My Review of the Panasonic DG Elmarit 200mm F2.8 + 1.4 TC

Interceptor121 said:

Another interesting feature of this lens is that the IQ is amazing wide open no need to stop down so gather all the light you can is my motto

Click to expand...

ivan bayu said:

Wow, thanks for reviewing this lens in particular. A Pro PL prime tele lens, fast, but not really recognised enough...

Interceptor121 said:

Another interesting feature of this lens is that the IQ is amazing wide open no need to stop down so gather all the light you can is my motto

Click to expand...

Yes, i've heard that you can get a superb centre sharpness at wide open, and, when you want a good corner sharpness, just stopped down by 1, there, you have it...

Btw, you said that you've had 300mm f/4 for sometime. How does this PL 200mm + 1.4x TC compared with that 300mm f/4, wide open and stopped down by 1? (even better if you could also give some comments when you're already have your 2x TC, about that combo with the 300mm f/4 + 1.4x TC, wide open and stopped down by 1, hehe)

Click to expand...

justyn_c_uk said:

Nice review and I would agree it is a lovely lens and flies under the radar somewhat. I have the x2 TC and although I don't use it a lot it gives me acceptable quality, provided the conditions are alright.

Attached is a photo from earlier in the year during lockdown.

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

Thank you Justyn for the example. I believe if there is an issue with the image being a bit fuzzy is probably the ISO 3200 more than the TC

If I may ask I see you have the panaleica 100-400mm how does it compare with that lens at 400mm?

Click to expand...

justyn_c_uk said:

Interceptor121 said:

Thank you Justyn for the example. I believe if there is an issue with the image being a bit fuzzy is probably the ISO 3200 more than the TC

If I may ask I see you have the panaleica 100-400mm how does it compare with that lens at 400mm?

Click to expand...

ISO is one of the issues to get the 200mm to deliver sharp results with the x2TC (f/7.1), often the ISO has to go up to 2000+. It also needs gentler handling and the focussing speed decreases (not a surprise) to deliver.

The comparison with the PL 100-400mm is really, really tight. The lenses have slightly different uses, if your stalking or at a consistent distance then 200mm + TCs, if the target distance is dynamic & unpredictable then 100-400mm.

For example, when I went to Bempton to photograph Gannets the 100-400 produced better images than the 200mm, but at gravel pits the 200mm +TCs is better.

At 400mm in good light I might pick the 100-400mm, especially if I wasn't sure what I might get to photograph. The positive is that x2 TC is quite small and if you don't want another lens in your bag then there is little difference in image quality, see camerastuffreview review or here . I got mine 2ndhand from Ffordes for £300.

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

justyn_c_uk said:

Interceptor121 said:

Thank you Justyn for the example. I believe if there is an issue with the image being a bit fuzzy is probably the ISO 3200 more than the TC

If I may ask I see you have the panaleica 100-400mm how does it compare with that lens at 400mm?

Click to expand...

ISO is one of the issues to get the 200mm to deliver sharp results with the x2TC (f/7.1), often the ISO has to go up to 2000+. It also needs gentler handling and the focussing speed decreases (not a surprise) to deliver.

The comparison with the PL 100-400mm is really, really tight. The lenses have slightly different uses, if your stalking or at a consistent distance then 200mm + TCs, if the target distance is dynamic & unpredictable then 100-400mm.

For example, when I went to Bempton to photograph Gannets the 100-400 produced better images than the 200mm, but at gravel pits the 200mm +TCs is better.

At 400mm in good light I might pick the 100-400mm, especially if I wasn't sure what I might get to photograph. The positive is that x2 TC is quite small and if you don't want another lens in your bag then there is little difference in image quality, see camerastuffreview review or here . I got mine 2ndhand from Ffordes for £300.

Click to expand...

Thank you I have seen the photo by Richard. 2x TC is 5.6 though not 7.1 so it is f/5.6 with 2x TC and 6.3 with the 100-400m at 400mm. Most of the shooting I do is not that unpredictable to be honest. I am the one walking towards the animal I don't get things to come at me. Usually if I am on a walk with my daughter I prefer a zoom as I may take a portrait. When I go on a early sunrise walk I am by myself and is long lens only in the pocket I may have a low light lens currently Sigma 56mm 1.4 for landscapes (you wonder what landscapes require 56mm 1.4 example here)

So I would not want to get another zoom on top of the 50-200mm which is very useful and takes great shots in the 50mm area for people

Click to expand...

justyn_c_uk said:

Interceptor121 said:

justyn_c_uk said:

Interceptor121 said:

Thank you Justyn for the example. I believe if there is an issue with the image being a bit fuzzy is probably the ISO 3200 more than the TC

If I may ask I see you have the panaleica 100-400mm how does it compare with that lens at 400mm?

Click to expand...

ISO is one of the issues to get the 200mm to deliver sharp results with the x2TC (f/7.1), often the ISO has to go up to 2000+. It also needs gentler handling and the focussing speed decreases (not a surprise) to deliver.

The comparison with the PL 100-400mm is really, really tight. The lenses have slightly different uses, if your stalking or at a consistent distance then 200mm + TCs, if the target distance is dynamic & unpredictable then 100-400mm.

For example, when I went to Bempton to photograph Gannets the 100-400 produced better images than the 200mm, but at gravel pits the 200mm +TCs is better.

At 400mm in good light I might pick the 100-400mm, especially if I wasn't sure what I might get to photograph. The positive is that x2 TC is quite small and if you don't want another lens in your bag then there is little difference in image quality, see camerastuffreview review or here . I got mine 2ndhand from Ffordes for £300.

Click to expand...

Thank you I have seen the photo by Richard. 2x TC is 5.6 though not 7.1 so it is f/5.6 with 2x TC and 6.3 with the 100-400m at 400mm. Most of the shooting I do is not that unpredictable to be honest. I am the one walking towards the animal I don't get things to come at me. Usually if I am on a walk with my daughter I prefer a zoom as I may take a portrait. When I go on a early sunrise walk I am by myself and is long lens only in the pocket I may have a low light lens currently Sigma 56mm 1.4 for landscapes (you wonder what landscapes require 56mm 1.4 example here)

So I would not want to get another zoom on top of the 50-200mm which is very useful and takes great shots in the 50mm area for people

Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant that with the x2 you get sharper images at f/7.1-f/8 rather than at f/5.6.

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

This makes sense now. So you say actually you can't really shoot at f/5.6 and need to stop it down a little. So perhaps this means the 100-400mm is better

Still I am not particularly interested in a 100-400mm zoom, 50-200mm is more my shooting

Thank you

Click to expand...

justyn_c_uk said:

justyn_c_uk said:

This makes sense now. So you say actually you can't really shoot at f/5.6 and need to stop it down a little. So perhaps this means the 100-400mm is better

Still I am not particularly interested in a 100-400mm zoom, 50-200mm is more my shooting

Thank you

Click to expand...

If you have the the 50-200mm and 200mm, which can both use the TCs then stick with them, you probably have little need for them.

Click to expand...

Interceptor121 said:

I noticed that there are no reviews of this lens here probably because it is fairly specific so here it is my short one.

Foreword: I had already the 50-200mm DG elmarit and I have had the Olympus 75-300mm and also had an Olympus 300mm f/4 on a long loan.

After my long test of the 300mm f/4 I was not convinced with telephoto prime lenses in many occasions I am not shooting small animals and I was in a situation where I did not have how to step back because the lens was too long.

After a first experience shooting deers at sunrise with my 50-200mm lens (which is a great lens) I realised that the animals seem to lurk a lot in the shadows and therefore I needed a faster lens. Having already discarded the Olympus 300mm f/4 I set my eyes on the Panasonic 200mm f/2.8. Although this lens is expensive I do a lot of shooting between 200mm and 300 mm and the lens comes with a 1.4x tc in the box so it is matching most of my shooting situations.

I especially wanted this lens for the 200 f/2.8 for golden hours and sunrise or sunset shooting. Other features of this lens that are similar to the 50-200mm is a powerful OIS that means your frame is steady when you shoot. I don't like the behaviour of the IBIS on long lenses not stabilised on my OMD body as the frame is only steady at half press.

Build of the lens is superb and Panasonic black Leica Elmarit are an excellent match not just for the Lumix camera but also for the black OMD EM1MKII I have.

Autofocus is super fast and I can't see any more benefit from dual IS on my Panasonic body probably because I do not shoot slow shutter anyway for my use.

The lens has a function button and memory set as well as focus limited I have to be honest I only use the focus limiter.

Tripod mount is screw on this is different from the larger base around the Olympus 300mm f/4 however I do not see any challenges except the mount is not arca compatible this is not a major issue as I have a plate anyway but probably someone shooting on a tripod may want to consider. For this reason I have taken away half star but perhaps am being harsh.

One thing that may be annoying for some as the lens has OIS the elements float when the camera is not powered on but it is normal and nothing to worry about.

One thing that is also interesting is that the performance with the Tc 1.4x included is sensational I do not recall a lens I have had in any format that did not suffer with a Tc there is something really magic here as the performance with tc is almost identical to the one with the bare lens unless you go with severe pixel peeping.

Another interesting feature of this lens is that the IQ is amazing wide open no need to stop down so gather all the light you can is my motto

If you want some technical details I recommend looking on lenstip for their resolution charts

A final note on weight like the Olympus prime this lens is not exactly light but I can carry it around with a battery grip and the TC for 4-5 hours without major issues my feet hurt sooner

Some shots here with and without TC all in pretty dark sunrise situations. Some have ISO 4000 or even 5000 and seem to be ok for my use. Sorry I don't ever post full resolution on the web but I think it gives an idea anyway

















Obviously this is still an MFT 2.8 lens so it is not exactly a bokeh lens however as the focal is very long the out of focus area are very pleasant.

I am now considering the 2x TC as I like this lens very much however I suspect I will be disappointed. Still at f/5.6 400mm would be the fastest on MFT among the lenses currently on the market and I am getting used at not having a zoom at long range.

Final note the lens works identically on Panasonic and Olympus bodies except dual IS is only supported on Panasonic but frankly it looks no difference performance than it is on the OMD.

Click to expand...

brentbrent said:

I agree that the 200 is fabulous, even with the 1.4x TC. I doubt I will buy the 2X TC, too pricey and I don't think I need it. But many others have posted here that it is quite good with the 2x.

I also agree that it's a shame the tripod foot doesn't have an ARCA base.

I've shot with the 300, and it is amazing as well. I think the Oly TCs are more reasonably priced than Panasonic's.

The choice between those two lenses I think boils down to: (1) preferred focal length (or focal length ranges with TCs); (2) f/2.8 on the 200; and (3) whether your camera is Oly or Pana, for dual or sync IS.

For my shooting, 200mm makes more sense, and f/2.8 is nice. Plus I have Pana bodies.

Click to expand...

SrMi said:

Thank you for the review.

I mounted my 200/2.8 on M1x and switched between OIS and IBIS (by using the on-lens switch). At shutter speeds of 1/10 and 1/8 sec, I repeatedly got sharper images with OIS off and IBIS on (subject distance about 20 feet). Do you have a similar experience?

I am used to DSLRs, where the stabilization kicks in only when the shutter is half-pressed, so I do not mind it. But I am surprised that I get better results with IBIS than with OIS.

Click to expand...