Olympus 100-400 vs (found faulty) Panasonic/Leica 100-400

xaprb said:

It is a great idea, and thank you for suggesting it -- and someone else did previously too, perhaps you as well, I don't remember. I contacted them this morning and they replied: "I'm sorry to hear you had that problem with the PL 100-400 lens. The Olympus is a bit sharper, but the Panasonic shouldn't have been soft. I've marked it for a repair inspection and will let you know what we find."

Click to expand...

I would love to hear about the feedback they send.

This just all sounded bad... and it's the worst comparison I have seen. Note I did not say worst review. It simply should be barely different with an edge, not a whole different, and unusable level. And some of the commentary has been a little over the top... and definitely makes me rethink posting comparisons here.

jalywol said:

The House Wren photo below was taken with the PL 100-400mm on a GX9, at 400mm, wide open (f 6.3) from a distance of about 25 ft. I was hand holding the lens, but I (and it) were very well braced. Lens OIS was on, as was the camera IS, so (Dual IS) was functioning.

Click to expand...

Note that the OP was shooting with a PEN-F. My understanding is that Dual-IS only works within brands, so that wouldn't be available to them.

I have the PL 100-400 on my E-M1.2, and I've had good results, albeit not too many trials.

Hey guy(?) Although the rest of this forum is quick to judge, even faster to fling accusations, while keeping their own contributions minimal. I personally appreciate the post and effort that went into this. I have often debated between the two super zooms and the 300f4. Hopefully it comes down to the PL being defective so keep us posted. Everywhere I have seen them compared gives the nod to the Oly in terms of sharpness so I wasnt too shocked. Just not this large of a gap.

As an aside: some observations from my time lurking. This place prefers rumors, measurebaiting and pp measuring to actual photography. To be honest...Sometimes I forget if I am on 43rumors (after all.. its a lot of the same usernames).

xaprb said:

It is a great idea, and thank you for suggesting it -- and someone else did previously too, perhaps you as well, I don't remember. I contacted them this morning and they replied: "I'm sorry to hear you had that problem with the PL 100-400 lens. The Olympus is a bit sharper, but the Panasonic shouldn't have been soft. I've marked it for a repair inspection and will let you know what we find."

Click to expand...

You should have contacted them first. Then report their findings and your experience with a second copy. I know hindsight is a wonderful thing but if I found such horrible results with almost any modern lens these days, my first port of call would be the supplier to check the lens out.

Bobby J said:

I've the P/L almost since it came out and have had none of the problems you seem to have here. Zero. I've never considered buying the Oly 100-400 for myself, but got one for my son and from what I've seen of his images it's quite good. I have thought about ordering a 150-400 but decided not to. I shoot with an EM1MK2. I have a feeling you possibly got a poor sample unfortunately. Just my 2 cents.

Click to expand...

Hi Bobby J,

So many people claim a tester must have gotten a poor sample when their favorite lens does not measure up in a test. Yes, you may be correct, but it seems there are so many comments of this nature that poor samples must be the norm rather than the exception.

I am glad that your PanaLeica 100-400 measures up to your expectations. You may have gotten an exceptional sample. Happy shooting. :-D


James

ThrowThisAway1 said:

Hey guy(?) Although the rest of this forum is quick to judge, even faster to fling accusations, while keeping their own contributions minimal. I personally appreciate the post and effort that went into this. I have often debated between the two super zooms and the 300f4. Hopefully it comes down to the PL being defective so keep us posted. Everywhere I have seen them compared gives the nod to the Oly in terms of sharpness so I wasnt too shocked. Just not this large of a gap.

As an aside: some observations from my time lurking. This place prefers rumors, measurebaiting and pp measuring to actual photography. To be honest...Sometimes I forget if I am on 43rumors (after all.. its a lot of the same usernames).

Click to expand...

You are debating which to purchase... there is feedback on this forum from actual users. Some have owned or own the 300 Pro and one of the super zooms, or have even compared the two super zooms as well. The Panaleica has a history of sample variation... my second one is excellent and my first one was very good. My 300 Pro is great but if I don't need to have f4.0 at 300mm to keep shutter speeds up, I am more than confident using my Panaleica super zoom.

Reviews have shown the nod for IQ to the Olympus super zoom over the Panaleica, but it is just a nod, or by a nose in horse racing terms.

The noticably smaller and lighter Panaleica, and in the case of a good sample, makes it a serious consideration for many.

The Lens IS alone of the Panaleica is half a stop better than the EM1.2 IBIS at 400mm and equal to the EM1X IBIS at 400mm... so very good, as is the AF on an Olympus EM1.2 or X body (presumably very good and an EM1.3 body as well). With DUAL IS on the EM1X and at 300mm, the results are a stop or more better than Lens IS alone on the Panaleica. If you shoot stationary subjects in low light, Olympus Dual IS has an advantage with the 300 Pro, and I am not sure how the limited Dual IS mode of the Olympus super zoom would compare in all this... I would be surprised if it is better than the Panaleica Lens IS on its own.

I had a Pen F. In comparison to my EM1.2 and X, I found the IBIS and AF hard to live with.

Some contributors here, have shown results from all the lenses discussed here, and have a history of integrity, honesty and consistency. So no "rumours" from them, only their real world experience, which does not align with the findings of the OP.

alanh42 said:

jalywol said:

The House Wren photo below was taken with the PL 100-400mm on a GX9, at 400mm, wide open (f 6.3) from a distance of about 25 ft. I was hand holding the lens, but I (and it) were very well braced. Lens OIS was on, as was the camera IS, so (Dual IS) was functioning.

Click to expand...

Note that the OP was shooting with a PEN-F. My understanding is that Dual-IS only works within brands, so that wouldn't be available to them.

Click to expand...

Of course not. But the point was that the lens is capable of delivering sharp shots at 400mm wide open. If I had been using a tripod, with IS off, as the OP was, there would be no reason not to expect the images to be just as sharp as my hand held with dual IS, and the OP got NO sharp shots, no matter what he did with it.

alanh42 said:

I have the PL 100-400 on my E-M1.2, and I've had good results, albeit not too many trials.

Click to expand...

It should work fine with just the lens OIS on Oly bodies, or just the IBIS alone on Oly bodies. The lens he had did not.

-J

My Pany is not like that. Pilot error or a bad copy.

xaprb said:

It is a great idea, and thank you for suggesting it -- and someone else did previously too, perhaps you as well, I don't remember. I contacted them this morning and they replied: "I'm sorry to hear you had that problem with the PL 100-400 lens. The Olympus is a bit sharper, but the Panasonic shouldn't have been soft. I've marked it for a repair inspection and will let you know what we find."

Click to expand...

LR has a tech with 10 years experience whose only job is to take lenses where a customer had questions and triple check them. Part of that involves directly comparing the copy you've had with other copies to make sure there's no difference.

I've flagged this thread for him to help give him a head start on what kind of problems you had. From the description it seems very possible this lens has a failing IS unit - remember the IS unit is an optical element and if it's not in exactly proper place it can affect the optics of the lens. Depending on the type of failure, even turned off a failing IS unit could affect the optics (if it doesn't lock in the proper position).

If there is a problem with it, they'll offer you a replacement copy to complete the test or a refund, whichever you prefer. And if you aren't happy with their outcome PM me here and I'll test it myself. We're very aware that a lot of customers are renting to make comparisons just like these and we take the responsibility of making sure they get a legitimate comparison seriously.

Roger

RCicala said:

xaprb said:

It is a great idea, and thank you for suggesting it -- and someone else did previously too, perhaps you as well, I don't remember. I contacted them this morning and they replied: "I'm sorry to hear you had that problem with the PL 100-400 lens. The Olympus is a bit sharper, but the Panasonic shouldn't have been soft. I've marked it for a repair inspection and will let you know what we find."

Click to expand...

LR has a tech with 10 years experience whose only job is to take lenses where a customer had questions and triple check them. Part of that involves directly comparing the copy you've had with other copies to make sure there's no difference.

I've flagged this thread for him to help give him a head start on what kind of problems you had. From the description it seems very possible this lens has a failing IS unit - remember the IS unit is an optical element and if it's not in exactly proper place it can affect the optics of the lens. Depending on the type of failure, even turned off a failing IS unit could affect the optics (if it doesn't lock in the proper position).

If there is a problem with it, they'll offer you a replacement copy to complete the test or a refund, whichever you prefer. And if you aren't happy with their outcome PM me here and I'll test it myself. We're very aware that a lot of customers are renting to make comparisons just like these and we take the responsibility of making sure they get a legitimate comparison seriously.

Roger

Click to expand...

Is this more common an occurrence with specific lenses? This concerns me as I was considering buying one.

Thanks Roger, I appreciate you taking the time to respond directly on this. I rent from LensRentals because of the stellar customer service, and my confidence in your equipment and your technicians' testing. In fact, that's literally the reason it didn't occur to me to check first with LensRentals before writing my results on this forum. I'd seen mixed reviews on the Panasonic and my experience seemed to back that up, and it didn't stick out to me as "this lens is SO bad that it might be a bad copy." It just seemed like "yep, people have said the Olympus is sharper, it looks like that's what I found too."

I just heard from your team a few minutes ago confirming that the lens I rented was not meeting expectations.

I appreciate the people who responded to this thread suggesting that I contact LensRentals!

I appreciate your comments about Lens Rentals. I think your experience confirms their reputation.

The reason I've kept my P/L lens is that it is so small and compact. It fits perfectly into a small, light backpack I have. I use only the IS in the lens. In fact with the EM-1MK2, if you just put the lens on the camera with the IS turned OFF. The camera will use the IBIS. If the lens IS is turned ON the body will deactivate the IBIS. I tested it both ways and the lens IS won.

Below is an image I made about a year ago of a Goldfinch. I focused on the birds eye from about 20 ft. away. 400mm @ f 6.4.







This is an OOC JPEG with no correction of any kind. This might have been better with the Oly 100-400, or certainly with the 150-400, but it's good enough for me.





--
BJM

Great photo, and thanks for sharing it.

NoTx said:

Is this more common an occurrence with specific lenses? This concerns me as I was considering buying one.

Click to expand...

Not clearly so, but there are some general trends. Obviously electronics (IS, aperture, focus motors) fail. Zoom lenses are more fragile than primes usually. The major brands are all fairly reliable, but some off-brands (boutique makers, low cost providers) are clearly less reliable. Every manufacturer, though, has a problem lens or two.

That being said, we track lenses for two years, which is usually about 30-40 rentals. The pattern we see is there is not any gradual wearing out over time. Rather lenses are unchanged at all, not the slightest bit, then suddenly one day they are. This often occurs when there are signs of damage, an impact or drop, etc. But not always, actually less than half the time. But the change, when it occurs is always sudden, you never see a lens sloooowwwwly get worse and worse.

That being said, remember we ship all these lenses. You've seen how we pack, it's impressive, even to me. But I've seen how shippers treat them. We assume (with good reason) that every box has had at least one 4 foot drop onto concrete during shipping.

Anyway, when someone tells us a lens doesn't seem right, we believe them because in more than half of cases, the lens isn't OK, something is wrong. It doesn't happen very often if you think about it as per rental (way under 1%) but we do hundreds of rentals a day so we see it several times a week.

glassoholic said:

I had a Pen F. In comparison to my EM1.2 and X, I found the IBIS and AF hard to live with.

Click to expand...

I appreciate that suggestion. I actually shoot more with adapted vintage manual lenses than with fancy ones like this thread is about, and I find IBIS in particular is just magical. Even in the PEN-F. I rented some more upscale models and noted the difference, but decided to wait for an upscale model with an upscale sensor before I buy anything better. As I’m sure you already know, the sensor and processor in the PEN-F are basically straight out of the original E-M1. So it’s keeping me happy for now!

xaprb said:

xaprb said:

I had a Pen F. In comparison to my EM1.2 and X, I found the IBIS and AF hard to live with.

Click to expand...

I appreciate that suggestion. I actually shoot more with adapted vintage manual lenses than with fancy ones like this thread is about, and I find IBIS in particular is just magical. Even in the PEN-F. I rented some more upscale models and noted the difference, but decided to wait for an upscale model with an upscale sensor before I buy anything better. As I’m sure you already know, the sensor and processor in the PEN-F are basically straight out of the original E-M1. So it’s keeping me happy for now!

Click to expand...

Actually, the original EM1 had the 16MP sensor. The Pen F and the EM1 mark II have the 20 MP sensor, although the Pen F only has CDAF, while all EM1 models have PDAF (different versions, but still) plus the CDAF. So, the tracking AF on the Pen F is not going to compare to that on the EM1 models of any generation.

-J

kitanaka said:

I recently wrote a blog post about this lens

Bird and wildlife photography with the Panasonic Leica 100-400 (richardcookphotography.com)

and while these pictures aren't amazing [...]

Click to expand...

Your pictures are wonderful, regardless what system and lenses you use.
And I love the PL100-400 review.

xaprb said:

xaprb said:

I had a Pen F. In comparison to my EM1.2 and X, I found the IBIS and AF hard to live with.

Click to expand...

I appreciate that suggestion. I actually shoot more with adapted vintage manual lenses than with fancy ones like this thread is about, and I find IBIS in particular is just magical. Even in the PEN-F. I rented some more upscale models and noted the difference, but decided to wait for an upscale model with an upscale sensor before I buy anything better. As I’m sure you already know, the sensor and processor in the PEN-F are basically straight out of the original E-M1. So it’s keeping me happy for now!

Click to expand...

The original EM1 actually had a Panasonic sensor

The EM1.2 has the Sony IMX270 sensor

The Pen-F has the Sony IMX269, a slower readout version of the IMX270 that is also used by the Yi-M1 camera

It is correct that both the Pen-F and the original EM1use the TruePic VII image processor from 2013

Of course! My mistake, you're right. I wonder where I got that wrong information from. Thank you for correcting me.

Thank you for correcting me!