I give up, returning 100-400!

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
richj20 Veteran Member • Posts: 7,861
On testing...
2

prairiedog wrote:

richj20 wrote:

Since the duck photograph is lacking detail, the first should be worse than it is, if the problem is the lens. Even though you braced the lens against a fence post for the duck photograph, can you really be sure that some user error didn't occur?

I can't be sure this particular example isn't a "user error" but the results are typical. The sign didn't have the same texture as feathers and had contrasting edges on the lettering. The duck was a couple of metres away, the sign was more like 20 metres, different ISO. So apples and oranges.

Before giving up on the lens, may I suggest you post some more with subject matter with detail, such as flowers, or leaves, using a tripod with time delay. All to eliminate any user error.

I do have flower images that show the same symptoms. I was less confident about the results due to possible movement of flowers, however slight. But I have controlled photos (tripod etc) of textured subjects, e.g the edge of a newly cut log.

To convince me it is a lens problem, you need to post more examples!

I agree, I would love to and a couple of images don't tell the whole story. The trouble is I could write an essay and post tons of images with full details of settings, conditions, etc and get lost in responding "yes, it was on a tripod," "no, i didn't use a filter" etc.
I'm happy I tried everything I could and was really just venting my frustrations and emotions here!

I understand, and I anticipated your response, leading me to realize that you have indeed made up your mind, so I removed my post.

I would like to suggest this about testing and posting examples for comments from others:

The first basic tests of a lens should be in good light, sturdy tripod, time delay, base ISO, check Manual Focus, all to eliminate any user or camera error (AF) or image degradation from using higher ISO. Anything else is a compromise, and viewers on the forum cannot make a valid judgment as to the lens.

(If you aren't tired of all of this, I would still like to see a few examples done as above, which will β€” or not β€” prove you correct, and satisfy my curiosity!)

Regarding hand holding —since you compare this lens to your 100-300mm — I am sure you are aware of, and notice, the weight difference:

  • Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 II
    Weight 520 g (1.15 lb)
  • Panasonic Leica DG Vario-Elmar 100-400mm
    Weight 985 g (2.17 lb)

I have used both lenses, and the 100-400mm extended out to 400mm is quite a different beast to hold than the smaller lens.

- Richard

-- hide signature --
 richj20's gear list:richj20's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH Sony a7R II
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow