for a long time, Louis ... :grin:
What about the DG's; 25/1.4 or 45/2.8 or 15/1.7 or 42,5/1.2 ?

 

[biglouis]

You can keep cracking for a long time, Louis ... :grin:
What about the DG's; 25/1.4 or 45/2.8 or 15/1.7 or 42,5/1.2 ?

The 45/2.8 is imho one of the finest lenses produced for the m43rds system. At f3.2 it hasa fantastic draw. Which is why I would give a home to another one.

Looking around ebay the prices of s/h Lumix kit is dismally low. You can pick up 20/1.7's - the lens which to my mind must have truly peed off Leica, for peanuts. That lens is as good as any summicron you want to put it up against.

Is it me or has the 25/1.4 lost its Leica branding? Panasonic now do not describe it as a Leica DG, just a Panasonic. When I bought that lens it even came with a Leica lens cap.

I sold all my m43rds kit when I went heavily into film and only kept the GH-2 with the 100-300. I then sold that to purchase a 70-200/4 for my Sony system which in comparison was I am afraid to say a piece of crud.

I am going to be very interested to test out the GX-8 against my Sony bodies and lenses.

LouisB

 

[Knorp]

The 25/1.4 still is the Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm f/1.4 ASPH (H-X025).
There is a new Panny 25/1.7 though ...

 

[k-hawinkler]

That would be too bad: but in what way doesn't it work ? Doesn't fit, no AF, no sharp images ?

Sorry Bart, not fit would have been the correct word.
The only two lenses which the teleconverter reportedly fits are the two I mentioned.
So, I may have jumped to a conclusion.

I believe you have a teleconverter.
If true I assume you will find out once your 100-400 mm lens arrives and let us know. TIA.

 

[Knorp]

Sorry Bart, not fit would have been the correct word.
The only two lenses which the teleconverter reportedly fits are the two I mentioned.
So, I may have jumped to a conclusion.

I believe you have a teleconverter.
If true I assume you will find out once your 100-400 mm lens arrives and let us know. TIA.

K-H, will do for sure and I've used the MC-14 for my R-lenses with good result, although I'm not certain if I tried this combo at infinity.
Note: the MC-14 fits perfectly into the R-mFT adapter.

Unfortunately I've no Panasonic lens that allows to test the MC-14.

Kind regards.

 

[k-hawinkler]

K-H, will do for sure and I've used the MC-14 for my R-lenses with good result, although I'm not certain if I tried this combo at infinity.
Note: the MC-14 fits perfectly into the R-mFT adapter.

Unfortunately I've no Panasonic lens that allows to test the MC-14.

Kind regards.

Thank you so much Bart. That's very useful information. Much appreciated! Why didn't I think of that? :facesmack:
I have several APO-Extender-R 1.4x and 2x. As you know the 1.4x cannot be used on the APO-R 180/3.4.
The last lens element would collide with the extender glass for infinity setting. The 2x extender doesn't have this problem.

So, I followed your advice and attached the Olympus 1.4x teleconverter between E-M1 and the Novoflex MFT/LER adapter, then the APO-R 180/3.4.
Following is a hand held shot with the IBIS focal length set to 250 mm.

E-M1+Oly 1.4x TC+MFT/LER adapter+APO-R 180/3.4 at 252 mm, f/3.4, ISO 3200, 1/15 s, hand held, uncropped, reduced in size.

Thanks again Bart. This works like a charm and should work for infinity focusing as well. No doubt in my mind!

Yup, I cannot attach the Olympus teleconverter to the Nocticron 42.5/1.2.


IIRC correctly, you also have the Nocticron that has POWER O.I.S. Mine is updated to latest firmware.
Using E-M5 and E-M5.2 or E-M1, all updated with latest firmware, one could probably figure out if the Nocticron benefits from 5-axis Sync IS.
According to Panasonic/Olympus literature we already know that on the GX8 camera the Nocticron would benefit from Dual I.S.
Question is, would the Nocticron also benefit from 5-axis Sync IS on either the E-M1 or E-M5.2?
One could then compare with the behavior on the E-M5 that doesn't support the 5-axis Sync IS feature.
So, I am wondering if the differences in behavior are easily demonstrable. :bugeyes:

Bart, which OM-D cameras do you have? I have kept all 3. :grin:

 

[Knorp]

Bart, which OM-D cameras do you have? I have kept all 3. :grin:

Well, my original OM-D cameras, EM5 and EM1 along with my Panasonic G1 (red), were all stolen.
Now I only have one EM1 Not much to grin about ... :scry:

 

[Knorp]

Thank you so much Bart. That's very useful information. Much appreciated! Why didn't I think of that? :facesmack:
I have several APO-Extender-R 1.4x and 2x. As you know the 1.4x cannot be used on the APO-R 180/3.4.
The last lens element would collide with the extender glass for infinity setting. The 2x extender doesn't have this problem.

So, I followed your advice and attached the Olympus 1.4x teleconverter between E-M1 and the Novoflex MFT/LER adapter, then the APO-R 180/3.4.
Following is a hand held shot with the IBIS focal length set to 250 mm.

E-M1+Oly 1.4x TC+MFT/LER adapter+APO-R 180/3.4 at 252 mm, f/3.4, ISO 3200, 1/15 s, hand held, uncropped, reduced in size.

Thanks again Bart. This works like a charm and should work for infinity focusing as well. No doubt in my mind!

That sure looks pretty good, K-H !
Again infinity has to be confirmed yet, but I too believe it will work.

These shots I took with the Telyt-R 350/4.8 and the MC-14: #post646118

Kind regards.

 

[drofnad]

You can keep cracking for a long time, Louis ... :grin:
What about the DG's; 25/1.4 or 45/2.8 or 15/1.7 or 42,5/1.2 ?

And the 35-100/2.8 (there's also a slower one)
is not too shabby. It doesn't change length in
zooming, and w/long lens hood reversed is shorter
than 12-40/2.8 w/hood out and not much longer
if that petal hood's reversed --and lighter.
(GX7 + 35-100 slung around neck/shoulder
while cycling ... --and used prices put lens
at about half of new 40-150, so my choice
was easy.) For me, the Pany zoom's OIS
on GX7 --which I perfer feel of to gripped E-M5--
does about as well as E-M5(I)'s IBIS + lens.

Similarly, the Pany 7-14/4 vs. Oly 2.8, for me,
and my copy --from KEH.com-- seems sharp
wide open all 'round. (or, sharp as I am,
which is a lower standard... )

 

[k-hawinkler]

Olympus M.Zuiko 300mm f/4 Pro - 4K video (shot with Panasonic GX8)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiW8gdkc5mw

 

[k-hawinkler]

Panasonic 100-400 lens shots

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3951201

 

[k-hawinkler]

Article about the 300/4

Olympus - January 2016

mZD 300 PRO - review - Marcin Dobas

 

[biglouis]

Article about the 300/4

Olympus - January 2016

mZD 300 PRO - review - Marcin Dobas

A fixed focal length does actually make a lot of sense for bird photography, which is my main interest in a long lens. However, I was always so impressed with my 100-300 that I prefer to continue with Panasonic rather than switch to Olympus. I'm sure Olympus owners feel exactly the same about continuing with what they know.

I took advantage of the January sales to gear up with a GX-8 and I have the 100-400 on order from two different companies. I just hope that the delivery deadline is not delayed and that I am in the list for the first orders.

LouisB

 

[Annna T]

A fixed focal length does actually make a lot of sense for bird photography, which is my main interest in a long lens. However, I was always so impressed with my 100-300 that I prefer to continue with Panasonic rather than switch to Olympus. I'm sure Olympus owners feel exactly the same about continuing with what they know.

I took advantage of the January sales to gear up with a GX-8 and I have the 100-400 on order from two different companies. I just hope that the delivery deadline is not delayed and that I am in the list for the first orders.

LouisB

Just curious : why do you think that a fixed focal is better for birding ? I feel that zooming with your feet is much less effective with very long focals and that a zoom would make more sense, but then I don't shoot so many birds.

I have a very bad experience with my Panasonic 100-300mm, so would prefer an Olympus at this length (I have a few other Panasonic lenses which I like, in particular the 14 and 20mm pancakes and the 25mm F1.4 of which I like the rendering a lot, but dislike the cumbersome hood).

 

[Knorp]

Just curious : why do you think that a fixed focal is better for birding ? I feel that zooming with your feet is much less effective with very long focals and that a zoom would make more sense, but then I don't shoot so many birds.

I have a very bad experience with my Panasonic 100-300mm, so would prefer an Olympus at this length (I have a few other Panasonic lenses which I like, in particular the 14 and 20mm pancakes and the 25mm F1.4 of which I like the rendering a lot, but dislike the cumbersome hood).

I'm sorry for your bad copy, Annna. I've always liked my 100-300 a lot. But then perhaps I'm somewhat less critical or I had a good copy, I don't know.
I wouldn't be surprised that in the end the fixed 300 Oly surpasses the 100-400 Pana in IQ, but I do prefer the flexibility of the zoom for my type of shooting.

Kind regards.

 

[k-hawinkler]

Louis, Annna, Bart,

Thanks. Where to begin? First, I apologize for posting about the 300/4 in this thread. But that seems fitting and I didn't want to start another thread about that lens. Also these two lenses are the top offerings from the two MFT gear makers and will be compared, no doubt. My guess, I'll probably end up with both. The 100-400 is scheduled to show up about a month later than the 300/4. So I have my pre-order in for the 300/4 at this time.

All I can say about my Olympus 75-300 II lens on each of my three OM-D cameras is that I like the results I get with it. For most of my shots I have been using it at 300 mm though. Nevertheless, I consider the 100-400/4.0-6.3 more useful than the 300/4 for many situations. However, for available light scenarios the 300/4 will be a better fit. I also use the Sony A7r/2 FF cameras with the Leica lenses 105-280/4.2 and 280/4 and the Nikon D800E and AF-S 80-400/4.5-5.6 VR II system. But for walking around I still prefer the Oly 75-300 II or would prefer the 100-400 from Panasonic for MFT cameras. But which MFT camera would be best? (BTW, the new Fuji XPRO2 24 MP and 100-400/4.5-5.6 and 1.4x extender may even have an advantage. Time will tell.)

Back to MFT cameras. I have never owned a Panasonic camera but get the impression that Panasonic lenses are best used on Panasonic cameras and vice versa for Olympus gear, in particular now that Dual I.S. and 5-axis Sync IS are available. I have not seen any indication that the two different dual image stabilization technologies can be used with mixing components from both companies. Of course, the lenses can still be used interchangeably, but only with their own lens or body IS, but not both. Of course, that may not matter for some uses. (BTW, the Fuji lens claims 5 stops of image stabilization, measured the standard way).

At this time the GX8 seems to have an advantage with its 20 MP sensor and 4K video. So, Louis I think you made an optimal choice for your situation. Congratulations on your new system.

I wonder though when the E-M1.2 will show up?

 

[biglouis]

Anna, K-H, Bart

I really think it comes down to which system you have invested in. I'm a Panasonic fanboy (haha) so I've gone for Panasonic.

To answer Anna's question: most birding requires very long lenses. In fact my 100-300 was a bit short, hence my desire to own the 100-400. Even though the amount of 'bird' in my frame may be double it will be quite small. Only rarely do you get to be close up enough to fill the frame of small song birds, for example. Mind you, I don't go in for blinds and things to disguise myself - I am only a 'backyard birder'.

I class the photo below as one of my most successful photos mainly because the common sparrow is actually quite uncommon in the UK now (it was on the endangered species list but does seem to be coming back) and I must have stalked the bird for about 4 hours to get a shot of it emerging from a pipe in a house. But as stated this is perhaps a fraction of the full frame and close to a 100% crop. Shot on a GH-2.

Anna, it really is a shame you had a bad experience with the 100-300. As you noted in a previous post I did quite well with it. My only mistake was to sell it! I did consider buying it back but I am in the fortunate position to have some spare cash to upgrade my camera and go for the newer lens.

BTW, I actually started the Panasonic 100-300 Flickr group (but handed over the admin to someone else a couple of years ago) and there are some fantastic captures in that group. Well worth visiting to see what the 100-300 is capable of.

I left the m43rds community a couple of years ago because I felt the format was ultimately a technical cul-de-sac but it is remarkable that the format is still going strong and Panasonic are still developing news lenses for the format with oversight by Leica.

LouisB

 

[Annna T]

I'm sorry for your bad copy, Annna. I've always liked my 100-300 a lot. But then perhaps I'm somewhat less critical or I had a good copy, I don't know.
I wouldn't be surprised that in the end the fixed 300 Oly surpasses the 100-400 Pana in IQ, but I do prefer the flexibility of the zoom for my type of shooting.

Kind regards.

Yes, I probably had a bad copy : it just wouldn't allow me to focus at infinite past the 225-250mm range.

What itches is that I sent it back to the support service while it was still on warranty and it came back as is with the diagnostic that it was "corresponding to the specifications".

I do also get double lines in many situations even when the lens is fixed to the tripod with a specially engineered tripod foot I bought from Germany especially for itand using the electronic first curtain on the E-M5II.

I can already see in the VF when using MF that the lens isn't able to focus. Something prevents me from turning the ring as far as I would like. It isn't incompatibility with the Olympus bodies, since I had the same problem with the Panasonic G3 body. The lens is just not able to acquire focus at the longer ranges, whether with AF or with MF. And I tried several apertures (closing down should help contrast and AF) with no improvement.

At the shorter range the lens perform better, but I tend to use it at the longer end.