Reading mode: Light Dark

100-300 Disappointing for Air Show

Go to last post
M

MarkyM

Senior Member
Messages
1,094
Reaction score
358
Location
Twinsburg , OH, US
The last time I shot an air show I had a Sony A77 with the 70-300G lens and it went fairly well.

That lens had something I sorely missed yesterday with the Panny 100-300: a focus limiter!

I have really enjoyed the 100-300 lens for slow moving animals etc. but it is simply too slow to focus for any kind of fast moving objects. I tried Single and Wide Area AF. (As we know, tracking really doesn't work yet on MFT and I confirmed that on my EM-10).

Not only is the 100-300 dog slow to focus but it spent most of the time hunting. At least if it had a focus limiter, it wouldn't have had to hunt so much and would probably have been much more useful.

Is the Oly 75-300II any better? Does it have a focus limiter?
 
What sky were you shooting against - i.e. clouds, bright, gray?

I got this shot in early August with my 100-300 on a G5 but i did find the hunting behavior as well, mostly in two situations:

later in the day as sensor couldn't find enough contrast due to the changing sky conditions, and this also seemed worse at the full 300. The latter part may simply be the physics of not actually holding steady on what limited contrast there is/was.

Some full frame guys suggested manual focus but that (to me at least) seemed and even harder task



keep the faith :)



039cca7fee904ba68eabf076a514da57.jpg.png
 
bradevans said:
What sky were you shooting against - i.e. clouds, bright, gray?

I got this shot in early August with my 100-300 on a G5 but i did find the hunting behavior as well, mostly in two situations:

later in the day as sensor couldn't find enough contrast due to the changing sky conditions, and this also seemed worse at the full 300. The latter part may simply be the physics of not actually holding steady on what limited contrast there is/was.

Some full frame guys suggested manual focus but that (to me at least) seemed and even harder task
Click to expand...
Nice shot of the T-birds!

It was mostly blue sky with some white clouds.

Yes, sometimes it was hard to get the focus box over the subject, especially while it was hunting!

Next time I am going to try with a larger AF box. I have it set to the smallest.

I hope Oly and Panny can make some advances with tracking AF soon. If Sony can do it with the A6000, I'm sure they will follow suit soon.

But it would really help if there was a long zoom lens with faster focusing and a focus limiter.
 
I found the 100-300 disappointing as well on my E-M10 this weekend as regards focus hunting. I tried to shoot hummingbirds and the lens would not focus lock in time. I also used the lens for static shots of dragonflies and the lens sometimes had trouble focusing in a field of plants and tall grasses. I had to point the camera in a different place, get focus lock, and then point the camera back to the original location to get focus lock.

Regards

Michael
 
You may be interested in this thread: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3710405

All in all, i don't think its an easy task. You might be able to make it easier (and heavier!) via Full Frame, but focus limiter would make a lot of sense in this shooting context
 
The 100-300 is an old lens, with an old AF system. If Panasonic is serious about good C-AF, as in the GH4, they really need updated tele lenses. The 35-100, which is barely Tele, is the only fast focusing "long" lens in their lineup.

Thg GH4 is a capable action shooter. None of their tele lenses, unfortunately, are.
 
MarkyM said:
...I hope Oly and Panny can make some advances with tracking AF soon. If Sony can do it with the A6000, I'm sure they will follow suit soon....
Click to expand...
It's already here. The Oly E-M1 already has hybrid PD/CD AF, and Panny's GH4 is trying DFD instead (although it isn't working very well on the 100-300 from what's been posted here). Both cameras held their own (or beat) against the A6000 in theCameraStore's head to head tests.

Or do you mean cost wise? :-)
 
Do you know if the Oly 75-300 MK2 is faster to focus?

Regards

Michael
 
I'm surprised that you get a lot of hunting. I used to get a lot of hunting with my Oly 4/3s 70-300 but the 100-300 is a big improvement on that. It's not perfect and if the light drops or it's a low contrast sky I do sometimes struggle to focus on anything but it's not hunting as such it just won't confirm focus.

If you look at my Picasa albums at the link below you will see this year's air shows all shot with the 100-300 with some success. I'm shooting with a G6.

Before I get to cocky I should say it's a long way from perfect and I'd like better but it does well bang for buck.

Trevor
My Galleries are at
 
MarkyM said:
The last time I shot an air show I had a Sony A77 with the 70-300G lens and it went fairly well.

That lens had something I sorely missed yesterday with the Panny 100-300: a focus limiter!

I have really enjoyed the 100-300 lens for slow moving animals etc. but it is simply too slow to focus for any kind of fast moving objects. I tried Single and Wide Area AF. (As we know, tracking really doesn't work yet on MFT and I confirmed that on my EM-10).

Not only is the 100-300 dog slow to focus but it spent most of the time hunting. At least if it had a focus limiter, it wouldn't have had to hunt so much and would probably have been much more useful.

Is the Oly 75-300II any better? Does it have a focus limiter?
Click to expand...
It seems like a pretty obvious question, so it's surprising I'm the first to ask it. Do you have a modern Panny body to test your lens with?

There are two possible culprits here, the lens and the body. Being slow to focus and a lot of hunting are two different issues IMO.

Being slow to focus could be either the lens or the body. But IMO, a lot of hunting is more likely the body. The C-AF algorithms for the E-M10 just may not be up to snuff with a long lens like the 100-300 or it may be specifically the Panny lens that the body doesn't like.

Also, consider that most reviewers find Panny bodies a lot better for tracking than Oly bodies, and the GH4 is just going to be that much better than anything else in the MFT lineup.

So, I really have a hard time accepting your conclusion until/unless you test it with a Panny body, preferably a more modern one.
 
MarkyM said:
The last time I shot an air show I had a Sony A77 with the 70-300G lens and it went fairly well.

That lens had something I sorely missed yesterday with the Panny 100-300: a focus limiter!

I have really enjoyed the 100-300 lens for slow moving animals etc. but it is simply too slow to focus for any kind of fast moving objects. I tried Single and Wide Area AF. (As we know, tracking really doesn't work yet on MFT and I confirmed that on my EM-10).

Not only is the 100-300 dog slow to focus but it spent most of the time hunting. At least if it had a focus limiter, it wouldn't have had to hunt so much and would probably have been much more useful.

Is the Oly 75-300II any better? Does it have a focus limiter?
Click to expand...
If Olympus would add a CAF+MF firmware upgrade it would solve many of these problems. The EC14+50-200SWD is not that fast focusing on the E-M1 when the lens is far away from correct focus. However, the lens has mechanically linked focus, so you can quickly manually move (1/2 turn from 3.9 ft. to infinity) the focus in the correct direction and then the auto focus lock is extremely fast. I have no idea why Olympus did not include this option on their mFTs cameras. My older Olympus DSLRs (E510 and E5) both had this setting.
 
Beach Bum said:
MarkyM said:
The last time I shot an air show I had a Sony A77 with the 70-300G lens and it went fairly well.

That lens had something I sorely missed yesterday with the Panny 100-300: a focus limiter!

I have really enjoyed the 100-300 lens for slow moving animals etc. but it is simply too slow to focus for any kind of fast moving objects. I tried Single and Wide Area AF. (As we know, tracking really doesn't work yet on MFT and I confirmed that on my EM-10).

Not only is the 100-300 dog slow to focus but it spent most of the time hunting. At least if it had a focus limiter, it wouldn't have had to hunt so much and would probably have been much more useful.

Is the Oly 75-300II any better? Does it have a focus limiter?
Click to expand...
It seems like a pretty obvious question, so it's surprising I'm the first to ask it. Do you have a modern Panny body to test your lens with?

There are two possible culprits here, the lens and the body. Being slow to focus and a lot of hunting are two different issues IMO.

Being slow to focus could be either the lens or the body. But IMO, a lot of hunting is more likely the body. The C-AF algorithms for the E-M10 just may not be up to snuff with a long lens like the 100-300 or it may be specifically the Panny lens that the body doesn't like.

Also, consider that most reviewers find Panny bodies a lot better for tracking than Oly bodies, and the GH4 is just going to be that much better than anything else in the MFT lineup.

So, I really have a hard time accepting your conclusion until/unless you test it with a Panny body, preferably a more modern one.
Click to expand...
Markym

You hit it right on the head. Although the 100-300 is not nearly as fast as the new 12-35 and 35-100 X lenses in AF, I've not had many things it hunts for. I am using it with the GH4 and it's an excellent lens. I do hope Panasoinc does update this lens to equal the new X series however.
 
I use the 100-300 on a GX7 and GH4 and have minimal problems with focusing. I also use the 'pinpoint' focus option with cross hair target. Maybe that is the answer. Oh, I used that same lens with a GH2 and it was a pretty good fit. Not as fast as the current bodies, but not bad either.
 
You stated later that you had the focus area set on the smallest setting. I expect a lot of the problem was the camera operator letting the aircraft drift out of that area. Once that happens the camera will hunt as it has no idea where the object is. Set it on the biggest area.
 
Adrian Harris said:
You stated later that you had the focus area set on the smallest setting. I expect a lot of the problem was the camera operator letting the aircraft drift out of that area. Once that happens the camera will hunt as it has no idea where the object is. Set it on the biggest area.
Click to expand...
 
MarkyM said:
Next time I am going to try with a larger AF box. I have it set to the smallest.
Click to expand...
There's the problem and the solution right there! My experience with µ4/3 AF is that the smallest AF box is significantly slower to AF than any other box size, irrespective of lens, and is only useful for slow, discriminating AF work.

Not the lens after all. Thread title should have been "Smallest AF box Disappointing for Air Show".

--
call me Arg
 
Last edited:
MarkyM said:
The last time I shot an air show I had a Sony A77 with the 70-300G lens and it went fairly well.

That lens had something I sorely missed yesterday with the Panny 100-300: a focus limiter!

I have really enjoyed the 100-300 lens for slow moving animals etc. but it is simply too slow to focus for any kind of fast moving objects. I tried Single and Wide Area AF. (As we know, tracking really doesn't work yet on MFT and I confirmed that on my EM-10).

Not only is the 100-300 dog slow to focus but it spent most of the time hunting. At least if it had a focus limiter, it wouldn't have had to hunt so much and would probably have been much more useful.

Is the Oly 75-300II any better? Does it have a focus limiter?
Click to expand...
Except for the 60mm macro, I don't think any mFT lenses have focus limiters.

Have you tried Multiple Area Focus? I think that helps.

The 75-300II focus seems to me to be about the same as the 100-300. I have both; got the 100-300 first and then picked up the 75-300II. The reason was because the 100-300 has a sluggish aperture, so it will not do high speed continuous mode. So I got the Olympus lens for those occasions when I need high speed. I keep the Pany because it's a bit brighter but also takes a tripod collar so it balances on a monopod better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Cleveland Air Show (Part 1)
Replies
4
Views
306
MarkyM
M
B
OM 100-400 mark ii
Replies
16
Views
5K
StevenAdler
StevenAdler
S
Birding with the MZ 75-300 ii (20 images)
Replies
9
Views
311
arrow501
A
T
Switch to OM done - First impressions
Replies
7
Views
3K
mmartel
M
Phocal
  • User review User review
OM SYSTEM M.Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm f/2.8 IS PRO Initial/Ongoing Review
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
42K
Hmm1000
H

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top