Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Micro Four Thirds Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2016 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropica...
  
 
bvphotos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


The reach in a small package is attractive. But not many MPs to crop and high ISO characteristics give me pause. But would any semi-serious enthusiast take this lens with an appropriate MFT body on a birding/wildlife trip to a tropical jungle. My instinct tells me, it would be a frustrating experience, due to the need for high ISOs. But perhaps others have better insight into this?


Dec 01, 2016 at 06:11 AM
Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


The cheapest practical alternative with a similar reach would be a Nikon D500 with the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 (750mm eqv.). You would get better AF and better high ISO, but twice the weight. I have owned hat lens, and it's a beast. The combo is around twice as heavy as an E-M1 II with the PanaLeica. There are other lens alternatives, but they are all at least as big, heavy and expensive.

One fantastic option would be the Zuiko 300mm f/2.8 in 4/3 mount, with the option of 1.4x and 2.0x extenders. It's available for USD 3,500 used, and it would require one of the E-M1 models to AF properly.

Conclusion: Yes, I would.



Dec 01, 2016 at 09:56 AM
glassartist
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


Threre is no simple or correct answer, and you are in the M43 Forum so . . .

Agree with Jorgen above - the D500 w/200-500 is the cheapest practical alternative. By most accounts the AF system on the D500 is about as good as you are going to get right now.

But there are other considerations. Is cost a consideration? What will the images be used for? Are you planning on printing them over 16 x 20, use them as a digital slide show or just post them on the web? Are you going to be doing hiking or just short excursions?

A couple things to note - Both the D500 and latest Oly m1 v11 are around 20 mpx- so there is no gain in resolution either way. You'll gain about 1EV in high ISO with the D500 - look at something like the Dpreview comparison chart. To my eyes a raw D500 3200 ISO files looks pretty indistinguishable from an Oly M1 V11 1600 ISO file. So you lose a stop, but gain it back with the faster 300 f4 (which btw is sharp wide open as well) But how high ISO are you thinking you are going to need to go? Small critters in dark foliage are always going to require compromises somewhere.

Don't discount the importance of either lens or body stabilization. For my money, Oly's is superior and looks to be particularly effective with the M1 v11 in conjunction with the Oly 300 f4.

With the Pany 100-400, you lose some speed but gain some FL flexibility. Again, there are compromises.

So if it were me, I'd opt for an M1 v11 with the Oly 300 f4 along with a back-up M1 with the 40-150 2.8.

But you are in the M43 Forum, so . . .



Dec 01, 2016 at 05:19 PM
bobbytan
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


I think you summed this up pretty well. I had the E-M1 + 300/4 lens on a trip to Costa Rica recently and it didn't let me down. As a matter of fact, the combo performed incredibly well. But frankly we didn't spend too much time shooting inside the rain forests where conditions are abysmal - the lighting is real bad, the backgrounds are terrible, and it's hot an humid. Here's a shot of a pair of spectacled owls in ISO 3200.

Some sample images with the 300/4 PRO lens here:

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1443052/1#13665252

glassartist wrote:
Threre is no simple or correct answer, and you are in the M43 Forum so . . .

Agree with Jorgen above - the D500 w/200-500 is the cheapest practical alternative. By most accounts the AF system on the D500 is about as good as you are going to get right now.

But there are other considerations. Is cost a consideration? What will the images be used for? Are you planning on printing them over 16 x 20, use them as a digital slide show or just post them on the web? Are you going to be doing hiking or just
...Show more





  E-M1    OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 lens    300mm    f/5.6    1/50s    3200 ISO    0.0 EV  




Dec 01, 2016 at 06:39 PM
notherenow
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


There are plenty of alternatives of sorts.

Plenty of faster aperture Canon lenses work for decent enough AF with M4/3 bodies using either Metabones or Kipon smart AF adapters.

Many will only be AFS but I understand that Metabones adapters can use AFC with some Oly cameras.

My experience is with the Kipon adapter and GX7 and older/shorter lenses but that combination works nice for AFS at least.

Would be a lot cheaper than a D500 anyway even if the AF wouldn't quite be as good.




Dec 01, 2016 at 10:07 PM
Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


notherenow wrote:
There are plenty of alternatives of sorts.

Plenty of faster aperture Canon lenses work for decent enough AF with M4/3 bodies using either Metabones or Kipon smart AF adapters.

Many will only be AFS but I understand that Metabones adapters can use AFC with some Oly cameras.

My experience is with the Kipon adapter and GX7 and older/shorter lenses but that combination works nice for AFS at least.

Would be a lot cheaper than a D500 anyway even if the AF wouldn't quite be as good.



You are right, and in theory it's a winning solution, although I would say that an E-M1/II would be a requirement to get autofocus that works well enough for anything moving faster than a turtle. The ultimate lens this side of $10,000 would then be the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 in EF mount, which becomes an 85-213mm f/2.0. Other alternatives would be the zooms from Tamron and Sigma that reach 600mm, or 426mm with the speed booster.

The problem with these solutions is that size and price approach that of a Nikon D500 combo, and the Nikon price can be reduced further by buying a D7200 instead, also a very decent camera that will focus faster than an E-M1 with a non-native lens, and light years faster than any other m4/3 camera with non-native lenses.

One solution that has not been mentioned so far is the 4/3 mount Zuiko 150mm f/2.0. It sells regularly second hand at around $1,500 and takes TCs very well, 1.4x as well as 2.0x. An E-M1 with that lens plus a stabilised Panasonic body with the 100-400mm would be a great combo, and still with a combined weight around that of the D500/200-500 combo.



Dec 01, 2016 at 10:38 PM
notherenow
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


Jorgen Udvang wrote:
You are right, and in theory it's a winning solution, although I would say that an E-M1/II would be a requirement to get autofocus that works well enough for anything moving faster than a turtle. The ultimate lens this side of $10,000 would then be the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 in EF mount, which becomes an 85-213mm f/2.0. Other alternatives would be the zooms from Tamron and Sigma that reach 600mm, or 426mm with the speed booster.

The problem with these solutions is that size and price approach that of a Nikon D500 combo, and the Nikon price can be reduced
...Show more

AF, even with my Panasonic GX7 and Kipon adapter, while AFS only is pretty close to native fast and I think with some of the newest Oly cameras is faster (and is maybe a bit better with the Metabones smart adapters too).

The kipon adapter as it was first introduced was slow and had lots of issues but after a few firmware updates (both the Kipon and Metabones have USB ports) it is very useful.

I have not got the camera and adapter with me right now but it was even ok with an ancient EF 100-300 5.6 L (sold) but worked great with my (sold) Canon 135 f2 L, and also the Sigma 150 2.8 APO macro (mine is the non stabilized older version) which is still quite fast and a LOT cheaper than that 150 f2.

I also use the camera/adapter with my EF 100 f2, 40 2.8 STM and 18-55 IS ii kit lens (IS works well). It doesn't work with an ancient 28-90 kit lens from an old EF film camera.

I use the same lenses adapted to Sony FF which is slower to focus (A7s).

Only AF photo I have from the 150 2.8 with the Kipon and GX7 readily to hand has been posted a few times.





  DMC-GX7    150mm    f/2.8    1/8000s    200 ISO    0.0 EV  




Dec 02, 2016 at 01:06 AM
Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


notherenow wrote:
AF, even with my Panasonic GX7 and Kipon adapter, while AFS only is pretty close to native fast and I think with some of the newest Oly cameras is faster (and is maybe a bit better with the Metabones smart adapters too).

The kipon adapter as it was first introduced was slow and had lots of issues but after a few firmware updates (both the Kipon and Metabones have USB ports) it is very useful.

I have not got the camera and adapter with me right now but it was even ok with an ancient EF 100-300 5.6 L (sold) but worked
...Show more

While the Sigma 150mm is certainly cheaper than the Zuiko, it becomes a 106mm f/2.0 with the Speed Booster. Add to that the $650 for that adapter versus around $150 for the weather sealed MMF-3, and the Zuiko lens actually looks quite reasonable.

While using non-native AF lenses on m4/3 bodies other than the E-M1 is certainly doable, and something that I've done for years with the GH2, GH3 and GX8 bodies, the difference up to the E-M1 is enormous. E-M1 bodies are dirt cheap now (I paid $550 for mine 6 months ago), and make the use of those lenses much more fun.



Dec 02, 2016 at 01:25 AM
notherenow
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


Jorgen Udvang wrote:
While the Sigma 150mm is certainly cheaper than the Zuiko, it becomes a 106mm f/2.0 with the Speed Booster. Add to that the $650 for that adapter versus around $150 for the weather sealed MMF-3, and the Zuiko lens actually looks quite reasonable.

While using non-native AF lenses on m4/3 bodies other than the E-M1 is certainly doable, and something that I've done for years with the GH2, GH3 and GX8 bodies, the difference up to the E-M1 is enormous. E-M1 bodies are dirt cheap now (I paid $550 for mine 6 months ago), and make the use of those
...Show more

Metabones makes both smart focal reducers and non focal reducer adapters and the Kipon is a non focal reducer adapter.

From what I have seen, the M4/3 smart adapters work better for AF on most M4/3 cameras than the 4/3 adapter does even to the E-M1 (I have not tried the E-M1 or 4/3 adapter but that is from what it seems posted around the web).

Again, AF, even with my now aging GX7 is almost native fast (AFS only) and the 150 2.8 stays 2.8 with a 300mm angle of view (and 5.6 DOF).

I think people have used that 120-300 Sigma 2.8 with Kipon and or Metabones adapters and I think it works quite well with at least some combinations anyway.

I do want to stress, I am simply saying these are options. If they are valid options for the OP (or anyone), then I suggest trying them first.



Dec 02, 2016 at 01:43 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 

        


notherenow
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


Here are a couple of videos, one of the Kipon and one of the Oly 4/3.

Plenty of early Kipon reviews failed it but that was before some firmware updates.

I think the non focal reducer Metabones may be better yet though is a lot more expensive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=y2k8flFM9xE#t=27

#t=27






Dec 02, 2016 at 02:50 AM
Jorgen Udvang
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


notherenow wrote:
Metabones makes both smart focal reducers and non focal reducer adapters and the Kipon is a non focal reducer adapter.

From what I have seen, the M4/3 smart adapters work better for AF on most M4/3 cameras than the 4/3 adapter does even to the E-M1 (I have not tried the E-M1 or 4/3 adapter but that is from what it seems posted around the web).

Again, AF, even with my now aging GX7 is almost native fast (AFS only) and the 150 2.8 stays 2.8 with a 300mm angle of view (and 5.6 DOF).

I think people have used that 120-300 Sigma
...Show more

It's indeed an interesting development, and I would love to have one for my Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S. I saw somebody made a Nikon to Sony AF adapter the other day, so we can only hope



Dec 03, 2016 at 09:57 AM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


bvphotos wrote:
The reach in a small package is attractive. But not many MPs to crop and high ISO characteristics give me pause. But would any semi-serious enthusiast take this lens with an appropriate MFT body on a birding/wildlife trip to a tropical jungle. My instinct tells me, it would be a frustrating experience, due to the need for high ISOs. But perhaps others have better insight into this?


I would certainly take it, along with an E-M1 Mark II. For shooting handheld, the IBIS will certainly help for slower shutter speeds and lower ISO. Personally, the last thing I would take is some heavy and cumbersome combo.

This guy has taken great shots all around the world with the E-M1, and I can only imagine he would take even better shots with the Mark II, along with the 100-400 in many situations:

http://www.firstlightworkshop.com/wheres-jay/

And IMO, I certainly would not risk fooling around with adapters that I had not fully tested with my gear before taking them on a trip.



Dec 03, 2016 at 02:29 PM
Iwas joeking
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


I would think taking a camera with less than stellar Hi ISO capabilities into a dark environment with a slow lens(f5.6 -6.3 at the longer end) would not be the best choice. Either considering a different lens or even camera system might be wise.


Dec 03, 2016 at 04:54 PM
bvphotos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


All, thanks for the responses. Tony, why do you specifically recommend the E-M1 II? Would a Pen F or a GX8 not work? The former has IBIS, I know. But the in lens stabilization would work with the GX8, no?


Dec 04, 2016 at 09:23 AM
bvphotos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


Iwas joeking wrote:
I would think taking a camera with less than stellar Hi ISO capabilities into a dark environment with a slow lens(f5.6 -6.3 at the longer end) would not be the best choice. Either considering a different lens or even camera system might be wise.


I agree. That's why I asked the question. My experience with the Rebel XT + 100-400 mk1 in the jungles of Costa Rica was not so great. Anything above ISO 1600 was too noisy. I'd guess that you must have f4 of faster on MFT cameras.



Dec 04, 2016 at 09:28 AM
Imagemaster
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?


bvphotos wrote:
All, thanks for the responses. Tony, why do you specifically recommend the E-M1 II? Would a Pen F or a GX8 not work? The former has IBIS, I know. But the in lens stabilization would work with the GX8, no?


For subjects that are not moving, you do not need stellar high ISO capability, nor do you need a larger than f5.6 lens. Use a tripod and/or IBIS. Sure, a 1DX II and 400 f2.8 would be better, but do you want to spend $20,000 and pack that heavy and bulky gear around?

I only suggest the E-M1 II because it sounds like it has the best specs of any MFT body.



Dec 05, 2016 at 01:59 AM
reggieb
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Would you dare taking the PanLeica 100-400 into a tropical jungle?




Jorgen Udvang wrote:
The cheapest practical alternative with a similar reach would be a Nikon D500 with the Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6 (750mm eqv.). You would get better AF and better high ISO, but twice the weight. I have owned hat lens, and it's a beast. The combo is around twice as heavy as an E-M1 II with the PanaLeica. There are other lens alternatives, but they are all at least as big, heavy and expensive.

One fantastic option would be the Zuiko 300mm f/2.8 in 4/3 mount, with the option of 1.4x and 2.0x extenders. It's available for USD 3,500 used, and it
...Show more

Depending on how much hiking you're doing, the 300PF and EC-14 would be way better. I'm going backpacking in Costa Rica, 17ish miles will be the longest day, but I'll take the weight savings there all day.

I'm taking a D500 300 PF, EM-1 mkII with 12-100f4 and maybe the 7-14. Last trip in I had a D800 with the Nikkor 7-14 and a 35mm Sigma art, and a 70-200 instead of the 300PF, my back is going to thank me.



Dec 06, 2016 at 12:00 AM







FM Forums | Micro Four Thirds Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password