I love that mantis picture. The way it was posing and the composition are just fantastic. It might be a little grainy especially on the aluminum print up close but when you held it up at a distance from the camera (which to me seems like a reasonable viewing distance) it looks perfectly fine.
Hey, thanks for your comment ! Indeed, the pic itself shows a noticeable ammount of digital noise. I have since reworked this picture and re-printed it, using fine art paper which I laminated on a Dibond panel. It's way better now, even when paper peeping hahaha !
Hey, On the 400mm, I used a Marumi DHG Achromat 200 (+5 diopters) with pretty good results. However, my macro setup has evolved drastically since that review. Now, I use an OM-1 + Olympus 60mm f2.8 macro, and sometimes a Raynox DCR-250 and / or viltrox extender rings if I need more magnification. As for light, I use a Godox TTL685 flash, along with a Cygnustech diffuser. Some of my macro photograpy is on my Instagram, link in the description if you want to see. Hope this helps!
Bought the 100-300, tried it a couple of days, exchanged it with the 100-400 mark 2, the 100-300 could deliver some decent images but in the end to many images had a lot of chromatic abberation (green and purple) as soon as the scene had much contrast - the 100-400 only a has tiny bit of purples and greens in certain situations but than can be neglected due to the tiny number. The sharpness above 300 is less but if you stop down from f6.3 to f8 the sharpness improves very well
Hi, thanks for your comment! I sometimes have the same thought about music in youtube videos. I even hate this current trend of putting click noises everywhere. It's just too distracting lol
7 месяцев назад
J'aime votre facon de commente vos photos. Je partage votre vvision. Excellente video. Merci!
Hi ! Thank you for your comment, I'm glad this video still helps people after so long :D I still got my 100-400 as of today, and it's going strong :) I use it with an OM-1 and it works wonderfully. I think you won't be disappointed !
In 2018 I had a G9 and the older version of the 100-300, and I got some great pictures. Over the years, I started chasing larger sensors with more pictures, and finally ended up with a Canon R5. In the past two weeks, I sold all my Canon gear and bought another G9, the 10-25/1.7, and the 100-400. I'm so happy to be back in a smaller, lighter(even with my kit being some of the largest, heaviest items in the system), and weather sealed kit. My issue with the relatively affordable Canon RF 100-400 and their 800/11 prime isn't their slow max aperture, but their lack of weather resistance. I've literally had my Lumix kit for less than 24 hours and already got some killer shots.
I accidentally bought the old version first and then got the 100-300 mkii because I thought it would always bother me if I didn't know what the difference was. At the long end the dual-IS makes a bit of a difference. I get less jitter with the new one. Both versions improved a lot with the newest firmware update, so I highly recommend doing that. Optically the new one might be a tiny bit sharper, but that could be down to variance. Both aren't very sharp lenses. I find stopping down to 7.1 whenever I can, and backing off on the zoom improves sharpness on both. I'm keeping the new one, but I wouldn't bother upgrading. I think mft is in a really weird spot with their wildlife lenses. The 100-400 is the same weight as a Canon 100-400, or even 100-500. That's a hard sell. I'm sticking to the 100-300 and I'm hoping hoping the price comes crashing down on the 150-400.
What is the point comparing two micro four third lenses if they are not compatible with other brand cameras, eg. Lumix can't be use with Olympus and Zuiko can't be use with Panasonic cameras ? 🤷♀️
Some very nice photos. I enjoyed your descriptions. Every picture has a story that makes them special. I recently bought the 100-300 version ii lens because I didn’t want to invest too much but still wanted something with reach for my hikes. I do believe this lens is very good quality for the price. I’m a G9 user also and you once again make it clear how good the G9 is and how relevant the MFT system still is. We know how big the equivalent FF lenses would be at these focal lengths. Thanks.
Very clear and entertaining. Your enthusiasm is infectious. I think I’ll get a 100-300 for my G9 and PEN-pl9 bodies. More compact for travel, cheaper, and I think your photos show not enough difference for my budget and travel requirements (I can always crop and sharpen a little in post!). Thanks again.
Hello, sorry for the immensely late reply. As you could see I kind of paused everything, but out of nostalgia I came back. Now I want to start making content again haha
I really like the way you reviewed these Lenses, the photo comparison was excellent and very creative. Thanks for making these 2 videos, they are possibly the best review that I have seen in a long time. Keep making videos and your channel will be very popular. 👍
Many thanks for that. You addressed all the things I wanted to ask. You are very entertaining. I've got a 100-300 II that's never off the camera as I usually photograph birds, insects and flowers. I have been considering the 400 for the extra reach and the advantage of being able to ignore the first 5 metres on autofocus. The speed of the focus is a point to consider also. I'm going to hire the 400mm lens to see how I get on with it.
I bought the 100-400 recently after owning the 100-300 for a while. Theres no doubt its better but I do find the times when 300 isn't enough but 400 is are less than I anticipated. I'm cropping far away birds and getting reasonable photos compared to not great if I cropped from 300mm. But it's not often I hit that sweet spot distance wise where the 400mm version blows the 300 away. I'm definitely keeping the 400. It can surprise you with sharp crops but maybe the difference between 600mm and 800mm isn't as great as I imagined or worth the extra £600
Hi, sorry for the delay, haven't connected for ages :o Thank you for your comment :D That's a good idea to hire the 400 before deciding to make the jump or not. As the time passes, I get better at coming closer to my subjects, and the extra 100mm become less and less important. It's still a pleasant plus in situations where the animals are very shy, but with the experience I have now, I can tell that it's way better to get closer than to get more milimeters.
@@adrienschmouker4854 I'm happy with it but it is significantly heavier and now I'm realising how good the 100-300 really was. But with the extra sharpness and cropability, the 100-400 is the way to go. Just not every time I go out 😀
An excellent report, entertaining, and very well done. I got just over 50% right. I have the 100-300 II on a GX9. I am amazed at the effectiveness of the dual stabilisers and it gives excellent hand held results where the subject is at least 20% of the frame.
Hi! sorry for the delay. Unfortunately I hadn't used the C-AF with the 100-300 before selling it, so I cannot answer your question precisely. I'd think that the difference would be notable, but not really game-changing if you are not targetting birds in flight.
100-300 is better for the price. For double the price the 100-400 isn't as good. But asking for double the performance is useless because that would have to be much more expensive than it already is
Very good video! Informative, interesting, and pleasant. I bought the Lumix 14 - 140 mm zoom lens to be my "long" lens when I bought my G85. Turned out to be an excellent "everything" lens! I use it more than my Leica 25 and 45mm lenses.
Hello, sorry for the extremely late reply haha. I've been doing alright, thanks a lot for asking ! Hope you're doing good too, and that 2024 starts well :)
Great video. I could tell the lens on all but the buzzard in the heat and the last one. I have a 100-300 and am considering getting the 100-400 for the extra reach, better stabilization and auto-focus, and higher detail, but I only have a G85, so not sure if I should spend the money on the lens or a G9.
Hi, I tend to do this more and more as the time goes on :'D I should do a video "1 yeard after", some things have changed a little, such as zoom creep ^^
@@adrienschmouker4854 If you want a real amazing vintage lens experience; get a [Nikon 300mm f4.5 ED IF]. It's all manual but the focus ring will almost move with a gentile breeze.
I had a 100-300mm with a G7. I bought a G9 and a Leica-Panasonic 100-400mm. I gave the G7 and 100-300mm to my son. The more expensive lens has many advantages. But the 100-300mm has many advantages.
Hi, sorry for the delay. I've compiled the answers in this video : ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-bXhvF1LDH_c.html You can watch only the end if you are not interested in what I have to say :)
The german company Roesch (www.r-roesch.de) offers a tripod colar for the Panasonic 100-300! By the way though I like manual focusing at more than 150 mm it becames a nightmare handheld....
Oooh I did not know that! That's a very nice piece of information ! Agreed, manual focusing only is a chore at longer focal lengths. I use the two front buttons of my G9 body for autofocus (the upper one for far priority, and the bottom one for close priority), and then fine-tune with the ring. With that I can find small birds in pretty dense foliage very quickly :)
@@adrienschmouker4854 I have the tripod collar from Reach and it is designed so you can go between landscape and portrait orientation rather quickly. My only complaint about the roesch collar is that the distance between the lens and the tripod is not great I (have heard others say the same) would have preferred twice the distance to permit a bit more "throw" with your fingers when you are zooming in and out.
Hi Adrien, excellent comparison between the two lenses; excellent quiz and very entertaining presentation of the solution, thank you very much!! I 100% agree with your bottomline that the equipment alone does not make good pictures, it is always the photographer. Anyway I made the observation on myself that the average quality of the results has improved with the quality of the gear I use, however when I look at some of my older shots I am pleasantly surprised occasionally (and I had a PAna FZ159...). Of course I cannot live up to your standards, but I find it enjoyable to use better equipment and take lots of pics! Actually I own the 100-300mm (the cheaper one...) and I am considering buying the 100-400mm; I would be tempted by the bigger zoom range and the goodies you so nicely describe in your video, but on the other side I am somewhat hesitant because of the price and the weight! BR. and again my compliments to two excellent videos!
Thank you very much for your humbling comment, and sorry for my delay. I've not been very active here with all that's going on... Glad this video still helps some people in making their choice! "I cannot live up to your standards" Don't beat yourself up! As long as you have time to put into this fabulous hobby, you will improve and get better pictures each time :) Someone in another comment said there is a collar for the 100-300. Had I known that I might not have bought the 100-400, but I'm not going to go back now haha. If the weight (and substancial increase in size) can be a problem, I invite you to rent a copy for a week end, and see if it suits you, that way you don't spend much to know which one you prefer ! :)
That's an interesting option, indeed ! I would loose the dual I.S. if I went that route, and even though the Panny 100-400 isn't what we can call compact, the Sigma 150-600 is even beefier.
The 1170g or so extra weight from the lens and the speed booster isn't insignificant. It's pretty big too. Two reasons why people choose m43 straight out of the window there 😀
Maybe you did not notice, but the funny thing is that I see a sort of ‘light shadow’ which looks like a big bird head in the picture you took of the bird of prey in very hot conditiones. I wonder if you ‘see’ it also. Very nice video all together and I will look in the 100-300 mm. Thank you. And...nice music🍀
The best camera is the one you have with you. The affordable bridge zoom camera definitely serves. I have an FZ2500. For my use I turn down the sharpening almost all the way. Sony play memories software to process the JPGs. Do Not save the improved JPG back onto the same SD card and reinstall in the Lumix camera. The saved Sony modified JPGs cause problems in the Lumix camera. Save the JPGs elsewhere. The results are worth the hassle!
Couldn't agree more. Spending thoushands in gear you are affraid to use is just not worth it. Bridges even from a few years ago are really capable ! That's quite the recipe you have there !
@@adrienschmouker4854 I agree! I have an a7r2 and the 24-105 f4 G lens. Incredible IQ. FZ2500 not as good IQ for sure. However, more fun to operate, and with Sony Play Memories software retouching, nearly as good IQ out to 13x19 inches! I also have the G9 Lumix. with the Leica 15 1.7 lens I get less C.A. but otherwise similar IQ.
