100-300 vs. 50-200+1.4TC: surprised!

luisflorit wrote:

Hi,

Testing my new equipment here at the long end.

I must confess that I bought the 100-300 without any hope. Consumer slow lens, what to expect.... However, I am deeply and pleasantly surprised by this little lens.

My previous long lens was the 50-200 SWD + 1.4 TC + 2.0 TC. The 2.0 is soft, but the extra magnification compensates for that. The problem with that 2.0TC is that it is virtually impossible to hand hold, so I only use it with a tripod.

So my main wildlife gear was the 50-200 + 1.4 TC, and I decided to test it against the 100-300, both in the EM1. I took 10 pictures of each setting in RAW, identical shooting parameters, choose the sharpest, processed without any treatment with RawTherapee except for curves, everything hand held.

Well, the 100-300 (wide open at 5.6) at 280mm won easily against the 50-200 + 1.4 TC (stopped down also at 5.6!!). I'm still surprised about this. Maybe I shouldn't, since I loved the FZ50 lens.

Look:

Oly 50-200 + 1.4TC at F5.6 1/400s ISO200 and 283mm. Around 20 meters, beautiful day

100-300 at F5.6 1/400s ISO200 and 280mm. Around 20 meters, beautiful day.

ISO400, 1/200s F5.6 280mm, around 3 meters

The difference is quite big, even downscaling.

So I was waiting for the M.Zuiko 300mm F4. Now I'm not sure anymore if this would make a big difference... Of course, I would have to see a comparative output. Now, the only negative point about the 100-300 is the lack of weather seals.

The good news for the 50-200 is that I can handhold it with the 2.0TC, thanks to the IBIS.

Another surprise with the EM1 was the stabilization. I took several keepers at 300mm and 1/30s! Amazing. Look:

1/30s F5.6, ISO 2500, Flash off, EM1+100-300 at 300mm

But the EM1 IQ at ISO200 is not good, too grainy. That's my only complain (for now).

Cheers,

L.

Yes, you DO like to complain, old friend!  But you have a right to: you take GREAT pictures with all the equipment that you've used,