Panny 100-400mm news - From the horses mouth

Started Nov 13, 2015 | Discussions thread
uRebel Rob Senior Member • Posts: 1,524
Re: Panny 100-400mm news - From the horses mouth

hindesite wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

nzmacro wrote:

Harold66 wrote:

Nuts About Photography wrote:

I was at a trade show yesterday and met with the national reps for Panasonic.

They confirmed the 100-400 would be shipping to the reps in December so they can show them to dealers, etc. Then the actual product would ship for retail sales in January.

Cost would be in the $2K area, Canadian, so maybe near $1500US$.

So, time to put this on your list for Santa!

I wonder who in these forums and out there really need such a lens . Hard to imagine that this could be useful for more than a very few photographers ( professional birders I guess )

in the meanwhile there is still no affordable , reasonably light 300mm equivalent , arguably the single most significant gap in the m4/3 lens line up among commonly used focal lengths


That's a long winded way of saying ....... "Harold doesn't need this lens" Plenty in here want and deserve this lens Harold. BTW, I don't want it, but that's not the point.

A bit like me saying who needs a wide angle, what for

All the best.


Hello Danny

Well no that's not it. I have personnally no need for a lens longer than 300mm equivalent but for people who shoot birds and animals and SOME sports , a 400 mm to 600mm FOV might be needed on a somewhat regular basis

However, unless you have a lot of cash and room in your bag I maintain my view that a lens above 600mm lens is not needed by most photographers

Yeah, I remember the old days when all my gear fitted in a bag...that train has long left the station.

Shooting above those focal lenghts required a sturdy tripod and body with large grips and so on and so on.

Actually, no. You generally hold the system by the lens, and when tripod mounted you use the pan tilt handle. When tripod mounted I almost always use a cable shutter release.

There are reasons for Panasonic to market such lenses but large sales volume is NOT one of them

The fact that some people are drooling at the sight of a big lens does not mean that they actually need it , nor at the end actually buy it

Well, I hope they do, even if they never use it. At least they have a choice, and it helps to make these products viable so I can afford one.

Those who disagree can tell us how often and for which purpose they need a 800 mm focal length

I'm not sure why I'm bothering to do this, but as I previously said, have a look at my videos. Many of them are taken with 400mm or longer. Many of the still images I've posted were taken with this range of focal lengths.

I would use a lens like this almost daily, certainly weekly or several times a month; I already use 500 and 400 MF, and the 100-300 extensively. I used 500 and 100-300 last week (same event). I'll probably use a 400 and 500 this afternoon, weather dependent.

I am not holding my breath however for specific and verifiable answers

I hope that is specific and verifiable enough for you.

Really, you cannot extrapolate your own experience and apply that to everyone else in the entire rest of the world.

My brother and I got into m43 for the same reasons: size + reach + IQ. He got the E-PL5 kit + 75-300, I got the GX7 kit + 100-300. The 100-300 with all its issues is still one of my 3 top used lens, the 75-300 still is my brother's top used lens by far. One thing we both want is more reach. (My top used lens is the 60 macro, and the 12-35 is used about the same as the 100-300 now.)

While both want longer reach, the photos differ. He uses his x-300mm more for nature and bird shots, I do mostly nightscape/cityscape/bridgescape, sports, close-ups, and sun/moon shots. I'm not sure if the 100-400 would be used for close-ups as my 100-300 is, though. I'm also not sure if I want more reach enough to pay $1500-$2500, but I'm glad it's coming out. The other options are the bigger x-500 and x-600mm for my D5100, something I wanted to avoid, so much so I go my GX7 in the first place, or the Nikon 1 series + 70-300, something I didn't think had the IQ/noise/DR I wanted when I went m43, or a canon long telezoom + smart adapter with AF. It might be GAS, but I think I'm going to do one of the above next year.

If the 100-400 has the IQ and isn't too expensive, it might be my ticket. But that canon + adapter might be as good IQ, cheaper, but bigger. February, huh?

 uRebel Rob's gear list:uRebel Rob's gear list
Pentax K-1 Panasonic Lumix DC-G9 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Pentax FA 28-105mm F3.5-5.6 Nikon D5100 +21 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow