Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Discover the ZEISS Digital Nature Hub

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

New Olympus 100-400

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Tuesday 4th August 2020, 07:26   #1
alanrharris53
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 103
New Olympus 100-400

Available soon in the UK. A direct challenger to the Panasonic 100-400 which is 100 more, but faster (F4) at the short end.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OWb...13UIW9,1JMHO,1
alanrharris53 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 4th August 2020, 15:57   #2
Essex Tern
Registered User
BF Supporter 2020
 
Essex Tern's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Essex
Posts: 798
Not seen any direct comparisons yet, but the lack of synch IS looks to be a downer for Oly owners hoping for an upgrade over the PL 100-400 on IS.

Haven’t seen anything yet to suggest it is a big improvement over the PL optically, so my wallet can stand down in all likelihood - think they may have scaled it back a bit so as to not take sales away from the forthcoming 150-400.

Ability to take a TC looks nice though, but needs to be very good optically. I would like Panasonic to bring one out for the PL to bring parity.
__________________
Essex Tern \('')/
Britain & Essex life lists - latest additions & totals - BUBO link
The past, like the future, is indefinite and exists only as a spectrum of possibilities. Stephen Hawking.
Essex Tern is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 2020 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 5th August 2020, 13:26   #3
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. James, Barbados
Posts: 24,147
The rumor site has a story with links to reviews: https://www.43rumors.com/the-first-f...a-superb-lens/

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean

Recently moved to Barbados
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 5th August 2020, 16:46   #4
nikonmike
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: grimsby uk
Posts: 849
Its my understanding it will work with pro-capture low that would interest me
__________________
Nikon Z50 16-50,50-250 FTZ
Sigma 100-400mm,105mm macro
nikonmike is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 5th August 2020, 17:49   #5
Jim M.
Choose Civility

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 6,988
Despite being slower at low zoom than the PL100-400, it is larger and heavier. So again there is the trend: Olympus makes the heavy lenses but the light bodies, and Panasonic does the reverse. That alone makes me favor the Panasonic lens. And, as I favor Olympus bodies, the fact that it bizarrely does not support dual image stabilization on Olympus bodies decides the issue as far as I'm concerned.

Some initial reviews suggest slightly better lens-only IS for the Olympus, and slightly better sharpness when wide open. But I think there is a fair amount of simple variation in terms of quality of the Panasonic lens, so I think any test only proves the superiority of a particular sample.

The only thing that the Olympus has going for it for me is the ability to use teleconverters. If those don't increase minimum focusing distance, that could make the lens plus teleconverter an interesting macro option, since it would likely double the image size vs the Panasonic. But a teleconverter would add even more weight and the effect on image quality is unknown at this point.
__________________
My Micro 4/3 birds, insects, & other wildlife photo gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums

Last edited by Jim M. : Wednesday 5th August 2020 at 17:52.
Jim M. is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 9th August 2020, 17:10   #6
ammadoux
Registered doux
 
ammadoux's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jeddah - Saudi Arabia
Posts: 76,916
just out of curiosity i will wait to see how much the 150-400mm f4.5 pro costs, and if it is not worth a kidney (which i am sure it will) then i think this 100-400 mm f6.3 will be with me by the end of the year.

but still i think Olympus and m4/3 line of lenses needs a 50-200 mm at f2.8. or better if like the 4/3 90-250 mm f2.8.
__________________
dulce doux
i love BF
flickr blog
birds of Saudi Arabia
ammadoux is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 9th August 2020, 17:34   #7
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. James, Barbados
Posts: 24,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by ammadoux View Post
just out of curiosity i will wait to see how much the 150-400mm f4.5 pro costs, and if it is not worth a kidney (which i am sure it will) then i think this 100-400 mm f6.3 will be with me by the end of the year.

but still i think Olympus and m4/3 line of lenses needs a 50-200 mm at f2.8. or better if like the 4/3 90-250 mm f2.8.
Do you think this 100-400 is better than the PanaLeica 100-400?

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean

Recently moved to Barbados
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 10th August 2020, 16:41   #8
ammadoux
Registered doux
 
ammadoux's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jeddah - Saudi Arabia
Posts: 76,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by njlarsen View Post
Do you think this 100-400 is better than the PanaLeica 100-400?

Niels
i live in always sunny Jeddah, so i don't care about the brighter f on the lower end, and i think its compatibility with the 1.4 TC is on the plus side.

never thought of the panaleica before since i got the 300 mm f4 prime and the TC.
__________________
dulce doux
i love BF
flickr blog
birds of Saudi Arabia
ammadoux is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 11th August 2020, 18:04   #9
ammadoux
Registered doux
 
ammadoux's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jeddah - Saudi Arabia
Posts: 76,916
Matii and Peter got a lovely comparison between the two lenses. lots of fun form both men.

https://youtu.be/S47irPpyeGs


https://youtu.be/jxgbyYlfM1g
__________________
dulce doux
i love BF
flickr blog
birds of Saudi Arabia
ammadoux is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 11th August 2020, 21:53   #10
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. James, Barbados
Posts: 24,147
Noticeable larger was a repeated statement re the Oly lens

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean

Recently moved to Barbados
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 18th August 2020, 23:34   #11
Australian Image
Ray
 
Australian Image's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Australia
Posts: 21
If you want stability, especially when hand holding, weight matters. I use an Olympus 90-250mm f2.8 hand held quite often (with my E-M1 MkII) and I get better results than with my Nikon 300mm f4, even if i use a 1.4x converter with the 90-250mm.
Australian Image is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 19th August 2020, 13:37   #12
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. James, Barbados
Posts: 24,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Australian Image View Post
If you want stability, especially when hand holding, weight matters. I use an Olympus 90-250mm f2.8 hand held quite often (with my E-M1 MkII) and I get better results than with my Nikon 300mm f4, even if i use a 1.4x converter with the 90-250mm.
While your premise is correct, I also believe the weight can be too high. It is likely that the optimal weight depends to some extent on the person doing the photography. I am using the PanaLeica 100-400 on a panasonic body, and I do not think I would like anything heavier, personal preference.

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean

Recently moved to Barbados
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 19th August 2020, 14:47   #13
Jim M.
Choose Civility

 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 6,988
I think the premise is dubious--would need to be convinced by tests, and expect it holds true, if at all, in only limited circumstances. For example, I know I get greater hand shake from the fatigue of holding heavier lenses.

In any event, if you prefer to haul around more dead weight, go full frame. Or tie weights around your lens. ;-) M4/3 is for people who want a lightweight system.
__________________
My Micro 4/3 birds, insects, & other wildlife photo gallery:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/albums
Jim M. is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 19th August 2020, 18:37   #14
ammadoux
Registered doux
 
ammadoux's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jeddah - Saudi Arabia
Posts: 76,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim M. View Post
I think the premise is dubious--would need to be convinced by tests, and expect it holds true, if at all, in only limited circumstances. For example, I know I get greater hand shake from the fatigue of holding heavier lenses.

In any event, if you prefer to haul around more dead weight, go full frame. Or tie weights around your lens. ;-) M4/3 is for people who want a lightweight system.

agree, and that what was all about the concept of mirrorless systems, until "you know who" decided to make there heavy and ugly systems mirrorless.
__________________
dulce doux
i love BF
flickr blog
birds of Saudi Arabia
ammadoux is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 19th August 2020, 18:38   #15
ammadoux
Registered doux
 
ammadoux's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Jeddah - Saudi Arabia
Posts: 76,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim M. View Post
I think the premise is dubious--would need to be convinced by tests, and expect it holds true, if at all, in only limited circumstances. For example, I know I get greater hand shake from the fatigue of holding heavier lenses.

In any event, if you prefer to haul around more dead weight, go full frame. Or tie weights around your lens. ;-) M4/3 is for people who want a lightweight system.

agree, and that what was all about the concept of mirrorless systems, until "you know who" decided to join
with there heavy and bulky bodies and lenses.
__________________
dulce doux
i love BF
flickr blog
birds of Saudi Arabia
ammadoux is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 20th August 2020, 04:31   #16
Australian Image
Ray
 
Australian Image's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Australia
Posts: 21
The m4/3 system was never intended to be a featherweight system, it caters to all types; but if you want fast lenses, then they are not going to be small and lightweight. They will of course be smaller and of lighter weight than FF lenses, but it's all relative.

People consider the 12-100mm f4 heavy and the 40-150mm f2.8 extremely heavy (I have both) and to me they are featherweight lenses compared to my other lenses. My lightweight cinema rig with the Olympus 14-35mm f2 lens weighs 4.3kg and I can carry that around all day without breaking a sweat (except when it's over 30C).

And with the rumoured direction that the new owners of Olympus are heading, there won't be any of these 'lightweight' cameras and lenses about as they focus on the pro end. Panasonic may also decide to ditch the m4/3 if sales don't grow (they ditched 4/3 without any hesitation).

And if you don't believe me, here's a job I did some years back using my 14-35mm f2 and 35-100mm f2 lenses with an E-M1 MkI from the back seat of a helicopter: https://australianimage.com.au/a-matter-of-balance/. I could provide many other examples of much easier situations on the ground.

Last edited by Australian Image : Thursday 20th August 2020 at 04:44.
Australian Image is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 20th August 2020, 19:13   #17
njlarsen
Opus Editor
 
njlarsen's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: St. James, Barbados
Posts: 24,147
you are likely both younger and stronger than I am. It sounds like you would be better served with the 150-400 rather than its smaller brother.

To repeat, i would not care for a setup heavier than my current setup.

Niels
__________________
Support bird conservation in the Caribbean: BirdCaribbean

Recently moved to Barbados
njlarsen is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 20th August 2020, 20:27   #18
Australian Image
Ray
 
Australian Image's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Australia
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by njlarsen View Post
you are likely both younger and stronger than I am.
Perhaps, but at 65 I try to keep fit and healthy. Having been into photography for a long time both professionally and otherwise, I do know what kind of gear suits my needs.
Australian Image is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
beware Olympus TCON-17 vs. Olympus TCON-17f Teleconverter confusion Jim M. Panasonic 2 Wednesday 29th April 2009 17:15
olympus sp-350 petej The Birdforum Digiscoping Forum 2 Sunday 1st January 2006 13:05

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.13965011 seconds with 32 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 18:16.