PDA

View Full Version : Panny 100-300mm


Seonnaidh
21st October 2012, 12:59 PM
Apologies if this subject has been covered before but has anyone out there used the above lens on an OMD E-M5 yet, and if so what are the results like?

I don't do a lot of tele work but the chance of getting a wee bit nearer than
I can at present.

Bikie John
21st October 2012, 01:53 PM
I have used it for rugby and cricket on sunny days and the results are fine. Possibly not the blistering sharpness of the 4/3 50-200 but more than adequate for those subjects.

Ciao ... John

PeterBirder
21st October 2012, 02:07 PM
Apologies if this subject has been covered before but has anyone out there used the above lens on an OMD E-M5 yet, and if so what are the results like?

I don't do a lot of tele work but the chance of getting a wee bit nearer than
I can at present.

Yes I have. Works well for me .

Some shots in these threads;
http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22876
http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22250
http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22318
http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=23376
http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=23374
http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=23343

Not entirely conventional use of a long tele but that's just me.:rolleyes:

Regards.*chr

Gwyver
21st October 2012, 03:04 PM
From my experience it is as John says - 'not the blistering sharpness of a 4/3 50-200 but adequate'. In fact since the 50-200SWD AF is unreliable on the OMD - the 100-300 provides the most practical alternative.

jamsa
21st October 2012, 06:02 PM
I too have posted up results on here recently and with the 1.5 update and the Panny 100-300 I found it fast and reliable. Not the build quality or feel of the 4/3rds lensesbbut more than adequate :)

Seonnaidh
21st October 2012, 06:04 PM
Can the Panny be updated if fitted to an Oly camera?
I'm thinking that this might be the way to go.

Bikie John
21st October 2012, 06:34 PM
I think so, but haven't tried it. Have a furkle around in the Oly firmware update pages - I vaguely remember something about a "Joint update service for 4/3 lenses".

Ciao ... John

PeterBirder
21st October 2012, 06:45 PM
Can the Panny be updated if fitted to an Oly camera?
I'm thinking that this might be the way to go.

It certainly can! Here's the link;
http://www.four-thirds.org/en/special/download.html


Regards.*chr

Greytop
21st October 2012, 09:17 PM
Some examples in this thread (http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22551)

And also some from our back yard...

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/P5290197.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/47560)

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/P5290223.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/47562)

http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab269/Greytop_photos/Lumix%20100-300%20examples/P5220774.jpg

All with the OM-D EM-5 and Panny 100-300

jdal
22nd October 2012, 11:22 AM
From well over 5km. the Great Arch on Pabbay, contrast enhanced a bit because of the haze.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7230/7365652452_fb823ffd31_o.jpg

Melaka
9th December 2012, 01:20 PM
On a related issue what are the relative merits of the Oly 75-300 and the Pany 100-300, noting that the latter is faster and heavier than the former? Does anyone have any experience of IQ etc please? I've just splashed out on a D5 and will need a telephoto idc.

jdal
9th December 2012, 01:36 PM
You'd need to ask someone with both, which is a bit unlikely! Maybe two people at an e-group outing?

I got the 100-300 partly because I got 50 back but mostly because it was faster. It's 25% heavier though.

There's a comparison here (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/41922138)

Jetset95
9th December 2012, 02:34 PM
Apologies if this subject has been covered before but has anyone out there used the above lens on an OMD E-M5 yet, and if so what are the results like?

I don't do a lot of tele work but the chance of getting a wee bit nearer than
I can at present.
This kind of came up in a reply to a post of mine recently, I've only had my OM-D for a few months, and only had Panny lenses to put on it coming from the Lumix G3. My early shots with the 100-300mm were not great, but I was shooting in horrendous conditions and it wasn't a fair test by any means.

Yesterday I put some fresh bird food out in the garden and waited at the bottom (over 100ft away) and got some much better output (jpeg straight out of the camera)

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8219/8255538698_34f5c25ede_z.jpg

Greytop
9th December 2012, 03:38 PM
You'd need to ask someone with both, which is a bit unlikely! Maybe two people at an e-group outing?

I got the 100-300 partly because I got 50 back but mostly because it was faster. It's 25% heavier though.

There's a comparison here (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/41922138)

Exactly my reasoning :)

oly_om
9th December 2012, 04:46 PM
I went for the 75-300 because of it being sharper (I've been quite pleased with the wide-open performance), better bokeh (comparative samples I've seen seem to back this up) and faster AF. The 100-300 also won't operate fast enough for the higher burst rate of the E-M5.

The speed argument doesn't really worry me - 5.6 vs 6.7 isn't much, especially if you need to stop the panny down more to get a reasonable sharpness. Given I am using this mainly for birds, I need higher sharpness than for typical sports scenarios.

Andy

Greytop
9th December 2012, 05:10 PM
I'm willing to be convinced regarding the sharpness but I've yet to see a real direct comparison between the two.
My 100-300 focusses very quickly so if the 75-300 is quicker then it's small potatoes IMHO.
I agree with you regarding the burst rate but this only applies if you stop down, when it's wide open you still get the full 9 fps with the E-M5.
Lately I've been using mine wide open and have been pretty pleased with the sharpness, it's slightly softer than stopped down but not a major difference.

However having said all that, in my opinion these two lenses are still where m4/3rds is lacking, the 12-35 and 35-100 have definitely raised the bar in the shorter focal lengths.
I'm waiting for a good to great m4/3rds prime, perhaps an f/4 300 or hopefully slightly longer with weather and dust sealing.

Melaka
9th December 2012, 05:41 PM
Thanks for those answers. I guess that like so much in photogrphy there's not a clear cut solution.