biglouis
Well-known member
I have a number of good friends here in this part of the forum and over time we have traded ideas, suggestions and observations about m4rds and the lenses.
I am having a lot of problems continuing to feel committed to using my Leica Lumix 100-400 for my growing interest in bird photography.
I feel the lens is not very good above 300mm and I also feel that the camera, the GX8 is not good enough, as well. I can achieve good results and have posted them here but after several visits to bird reserves where I have had the time and opportunity to photograph a variety of animals the 100-400 has often let me down in terms of speed of AF and sharpness at 400mm.
My main issue is the AF, specifically that with the number of AF points available, it is difficult to be sure about achieving critical focus - and anyone with experience of birding will know you often only have split seconds to get it right.
As I see it I have 3 possible ways forward:
1. The cheapest in terms of additional cost: replace the GX8 with a GH5 - I've already noticed that the sensor on my GX80 is sharper without the AA filter and I also think it supresses noise by up to 1 more stop. I would continue to use the 100-400 and hope that the better AF, better shutter and other features (like 16K capture) would help me to up my keeper rate.
2. The second cheapest (or most expensive) solution is to abandon m43rds for birding and get the new Nikon D500 - which is aclaimed as having excellent performance for birding - and something like the 300/4 PF lens + 1.4 and 1.7x teleconverters. This is actually the same weight as my GX8+100-400. The D500 is clearly a better camera than the GH5 as far as IQ goes at higher ISOs, something m43rds cannot compete with. One drawback though is returning to an optical viewfinder - a bit like going backwards in some respects.
3. The most expensive - paradoxically - is to stay with m43rds but change to a OM-D EM1 MkII and the 300/4 Pro + MC1.4 teleconverter (which is not essential but might be a useful add-on in certain circumstances). Believe it or not the camera and lens together are about 30% more expensive than the Nikon solution and together weighs 300g more than my existing and the Nikon solution. However, it remains within the m43rds family with all the benefits of small size and can use all my m43rds lenses as well.
4. The fourth solution which I have dismissed is to go with a Canon 7D MkII + 400/f5.6 - which is in many ways the 'birding standard' but only because of weight of the system. When I compare the weight of all 4 solutions, the Canon is the heaviest and reading the reviews for someone like me I'd have problems trying to using it handheld for BIF. I do use a tripod sometimes at reserves but I don't want to be compelled to use it at all times because of weight.
So, I would like to improve my kit - I know it is wrong to blame one's kit but after a year of using the 100-400 I really do think my lack of success is a little more than my technique alone - but I am not sure whether to invest more in Panasonic, abdandon Panasonic and invest in a dedicated Nikon solution (I would remain with m43rds for all my other work) or invest what seems to be a considerable amount of money - which seems paradoxical for m43rds - and change to Olympus.
These types of posts, I know can be incredibly frustrating for the reader but as I said at the beginning there are a lot of people in this part of the forum whose opinion I value and I would be interested in your thoughts - even if they are: stop fussing and take more photos!
LouisB
I am having a lot of problems continuing to feel committed to using my Leica Lumix 100-400 for my growing interest in bird photography.
I feel the lens is not very good above 300mm and I also feel that the camera, the GX8 is not good enough, as well. I can achieve good results and have posted them here but after several visits to bird reserves where I have had the time and opportunity to photograph a variety of animals the 100-400 has often let me down in terms of speed of AF and sharpness at 400mm.
My main issue is the AF, specifically that with the number of AF points available, it is difficult to be sure about achieving critical focus - and anyone with experience of birding will know you often only have split seconds to get it right.
As I see it I have 3 possible ways forward:
1. The cheapest in terms of additional cost: replace the GX8 with a GH5 - I've already noticed that the sensor on my GX80 is sharper without the AA filter and I also think it supresses noise by up to 1 more stop. I would continue to use the 100-400 and hope that the better AF, better shutter and other features (like 16K capture) would help me to up my keeper rate.
2. The second cheapest (or most expensive) solution is to abandon m43rds for birding and get the new Nikon D500 - which is aclaimed as having excellent performance for birding - and something like the 300/4 PF lens + 1.4 and 1.7x teleconverters. This is actually the same weight as my GX8+100-400. The D500 is clearly a better camera than the GH5 as far as IQ goes at higher ISOs, something m43rds cannot compete with. One drawback though is returning to an optical viewfinder - a bit like going backwards in some respects.
3. The most expensive - paradoxically - is to stay with m43rds but change to a OM-D EM1 MkII and the 300/4 Pro + MC1.4 teleconverter (which is not essential but might be a useful add-on in certain circumstances). Believe it or not the camera and lens together are about 30% more expensive than the Nikon solution and together weighs 300g more than my existing and the Nikon solution. However, it remains within the m43rds family with all the benefits of small size and can use all my m43rds lenses as well.
4. The fourth solution which I have dismissed is to go with a Canon 7D MkII + 400/f5.6 - which is in many ways the 'birding standard' but only because of weight of the system. When I compare the weight of all 4 solutions, the Canon is the heaviest and reading the reviews for someone like me I'd have problems trying to using it handheld for BIF. I do use a tripod sometimes at reserves but I don't want to be compelled to use it at all times because of weight.
So, I would like to improve my kit - I know it is wrong to blame one's kit but after a year of using the 100-400 I really do think my lack of success is a little more than my technique alone - but I am not sure whether to invest more in Panasonic, abdandon Panasonic and invest in a dedicated Nikon solution (I would remain with m43rds for all my other work) or invest what seems to be a considerable amount of money - which seems paradoxical for m43rds - and change to Olympus.
These types of posts, I know can be incredibly frustrating for the reader but as I said at the beginning there are a lot of people in this part of the forum whose opinion I value and I would be interested in your thoughts - even if they are: stop fussing and take more photos!
LouisB