OM-1 with Panasonic Leica 100-400 (1 Viewer)

[GMS]

Apologies for opening a new thread on this but going round in circles. I'm looking to replace my current set up (7d Mark ii, Canon 100-400 ii) as it's getting a bit heavy for me. I'm mostly a birder but like taking pics. I mostly use the camera for gulling at the moment but also do a lot of coastal birding so want a sufficiently fast set-up to enable (record) shots of any goodies lurking in the bushes/woods. After going round across the multitude of options I'm considering the Olympus OM-1 with the Panasonic Leica 100-400. This seems to be an attractive option both on weight and performance. I realize that it will be a step back on the glass. Does anyone use the combination? Not looking to move away from versatile zoom lens.

 

[njlarsen]

I am using the lens on a cheaper and older Panasonic camera. The first 15 pages of this set is with this combo:

Media added by njlarsen

www.birdforum.net

Niels

 

[Jim M.]

I have been using the Olympus EM-1 mk ii with a PL 100-400 mm lens as my primary birding set up for several years – the mk ii is one of the predecessors to the OM-1. I love the combination – Olympus makes excellent bodies that are lighter than Panasonic bodies (though the weight of the top-of-the-line Olympus bodies keeps creeping up, unfortunately) and Panasonic has the lighter zoom lens. I also have the Olympus 300 mm F4 prime and the teleconverters, but rarely use it because it is heavier and don't notice much if any difference in the image quality.

I recently acquired an OM-1, but haven't used it with the 100-400 mm yet – but I'm confident it will work well.

The Olympus 100-400 mm zoom lens is heavier, and the only advantage over the Panasonic is that it will take teleconverters. But even the 1.4x tc reduces the widest aperture to F8, so I don't feel it is worth the extra weight.

These zoom lenses can also focus quite close, so I also frequently use my PL100-400 as a quasi-macro lens for larger subjects, such as butterflies and odonates. I think it is brilliant in that capacity as well.

You can check out some of my photos with this combination in the link below.

 

[Steve Babbs]

I bought the Olympus 100 - 400. I like it but it is quite a bit heavier and in retrospect I wish I'd looked more closely at the Panasonic.

 

[GMS]

Thanks all for your input. Some very nice images too. I'm very tempted - only reservation is that the when scouring the net it seems to be a bit hit and miss. Working very well for some but not so well for others. Unsure if equipment variability or technique.

 

[njlarsen]

Thanks all for your input. Some very nice images too. I'm very tempted - only reservation is that the when scouring the net it seems to be a bit hit and miss. Working very well for some but not so well for others. Unsure if equipment variability or technique.

I can say that recent upgrade in my editing software and/or skills have made my images appear sharper and therefore more satisfying. As I said, I am using a different and older camera so not sure how relevant this is to you.
Niels

 

[Jim M.]

Thanks all for your input. Some very nice images too. I'm very tempted - only reservation is that the when scouring the net it seems to be a bit hit and miss. Working very well for some but not so well for others. Unsure if equipment variability or technique.

You mean the PL100-400? There does seem to be some variation in quality based on reports. The workaround is to try in store; or order one--if not satisfied, return it. Or opt for the somewhat heavier oly 100-400, which doesn't seem to have conflicting reports. I bought my PL100-400 when they first came out some years ago.

 

[Jim M.]

I can say that recent upgrade in my editing software and/or skills have made my images appear sharper and therefore more satisfying.

Yes, I think we are approaching the point where software may make super sharp lenses not worth the cost/weight because you can achieve similar results through pp.

 

[Elkhornsun]

I went with the Olympus lens as its optical stabilization works in tandem with that of the Olympus cameras to provide more f-stops overall. It weighs 5 ounces more but at 2.48 lb this is still a very light lens. My full fram 800mm lens weighs twice as much.

 

[Jim M.]

I went with the Olympus lens as its optical stabilization works in tandem with that of the Olympus cameras to provide more f-stops overall. It weighs 5 ounces more but at 2.48 lb this is still a very light lens. My full fram 800mm lens weighs twice as much.

Sorry, but the Olympus 100-400 mm stabilization does not work in tandem with Olympus camera bodies. I believe it is only the Olympus "Pro" lens line that has this feature. It is unfortunate that Olympus did not include this feature for the 100-400 mm lens. But in any event, stabilization is so good these days that I don't consider it a major issue.

 

[Dyrlege]

Do you have an OM already, if not: get a Panasonic G something to go with the Lumix 100-400, they work together on OIS.

 

[GMS]

Unfortunately the combination did not work for me at all and have sent back to retailer. The camera functionality looks great though. I was unable to get decent images even with close stationery targets. Some of this probably due to technique but I used the settings others had described as working well for bird photography. Back with my very old Canon 100-400 lens for now whilst I consider my options for the future.

 

[MelospizaMelodiaFan]

Sorry, but the Olympus 100-400 mm stabilization does not work in tandem with Olympus camera bodies. I believe it is only the Olympus "Pro" lens line that has this feature. It is unfortunate that Olympus did not include this feature for the 100-400 mm lens. But in any event, stabilization is so good these days that I don't consider it a major issue.

For a few of the top tier cameras (E-M1 ii and above, E-M5 iii and above), the lens IS handles pitch and yaw, while the body handles roll, if you update firmware. It's not the full 5 axis, but you do get some minimal coordination.

 

[Jim M.]

You mean the PL100-400? There does seem to be some variation in quality based on reports. The workaround is to try in store; or order one--if not satisfied, return it. Or opt for the somewhat heavier oly 100-400, which doesn't seem to have conflicting reports. I bought my PL100-400 when they first came out some years ago.

Just want to update this by noting I made the above comment shortly before version 2 of the PL100-400 was announced. Hopefully, version 2 will not suffer from the sample variation of version 1.

 

[rich.slipper]

I have been using the Olympus EM-1 mk ii with a PL 100-400 mm lens as my primary birding set up for several years – the mk ii is one of the predecessors to the OM-1. I love the combination – Olympus makes excellent bodies that are lighter than Panasonic bodies (though the weight of the top-of-the-line Olympus bodies keeps creeping up, unfortunately) and Panasonic has the lighter zoom lens. I also have the Olympus 300 mm F4 prime and the teleconverters, but rarely use it because it is heavier and don't notice much if any difference in the image quality.

I recently acquired an OM-1, but haven't used it with the 100-400 mm yet – but I'm confident it will work well.

The Olympus 100-400 mm zoom lens is heavier, and the only advantage over the Panasonic is that it will take teleconverters. But even the 1.4x tc reduces the widest aperture to F8, so I don't feel it is worth the extra weight.

These zoom lenses can also focus quite close, so I also frequently use my PL100-400 as a quasi-macro lens for larger subjects, such as butterflies and odonates. I think it is brilliant in that capacity as well.

You can check out some of my photos with this combination in the link below.

I have been using the Olympus EM-1 mk ii with a PL 100-400 mm lens as my primary birding set up for several years – the mk ii is one of the predecessors to the OM-1. I love the combination – Olympus makes excellent bodies that are lighter than Panasonic bodies (though the weight of the top-of-the-line Olympus bodies keeps creeping up, unfortunately) and Panasonic has the lighter zoom lens. I also have the Olympus 300 mm F4 prime and the teleconverters, but rarely use it because it is heavier and don't notice much if any difference in the image quality.

I recently acquired an OM-1, but haven't used it with the 100-400 mm yet – but I'm confident it will work well.

The Olympus 100-400 mm zoom lens is heavier, and the only advantage over the Panasonic is that it will take teleconverters. But even the 1.4x tc reduces the widest aperture to F8, so I don't feel it is worth the extra weight.

These zoom lenses can also focus quite close, so I also frequently use my PL100-400 as a quasi-macro lens for larger subjects, such as butterflies and odonates. I think it is brilliant in that capacity as well.

You can check out some of my photos with this combination in the link below.

Hello Jim, I cannot see the link you mention. I'd like to see the pictures you mention. Thank you.

 

[Jim M.]

Hello Jim, I cannot see the link you mention. I'd like to see the pictures you mention. Thank you.

Hi Rich. The link is in my signature, which appears at the bottom of each post I make. It is the underlined text.

 

[rich.slipper]

Hi Rich. The link is in my signature, which appears at the bottom of each post I make. It is the underlined text.

Ah, that wasn't showing on my phone. Now I've looked on a PC and there it is. Thanks. I shall have a pleasant afternoon browsing your Flickr albums.

 

[MelospizaMelodiaFan]

Hi Rich. The link is in my signature, which appears at the bottom of each post I make. It is the underlined text.

I don't see your sig, either. And my account preference is ticked on to show sigs.
Nevermind, I guess it doesn't work on phones.

 

[rich.slipper]

I don't see your sig, either. And my account preference is ticked on to show sigs.
Nevermind, I guess it doesn't work on phones.

I'll investigate that. Might not have one. Only set up account yesterday. And to be honest I don't have a big online presence. But I'll sort it out. Thanks.

 

[MelospizaMelodiaFan]

When I was shopping for my kit, I also fretted over a fractions of a kilo between the Pana and Oly 100-400 zooms. In the end I went with the Oly lens to mate with Oly body. Yes, it is heavier, but guess what, I don't think about the slight difference in weight anymore. It's just about getting the best photos with my gear, and appreciating what it can deliver.