Canon 5D/100-400L IS vs. Panasonic GF1/45-200

Started Jan 16, 2010 | Discussions thread
OP Robert Deutsch Forum Pro • Posts: 10,226
Re: Canon 5D/100-400L IS vs. Panasonic GF1/45-200

jwilliams wrote:

At those shutter speeds obviously you should have no problem getting good results with IS.

I know the 100-400 isn't the best Canon lens at 400, that is why years ago I bought the 300/4IS and 1.4x instead of the zoom, plus I just though the 300 handled better. I had been contemplating upgrading my ancient 20D and getting either a used 5D or new 5DII. My though was use my GH1 for most things and reserve the DSLR gear for the times when I want to take 'serious' pictures.

That about sums it up for me, too. For the ultimate quality, I would still use the 5D (I can't justify buying a 5DII at this point). I haven't used the 100-400L IS very much--it's just so heavy that I must have a special reason for taking it with me. I've used the 45-200 much more. I should probably sell the 100-400...

I am curious, these shots aside, how you feel about the quality of the GF1 vs your 5D. I haven't done any direct comparisons of my 20D vs my GH1, but my gut feeling looking at my GH1 shots is that the 20D is still a tiny bit better.

I used to have a 20D, which I sold to a friend when I got the 5D, and she's very happy with it. I have no doubt that the performance of the 20D--and the 5D--at high ISO (say, 1600) is superior to the GF1, and so is the dynamic range. I understand that the GH1 sensor is somewhat better than the one in the GF1 and the G1, but I would expect the superiority of the 20D/5D to hold. But the GF1 and its associated lenses are very good, and at lower ISO and where extreme DR is not present, the IQ is in the same league--and much better than what you can get from the best of the small-sensor digicams like the G10 (which was used for the photo of the GF1 and the 5D), G11, or the LX3.

To me it seems that my GH1 blows highlights out easier and really needs to have the exposure nailed for good results. It seems the 20D is more forgiving. Given ideal lighting and exposure I think the GH1 may actually be slightly better. I did some shots under a simple studio lighting setup and the results were very good. Also it seems that setting the WB manually helps a lot. The AWB on the GH1 seems to miss a lot more than the Canon.

I don't have the 45-200, but do own the 14-45, 14-140 and 20. I may just have to pickup the 45-200. My reasoning so far was I would probably get my 20D and 300/4 + 1.4x if I was going to do long tele shots like widlife stuff etc. I might want to rethink that.

If you need a really long tele, the 300/4 +1.4x on the 20D will be quite a bit longer than the 45-200, keeping in mind the extra 1.6x crop factor.

Again thanks for the informative post.

I'm glad you found it useful.

Bob

 Robert Deutsch's gear list:Robert Deutsch's gear list
Olympus E-M5 II
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
tko
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow