Reading mode: Light Dark

Leica/Panasonic 100-400MM First Impressions

Go to last post
Bill Spencer

Bill Spencer

Leading Member
Messages
589
Reaction score
59
Location
Honolulu US, HI, US
Dear friends who lust over Leica glass in Panasonic clothing...

Finally got mine yesterday. Have only had a chance to take a few shots, not with a tripod.

So, far, I'm not wowed by anything other than the OIS, quick focus, craftsmanship and the extra reach compared to the 100-300 (I have one comparison shot for you). I only tested the long end at F8, hand held.

I noticed that the focus is very quick compared to the 100-300 and there is very little hunting going on. It is a very solid lens, well made and heavy, but I don't mind that on the GX8. It feels good. The zoom ring is a little stiff, but that may ease up with use.

I'm uploading some shots. Frankly, they seem a little soft. Maybe slightly better than the 100-300mm.

At the end are some comparisons of the two lenses at full reach and with a 100% crop. I will try to be a little more methodical in future tests if you encourage me to do so. The photos are not special, just grabs from my lanai. I amped the contrast and straightened, but that's it.

Hope this helps if you are in the throws of decision making. I sill still keep it no matter what.

Bill



400MM
400MM



400mm
400mm



400mm
400mm



300MM Full frame
300MM Full frame





400MM Full Frame
400MM Full Frame







100% crop of 300MM
100% crop of 300MM



100% crop of 400MM
100% crop of 400MM





--
Photography taught me how to see!
 
JoostL said:
There may be other causes for the softness as well, but shooting distant subjects at F8 means heat wave distortion (clearly visible) and diffraction starting to kick in.
Click to expand...
+1

But the thermal distortion distortion is far and away the prime killer here, and less so with the 100-300, which does look sharper, but clearly has less fine detail - eg the gray shingled roof on the left side which is only an amorphous mass with the it.

And these distances are far beyond the usual birding/nature shots.

Pete
 
Long distance shooting is nearly always about being luck and not influenced by heat waves - IMHO they are clearly visible here. Shooting moon is sometimes total disaster - even with tripod and e-shutter maybe one of 10-20 are sufficently sharp.

Try 4k and compare frame by frame how the details is changing. If so - then it is weather not the lens which causes the softness.
 
Do you use focus-magnification to fine tune? Use electronic shutter?
 
Thanks for your report!

However, shooting a building far away says nothing about any lens, because of heat, turbulence, haze, etc from the atmosphere.

What I would really appreciate is that if you could shoot something that is only at 4 or 5 meters from you (to avoid atmospheric problems), with fine detail (like fur, e.g., a teddy bear), both with the 100-400 and the 100-300, both at maximal zoom, and the 100-300 a bit closer to get the same magnification, trying to get as similar as possible pictures.

Of course, you should use lowest ISO (illuminate your subject), both lenses wide open, a tripod (or something solid), electronic shutter, etc, to really judge the IQ and not your hands or the ISO of the camera.

And, since I am asking... RAW files would be fantastic.

In that way we could judge better the difference between both lenses.... well, at least, your lenses.

Thanks again!!!!!!!

L.

--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photo
 
Last edited:
We have seen enough red hot pix from, this lens to expect it to do a bit better than your last shot or two.

Test on a solid tripod first, then do hand-held, which is a test of OIS.

Also, as the previous poster suggested, cut the distance! Maybe 50 meters, 100 max? In bright, sunny weather, even at 100, you are inevitably going to get atmospherics interfering.

A couple of 300 shots.







cb0139002aa84a95bfd20e4b79b8a1f8.jpg



--
Geoffrey Heard
Down and out in Rabaul in the South Pacific
http://rabaulpng.com/we-are-all-traveling-throug/i-waited-51-years-for-tavur.html
 
Last edited:
Thanks Hen3ry!

I agree with you, this was not a true test, just some quickies. The light on the crops was terrible and the air hasn't been that great. All the critiques have been fair.

I'm not a "test chart" kind of guy, but I do have a good solid tripod and will have fun taking some further comparison shots when conditions present.

My perch overlooks Honolulu harbor and the only wildlife I come across is an occasional humpback whale and my feral cat who is a very unwilling subject on most days.

Thanks for shooting some birds at me. They are beautiful.

Warmest regards,

Bill
 
Don't expect every image to be great. In very good light almost any camera/lens will produce a good image. In flat light with objects at a distance, no camera/lens with produce a great image. I don't see anything that would be a cause for concern in these images and I would not expect my 300mm+MC14 to do any better under these conditions. I do expect to see some great ones later.
 
Out of all the lenses I have seen sample shots of when they first come out I have never seen so many conflicting reviews/reports, some shot we have seen lately are stunning while others from equally good photographers look no better that than the 100-300mm and in some cases worse while others look almost as good as the Oly 300mm F4. I hope this isn't a sign of quality control from panasonic ( I am hoping this is from user errors as I have pre ordered one of these 100-400mm lenses) as I have never known this from other lenses for example most agree the the Oly 300mm f4 is a good lens likewise the Oly 40-150mm pro and the 12-40mm pro have nothing but good reports.

Please note none of my comments are aimed at the OP but purely the lens only.

What do other member feel about the huge difference in comments about the 100-400mm or am I talking out of my backside. :-D ;-)
 
Virtually everyone who is posting images captured with this lens is shooting everything hand held. That is an inconsistent and unreliable way to gauge the sharpness of any lens.

Some people are rock steady at hand holding, while others (me included) tend to wave a lens around like a 'surrender flag'.

Given that this lens is an 800mm equivalent focal length at full zoom, it is not surprising that a lot of samples would be a bit soft when viewed at 100%. I suspect that even with the excellent dual IS of the Oly 300mm, if one were to take all those images that have been posted and crop them to a 400mm FOV there would be a similar variation in soft vs sharp images, if viewed at 100%

I had a chance to try out the 100-400mm yesterday and was very impressed. Without doing any side be side comparisons, I can see that it out resolves my Oly 75-300mm simply looking at the images on my camera LCD -- and those were high ISO, indoor shots, hand held.

I will definitely be buying this lens, and just like my 75-300mm I will mostly shoot it on either a tripod or monopod. Now, I just need to gather the money. :-)
 
JIngrouille said:
Out of all the lenses I have seen sample shots of when they first come out I have never seen so many conflicting reviews/reports, some shot we have seen lately are stunning while others from equally good photographers look no better that than the 100-300mm and in some cases worse while others look almost as good as the Oly 300mm F4. I hope this isn't a sign of quality control from panasonic ( I am hoping this is from user errors as I have pre ordered one of these 100-400mm lenses) as I have never known this from other lenses for example most agree the the Oly 300mm f4 is a good lens likewise the Oly 40-150mm pro and the 12-40mm pro have nothing but good reports.

Please note none of my comments are aimed at the OP but purely the lens only.

What do other member feel about the huge difference in comments about the 100-400mm or am I talking out of my backside. :-D ;-)
Click to expand...
I am in 100% agreement with you.

Looks like we are all playing a Russian roulette when buying this lens.
 
JIngrouille said:
Out of all the lenses I have seen sample shots of when they first come out I have never seen so many conflicting reviews/reports, some shot we have seen lately are stunning while others from equally good photographers look no better that than the 100-300mm and in some cases worse while others look almost as good as the Oly 300mm F4. I hope this isn't a sign of quality control from panasonic ( I am hoping this is from user errors as I have pre ordered one of these 100-400mm lenses) as I have never known this from other lenses for example most agree the the Oly 300mm f4 is a good lens likewise the Oly 40-150mm pro and the 12-40mm pro have nothing but good reports.

Please note none of my comments are aimed at the OP but purely the lens only.

What do other member feel about the huge difference in comments about the 100-400mm or am I talking out of my backside. :-D ;-)
Click to expand...
 
This is the first lens in the system of that kind reach. The super long range amplifies the skill/technique differences among the users, increasing the variability of the photo quality.
 
JIngrouille said:
Out of all the lenses I have seen sample shots of when they first come out I have never seen so many conflicting reviews/reports, some shot we have seen lately are stunning while others from equally good photographers look no better that than the 100-300mm and in some cases worse while others look almost as good as the Oly 300mm F4. I hope this isn't a sign of quality control from panasonic ( I am hoping this is from user errors as I have pre ordered one of these 100-400mm lenses) as I have never known this from other lenses for example most agree the the Oly 300mm f4 is a good lens likewise the Oly 40-150mm pro and the 12-40mm pro have nothing but good reports.

Please note none of my comments are aimed at the OP but purely the lens only.

What do other member feel about the huge difference in comments about the 100-400mm or am I talking out of my backside. :-D ;-)
Click to expand...
 
Thanks Ingy,

For me, it's too early to tell. I mostly shoot pictures like the ones I posted, sunsets, landscapes surfing, etc., so the comments about air quality, handheld, etc. will always plague me because that's how I shoot. I'm not a birder and I didn't buy the lens to take pictures at 15-30M distances.

So far, the physical attributes of the lens, the quick focus, the OIS, the build quality etc., are impressive and better than the 100-300MM which I enjoyed, but always thought was a little soft at the long end.

I hope with more experience, I will tame this beast and get the results I expected.

Thanks all for your input and thoughts!

Bill
 
FYI, I'm running the latest firmware on the GX8 that I used with this lens.
 
If you think the conditions of my first impressions "test" shots weren't perfect, then this should drive you crazy!

Woke up this morning to find four Hueys landing on the pier across from my building.

These are the kinds of birds I like to take telephoto pictures of. So glad I had my new lens.

Bill





[ATTACH alt="This is the kind of "bird" I like to take pictures of"]1335644[/ATTACH]
This is the kind of "bird" I like to take pictures of





--
Photography taught me how to see!
 

Attachments

  • 042ac8e9d14b47c9bef132994e668212.jpg
    042ac8e9d14b47c9bef132994e668212.jpg
    4 MB · Views: 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

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