Been on the fence regarding a Sigma 100-400 as my long landscape lens option and this one's looking interesting. Will have to wait until I see some shots from it but at 1.3kg it's definitely in the running. Apparently will take 1.4x and 2x converters too.
I liked the Sigma 100-400 for it's price/FL/size/performance...But it needed to be weather sealed. This new panny looks like a nice alternative with an extra 100mm's. It's close to the same size/weight, has dual AF motors, new OIS and is weather sealed which is what these long zoom TF lenses need to be IMO.
If I was in the market I'd definitely check this out.
Matt Kerby wrote:
I liked the Sigma 100-400 for it's price/FL/size/performance...But it needed to be weather sealed. This new panny looks like a nice alternative with an extra 100mm's. It's close to the same size/weight, has dual AF motors, new OIS and is weather sealed which is what these long zoom TF lenses need to be IMO.
If I was in the market I'd definitely check this out.
Definitely considering it. The one thing that I am a little concerned about is the amount of issues with moisture/coatings on Lumix lenses. Seen a lot of 24-105 and 70-300 lenses for sale cheaply because of “moisture inside lens” though to me it looks more like coating deterioration.
I'm definitely interested. The release is well timed - Only a few weeks after I picked up the Leica SL 100-400. The Lumix 100-500 is very similarly sized, but lighter than the SL! Very intrigued.
While it is difficult to tell for certain, it looks like the lens yields nice crisp shots at 500mm, but appears to lose sharpness with a TC. It will be interesting to see how things look once someone does an in-depth review sample photos that you can look at (not in a video).
Abuttolph wrote:
B&H has a video about this lens here:
While it is difficult to tell for certain, it looks like the lens yields nice crisp shots at 500mm, but appears to lose sharpness with a TC. It will be interesting to see how things look once someone does an in-depth review sample photos that you can look at (not in a video).
I think if you look at the MTF chart at 500, and also note that there are no ASPH elements in the design ... the use of a TC is only going further amplify that spread between the M / S lines. Noting also, that they begin to separate, immediately from the center of the image. So yeah, the TC is going to exploit that a bit differently than a lens that remains tighter, than the 500mm performance on this one. Not to say it's bad, per say ... but, the penalty of the TC further diverging the light path will reveal itself a bit, imo.
Abuttolph wrote:
B&H has a video about this lens here:
While it is difficult to tell for certain, it looks like the lens yields nice crisp shots at 500mm, but appears to lose sharpness with a TC. It will be interesting to see how things look once someone does an in-depth review sample photos that you can look at (not in a video).
When I first saw the rumours I was optimistic that it might be competitive with Canon's outstanding 100-500L lens, but I guess that was just wishful thinking.
Cliff L. wrote:
When I first saw the rumours I was optimistic that it might be competitive with Canon's outstanding 100-500L lens, but I guess that was just wishful thinking.
I will wait for more samples before passing judgment. DPReview have not historically been particularly good at testing longer lenses.
I have had the S 70-200 2.8 with both 1.4x and 2x converters for a few years now and the combinations are pretty remarkable even at 400 5.6 equivalent, but it is a heavy lens. What I would like to see is someone use the Canon 200-400L on a S1 II with MC-21 as the Canon seems to be the best value on the used market right now by far to get to 500 at 5.6 for less than a new Sigma 500 5.6, but portability goes out the door.
Has anyone tried this lens on a Leica SL3 or SL3-S body? Any impressions on how well the AF or stabilization works with a Leica body? And any thoughts on image quality?
Looking for info on this combo I came across this post.
I’ve been using the lens for a few weeks now and running a series of tests on the SL3. I’m still not entirely convinced about its performance at the long end. There seems to be an unusual amount of blur/smearing, possibly due to shutter shock or an IS/OIS conflict.
When I switch to electronic shutter, mount it on a tripod, use a 6-second exposure, OIS&IS off, and focus manually, I can achieve sharp results, but not consistently. So the lens is clearly capable, just not reliably so. When it hits, the image quality is beautiful. Unfortunately, I’m currently seeing more misses than hits.
For now, I’m using electronic shutter (not ideal), but it does improve my hit rate when shooting handheld. On a tripod, however, results remain inconclusive. I really wish Leica would implement EFCS on the SL3, as that would likely help.
The Lumix 100-500 is very similarly sized, but lighter than the SL! Very intrigued. 
