After shooting (and loving) the 75/1.8, the 25/1.4 and the 45/1.8, it's really hard to get excited about the Pany 100-300's IQ, although at times it can be pretty good if you don't inspect too closely
I kept mine, though - thought about returning it, but then realized I was evaluating IQ vs very sharp primes instead of using fair criteria - it's a decently built, decently priced long zoom with decent IQ.
I've never shot with one, but Pentax made the smallest 300/4 that I know of. It's tough to come by and might stretch the budget a bit, but I think it's only five inches long (or so). I'm sure you can find image samples via google.
I have shot with the Canon FD 300/4L (on an E-P2) and C/Y Zeiss 300/4 (on Canon 5D). The Canon's lighter, IIRC, and CA is better controlled, but the Zeiss is sharper with more apparent detail. I'm not sure if Oly's IBIS has improved to the point where it's really helpful with lenses this long and heavy, so I would consider using them with a monopod, at least.
Steve Beck wrote:
Optically the 75-300 is the better of the two in regards to the Panasonic 100-300. The Panasonic is more popular because its cheaper. The Panasonic has has some fringing issues. But the cost difference makes it hard to ignore.
Frankly, money wasn't the issue for me - taking pictures is what keeps me relatively sane. The images I saw from the 75-300 didn't really appeal to me, but the ones I saw from the 100-300 did. What then sold me was the absolutely awesome image stabilizer. So much better than the one on the Canon 100-400! And the image quality, especially at close range, is quite good actually.
Steve Beck wrote:
Optically the 75-300 is the better of the two in regards to the Panasonic 100-300. The Panasonic is more popular because its cheaper. The Panasonic has has some fringing issues. But the cost difference makes it hard to ignore.
Antje wrote:
Frankly, money wasn't the issue for me - taking pictures is what keeps me relatively sane. The images I saw from the 75-300 didn't really appeal to me, but the ones I saw from the 100-300 did. What then sold me was the absolutely awesome image stabilizer. So much better than the one on the Canon 100-400!
That's encouraging. So the Panasonic in-lens stabilizer is better than the OM-D's in-camera stabilizer? I guess I'm just going to have to try one. Thanks for the input.
I haven't found an OIS lens yet for m4/3 that matches the OM-D's stabilizer at any focal length, but if there were one lens that would probably equal or beat it, it's probably the 100-300, due to the very long focal length. I've only shot the 100-300 sporadically, so I can't say definitively whether or not it's better.
I do know I get about 2 stops at 300mm with the IBIS.
CalW wrote:
Bobby and Steve - I'd really like to see that shootout between the Oly and Pany long zooms - perhaps not in this thread but in a dedicated thread? Please do!
