Reading mode: Light Dark

Decided on Oly 300mm F4 Pro instead of 40-150mm F2.8 Pro, some advice wanted.

Go to last post
X

Xx123456xX

Member
Messages
37
Reaction score
11
Location
Houston, TX, US
After some feedback from fellow forum members, and digging deeper into reference photos, I've decided that the 300 will better suit my needs than the 40-150. I'll be willing to pay more and tolerate more size and weight.

I'll most likely be shooting predominantly on a tripod, but, at this extreme length, would IS be beneficial even on a tripod? Since I have a GH5, I assume Sync-IS won't work, so should I opt for OIS or IBIS? When I ditch the tripod, would the decorative ring be noticeably less cumbersome or uncomfortable than the tripod collar?
 
Xx123456xX said:
After some feedback from fellow forum members, and digging deeper into reference photos, I've decided that the 300 will better suit my needs than the 40-150. I'll be willing to pay more and tolerate more size and weight.

I'll most likely be shooting predominantly on a tripod, but, at this extreme length, would IS be beneficial even on a tripod? Since I have a GH5, I assume Sync-IS won't work, so should I opt for OIS or IBIS? When I ditch the tripod, would the decorative ring be noticeably less cumbersome or uncomfortable than the tripod collar?
Click to expand...
The rule when using my Canon gear was that the IS should be off when using a tripod because the IS for that gear is always running when turned on, but even that has never been completely clear to me as when I keep my camera and lens on a tripod the ball head is loose to swivel and it seems to me that the IS is a help, not a hinderance.

I would like to hear from people who use the 300 on a tripod. Do they use IS? Is the camera and lens firmly locked into place when they do? Or is it free to move? And, if it is free to move, is the IS a benefit or not. I have experimented using both on and off and do not see much difference as long as the ball had is loose and the camera and lens are free to easily swivel.
 
Last edited:
Hehe, Just kidding, well, sort of. The thing I love about the 300 F4 is that it doesn't need a tripod to shine, and for what I use it for, I almost never use a tripod.

If you are using it on a tripod, I would generally not have IS turned on, but I could see a few special circumstances where you'd want it. If you aren't locked down and are shooting with your ballhead or gimbal loose, then I would imagine you might want to leave IS on. In most situations where I would be shooting like that, I would usually have shutter speeds at such that IS wouldn't matter much if at all, but I personally have not found a whole lot of pictures that came out bad where having IS on when I didn't need it actually messed up the shot.

I've done more than one astro shoot where I left IS on accidentally and then turned it off halfway through a shoot, but then couldn't really find any obvious differences or degradation. Maybe if you peep like crazy.

I'm sure others on here feel differently, and YMMV.

Wally
 
I borrowed a 300/4 on the Olympus "Test & Wow" programme. I shot two days of birds on the Yorkshire coast and was extremely impressed with the lens. I didn't use a tripod and TBH the image stabilisation is so good, and the lens comparatively light that I really don't think it needs one, for wildlife shooting at least.

As for IS settings when tripod mounted - I think that the latest Oly bodies are pretty good at detecting when they are tripod mounted and will automatically disable IS.
 
pdk42 said:
As for IS settings when tripod mounted - I think that the latest Oly bodies are pretty good at detecting when they are tripod mounted and will automatically disable IS.
Click to expand...
I am not questioning your statement, but what makes you say that? Is it based on some article you read? Or something you saw on the Olympus website? Or is it just a personal observation?

I think it would be helpful to know.
 
Xx123456xX said:
After some feedback from fellow forum members, and digging deeper into reference photos, I've decided that the 300 will better suit my needs than the 40-150. I'll be willing to pay more and tolerate more size and weight.

I'll most likely be shooting predominantly on a tripod, but, at this extreme length, would IS be beneficial even on a tripod? Since I have a GH5, I assume Sync-IS won't work, so should I opt for OIS or IBIS? When I ditch the tripod, would the decorative ring be noticeably less cumbersome or uncomfortable than the tripod collar?
Click to expand...
When I use a tripod with my copy of the 300 mm f/4, I have the IS off on both the camera (E-M1 Mark II) and the lens. When I use my mono pod, I leave on the camera stabilization more often than not, and sometimes the lens stabilization.

I am used to using the tripod mount as a grip, so I just leave it in place. The decorative ring would reduce the weight some, but I do not find the lens to be cumbersome in either case.
 
pdk42 said:
I borrowed a 300/4 on the Olympus "Test & Wow" programme. I shot two days of birds on the Yorkshire coast and was extremely impressed with the lens. I didn't use a tripod and TBH the image stabilisation is so good, and the lens comparatively light that I really don't think it needs one, for wildlife shooting at least.

As for IS settings when tripod mounted - I think that the latest Oly bodies are pretty good at detecting when they are tripod mounted and will automatically disable IS.
Click to expand...
 
Xx123456xX said:
After some feedback from fellow forum members, and digging deeper into reference photos, I've decided that the 300 will better suit my needs than the 40-150. I'll be willing to pay more and tolerate more size and weight.
Click to expand...
Congratulations, it's a spectacular lens and a lot of fun to use.
Xx123456xX said:
I'll most likely be shooting predominantly on a tripod, but, at this extreme length, would IS be beneficial even on a tripod? Since I have a GH5, I assume Sync-IS won't work, so should I opt for OIS or IBIS? When I ditch the tripod, would the decorative ring be noticeably less cumbersome or uncomfortable than the tripod collar?
Click to expand...
I'll assume OIS will be better than IBIS but you'll want to test both systems to find out. It seems folks have found the longer the lens the more effective OIS is in comparison.

Definitely ditch the collar for the ring when handholding unless you want to tote the lens by the foot. Comes off in seconds, the trim ring can be a little stubborn to seat when turning it. Oly still recommends turning IS off when using a tripod and that's what I generally do. If the tripod isn't super solid you'll easily see movement in the finder with a 300mm and may want it on, if nothing else to tame the viewfinder image.

Enjoy it!

Rick
 
Xx123456xX said:
After some feedback from fellow forum members, and digging deeper into reference photos, I've decided that the 300 will better suit my needs than the 40-150. I'll be willing to pay more and tolerate more size and weight.

I'll most likely be shooting predominantly on a tripod, but, at this extreme length, would IS be beneficial even on a tripod?
Click to expand...
When using a tripod the norm is to have the IS off. Olympus advises that in their manuals. Not sure what Panasonic says but I assume its the same.
Xx123456xX said:
Since I have a GH5, I assume Sync-IS won't work, so should I opt for OIS or IBIS?
Click to expand...
No Sync IS won't work. Don't know much about Panasonic cameras but I think the GH5 IBIS would be more effective then the lens IS in this case depending on the number of stops it achieves. But you may need to experiment which works better.

The 300mm F4 introduces additional Yaw and Pitch IS and the In-lens IS performance is equivalent to 4 shutter speed steps according to Olympus.
Xx123456xX said:
When I ditch the tripod, would the decorative ring be noticeably less cumbersome or uncomfortable than the tripod collar?
Click to expand...
I shoot handheld with the 300mm F4 and tried to use it without the tripod collar and with the decorative ring. But I never felt comfortable so I have reverted to using it handheld with the tripod collar and the foot resting in my left hand.
 
Skeeterbytes said:
Xx123456xX said:
After some feedback from fellow forum members, and digging deeper into reference photos, I've decided that the 300 will better suit my needs than the 40-150. I'll be willing to pay more and tolerate more size and weight.
Click to expand...
Congratulations, it's a spectacular lens and a lot of fun to use.
Skeeterbytes said:
I'll most likely be shooting predominantly on a tripod, but, at this extreme length, would IS be beneficial even on a tripod? Since I have a GH5, I assume Sync-IS won't work, so should I opt for OIS or IBIS? When I ditch the tripod, would the decorative ring be noticeably less cumbersome or uncomfortable than the tripod collar?
Click to expand...
I'll assume OIS will be better than IBIS but you'll want to test both systems to find out. It seems folks have found the longer the lens the more effective OIS is in comparison.

Definitely ditch the collar for the ring when handholding unless you want to tote the lens by the foot.
Click to expand...
I am the opposite Rick, I keep it on for shooting handheld! :-O
Skeeterbytes said:
Comes off in seconds, the trim ring can be a little stubborn to seat when turning it. Oly still recommends turning IS off when using a tripod and that's what I generally do. If the tripod isn't super solid you'll easily see movement in the finder with a 300mm and may want it on, if nothing else to tame the viewfinder image.

Enjoy it!

Rick
Click to expand...
 
Xx123456xX said:
After some feedback from fellow forum members, and digging deeper into reference photos, I've decided that the 300 will better suit my needs than the 40-150. I'll be willing to pay more and tolerate more size and weight.

I'll most likely be shooting predominantly on a tripod, but, at this extreme length, would IS be beneficial even on a tripod? Since I have a GH5, I assume Sync-IS won't work, so should I opt for OIS or IBIS? When I ditch the tripod, would the decorative ring be noticeably less cumbersome or uncomfortable than the tripod collar?
Click to expand...
With legacy lenses (without OIS) you can use IBIS. Once OIS (non panny) is recognized you can use it but you can't use ibis. Either OIS or nothing. With panny dual IS(2) capable lenses you can use either ibis+ OIS or nothing.

Re ibis / OIS on/off when tripod in use I never switch it off. I tested it with panny 100-300 at 300 and when camera was sitting on a hefty table there was no difference (on/off) however in real conditions outside (e.g. Small residual vibrations from shutter (not shutter shock) or movement caused by wind or just not perfectly stable tripod construction) the OIS was able to compensate when switched to on and images in such a case were slightly sharper.

My 0.02$
 
Denjw said:
I am the opposite Rick, I keep it on for shooting handheld! :-O
Click to expand...
Heh, had a similar discussion with Phocal recently, who leaves it on as a carry handle and wonders what this "portrait orientation" I speak of can possibly mean. :-)

It also bugs me digging into my leg while carrying the rig on a sling. I do appreciate how easily they can be added and removed and with the 300, the super addition of the Arca Swiss grooves.

Cheers,

Rick
 
According to a Panasonic employee, they will release a 200mm f2.8 with 1.4x and 2x converter until the end of this year. We will see if this is true in the next few days.
 
Skeeterbytes said:
Denjw said:
I am the opposite Rick, I keep it on for shooting handheld! :-O
Click to expand...
Heh, had a similar discussion with Phocal recently, who leaves it on as a carry handle and wonders what this "portrait orientation" I speak of can possibly mean. :-)

It also bugs me digging into my leg while carrying the rig on a sling. I do appreciate how easily they can be added and removed and with the 300, the super addition of the Arca Swiss grooves.

Cheers,

Rick
Click to expand...
 
Sero said:
According to a Panasonic employee, they will release a 200mm f2.8 with 1.4x and 2x converter until the end of this year. We will see if this is true in the next few days.
Click to expand...
I'll definitely have time to compare the two, but honestly, I think I'll probably stick with my current decision. Were the Pana a 200mm F2 or 300mm F2.8, I'd be much more inclined to switch.
 
Great choice in lenses! I never turn IS off when using the 300, whether on a monopod, tripod, or handheld. No effect on sharpness that I can see. Also, the ring that hides the tripod mount is permanently put aside. Even when hand holding the lens I need the tripod mount to attach my Black Rapid strap
 
Panny's typical lens timeline seems to be 1. tease mockup at show 2. go silent for N months where N can be a very large number 3. eventually release. Since we haven't seen the 50-200 yet it would be pretty surprising to see them produce a tele prime with no prior hints ahead of the zoom.

We do know they have plans for a 150/2.8 sitting on a shelf, having been teased then withdrawn a few years ago. Since then, m4/3 teles have become a much more competitive market so more of them seems reasonable, primes included, down the road.

In the meantime the 300 is a very nice option indeed.

Cheers,

Rick

ETA Just saw the rumor site images of a 200/2.8, so maybe not a phantom after all. It would squeeze into the space between the 40-150/2.8 and 300/4. Were it to have macro ability it could be a huge hit.

--
Equivalence and diffraction-free since 2009.
You can be too; ask about our 12-step program.
 
Last edited:
Skeeterbytes said:
Denjw said:
I am the opposite Rick, I keep it on for shooting handheld! :-O
Click to expand...
Heh, had a similar discussion with Phocal recently, who leaves it on as a carry handle and wonders what this "portrait orientation" I speak of can possibly mean. :-)

It also bugs me digging into my leg while carrying the rig on a sling. I do appreciate how easily they can be added and removed and with the 300, the super addition of the Arca Swiss grooves.

Cheers,

Rick

--
Equivalence and diffraction-free since 2009.
You can be too; ask about our 12-step program.
Click to expand...
As Rick said....................I leave it on for two reasons. One is for a handle to carry the camera, which the foot is really to small so I have had to add a plate anyways. I also prefer putting the foot in my left hand when handholding but the 300/4 is the most uncomfortable of all my lenses. Something about the shape and that big huge knob that digs into my hand, still working that all out as I have only shot the lens a few times.

Ronnie
 
All of this talk about IS on/off when on tripod is kind of amusing. In the early days of IS you did need to turn it off when on a tripod. The modern systems don't need to be turned off. I turned the IBIS on for my EM5 and EM1's the day I got them and have never turned it off and have yet to see any evidence that it needs to be turned off. Even doing 1+ minute exposures I have seen no evidence that it's needed.
 
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