• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

100 400 or 200 plus 2.0 teleconverter (1 Viewer)


Well-known member
Could anyone tell me if there would be much difference in results by comparison of a Panasonic 100 to 400 and a leica panny 200 prime with teleconverter please.
Thanks I am not much wiser I find these pro reviews very biased but I will work out what to do.
I think it depends a lot on budget - money no object then I think the 200 is likely a little better from the tests, but personally I would like to try both to see what kind of difference I would get myself in real use.

The 200 is quite a lot more money, especially with the 2x tc which you will want, and my 100-400 gives me results I am happy with, so possibly I’d find it hard to justify for a tiny bit more sharpness, especially when the majority of my photos I am cropping the life out of them because I want more reach, so I think the gains would be watered down in those situations, albeit a slight advantage With the 200 which I wouldn’t say no to if someone offered me one 😉

The 100-400 is I think the most compact way to get 400mm (I think the lens hood on the 200 is longer which is important to me as my current 100-400 is likely more compact).

As I say I actually hope for more reach so may not go beyond my trusty 100-400 until there is a native longer reach option available - I think the 100-400 is a relatively good value proposition whereas the 200 plus tc is getting into the price range where I’d be questioning myself whether the money was better spent on a bigger sensor system. Money no object then 200 all the way, although I do like the versatility of the zoom so would likely have that too, and or the PL 50-200.
Last edited:
I have the 100-400 and am quite happy with it. The second review indicates the 50-200 w/ 2x TC is almost 50% heavier than the 100-400, which is a big negative for me. I believe it can focus a bit closer though if you do macro.
Last edited:
Have you considered the sacrilege of the oly 150-400 if you want something better (and more expensive) than the 100-400?

For my money, the PL100-400 hits a pretty sweet spot
Don’t underestimate the difficulty of framing and tracking a distant bird at long focal length. The 100-400 has the advantage of being able to find a bird on a lower magnification and then zoom in. I use the 400mm end a lot and wouldn’t want to go out with much less. I’ve been very happy with this lens. Mind you, a hood friend of mine uses the Olympus 300 prime + TC and he gets incredible results so that’s also worth looking at it you can afford it.
Warning! This thread is more than 3 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread