Wildlife lens weight versus IQ

Hazel123 · Mar 28, 2022

Atho said:
da7329 said:

I have the 75-300 ii. Thomas Stirr has a very good comparison between the 75-300 and 100-400 on his website smallsensorphotography. The 75-300 fits the system very well. It would be great if it were updated again to bring IQ and AF up to best in class. There is no way I would ever buy the oly/ pany 100-400. They are full frame heavy and expensive. Makes no since to carry a full frame heavy lens around with a small sensor cam. I have a couple 100-400’s I use on FF or crop bodies. That’s the problem with MFT the long tele’s are full frame heavy!! Makes no since for the system.

DA

Click to expand...

He also wrote an article saying that the 40-150mm f2.8 is his favourite lens whether used on its own or with the MC20 & MC14

https://smallsensorphotography.com/favourite-m-zuiko-lens

Thanks to all for so many interesting options as opposed to just the 100-400 or 300. That article is impressive and food for thought.

It is not that heavy at 760g - but heavier than the 75-300 and a shorter lens for the weight at 160mm (presumably unextended).

The 75-300 is the same length but only 423g.

M_digicapt · Mar 28, 2022

Hazel123 said:
Fantastic pictures. That is quite a difference in lens size.

I use the 75-300mm and the Olympus 100-400mm. The Olympus is slightly bigger than the Panasonic 100-400mm.

I use the 75-300mm when I need something light or when going out for something other than birding. The difference in IQ at 300mm is noticeable. At close range the 75-300mm performs really well.

I can walk 3-5 for miles with the O.100-400mm, but sometimes wrists bother me at the end of the day. So, most of the time I carry a light monopod with a ballhead/tilthead and use it when needed and the rest of the time it's attached to my belt or backpack. It makes a huge difference when waiting for a long time for a bird to move or focusing from uncomfortable low/high angles. My back and neck also get less strained when I use the monopod.

Even though the E-M1 mkii + 100-400mm is not a light setup it's considerably smaller than the APSC and FF setups all the other birders I go out with use. The results are very similar most of the time.

Jack Tingle · Mar 28, 2022

One of the pluses of the 75-300mm is the size. It's smaller & lighter than my old Vivitar 70-210mm SLR lens. I flat wore that lens out. If Olympus's 40-150 (80-300 FFeq) wasn't so handy, I'd be at risk of wearing out the 75-300mm.

Hazel123 · Mar 28, 2022

Hazel123 said:
I know there are a few threads about wildlife lenses for micro four thirds, and I've looked into which ones are available. But am trying to weigh up the best thing for my needs. Weight is always a factor for me due to slight wrist problems. On the other hand I tend to always go for the best IQ or get frustrated - so I have generally used smaller prime lenses.

After a difficult year I've decided to do some new things and want to get out more and do some bird and mouse photography - small creatures. I live in a rural area so subject matter is abundant.

I've read all the reviews of the Olympus and Panasonic 100-400 zooms. I would love to get the Olympus 300mm for the IQ - but feel it will be too heavy for me, for the length in particular (longer lenses balance out the weight more) and I think a zoom lens would be better for wildlife photography and versatility.

So I'm actually keen on the idea of the smaller, lighter Olympus 75 to 300. Admittedly it doesn't have the reach of a 400mm. But I am just wondering if the IQ is "good enough" to not frustrate me.

Also be interested to hear on the "handling" of the Olympus 100-400 which is not light but does seem quite long and possibly the weight is balanced out ergonomically during use?

And does anyone find a monopod works well? For wildlife. (Might negate the weight aspects).

I'll also need a new Olympus body as currently only have the EM10ii

Thanks for all the immensely helpful replies and some useful techniques and ideas. I'm inclining towards the Olympus 100-400 and a monopod. Will see if I can hire one and try it out.

Adrian Harris · Mar 28, 2022

Hi Hazel, I have and use both the Olympus 75-300 mk2 and 100-400 Panasonic lenses for wildlife.

When I use the Panasonic 100-400 I curse the weight, when I use the Olympus 75-300 I curse I didn't carry the Panasonic instead!

I now use the olympus em1-mk2 camera and the lens stabilisation of the Panasonic, it's truly a marvel.

I like the lightness of the 75-300 but it's slower to focus which causes me to miss many bird shots. And although it's very good at the wide end, after about 150mm the Panasonic 100-400 seriously out performs it for detail and contrast. Obviously the Panasonic also has more reach and let's in more light also. The zoom action is however a little stiff.

The 75-300 is about a 1/3 of the price and balances well, but has no monopod or tripod fitting.

M_digicapt · Mar 28, 2022

Adrian Harris said:
Hi Hazel, I have and use both the Olympus 75-300 mk2 and 100-400 Panasonic lenses for wildlife.

When I use the Panasonic 100-400 I curse the weight, when I use the Olympus 75-300 I curse I didn't carry the Panasonic instead!

I now use the olympus em1-mk2 camera and the lens stabilisation of the Panasonic, it's truly a marvel.

I like the lightness of the 75-300 but it's slower to focus which causes me to miss many bird shots. And although it's very good at the wide end, after about 150mm the Panasonic 100-400 seriously out performs it for detail and contrast. Obviously the Panasonic also has more reach and let's in more light also. The zoom action is however a little stiff.

The 75-300 is about a 1/3 of the price and balances well, but has no monopod or tripod fitting.

da7329 · Mar 28, 2022

The oly 100-400 is 1120gr!! That is close in weight to several FF 100-400’s. Heavy Slow Expensive! If this lens is the best oly could do for a non pro zoom maybe they saw writing on the wall and dumped the whole camera company.

DA

Atho · Mar 28, 2022

da7329 said:
The oly 100-400 is 1120gr!! That is close in weight to several FF 100-400’s. Heavy Slow Expensive! If this lens is the best oly could do for a non pro zoom maybe they saw writing on the wall and dumped the whole camera company.

DA

Welcome visitor, can you give some examples please?

Impulses · Mar 28, 2022

I've not read thru the thread so I dunno if it has been mentioned, but a monopod with a Wimberley Monogimbal could be an option for easier handing of a 100-400... Basically balances it over the monopod so you can tilt it up/down with the tip of a finger while still retaining the mobility of a monopod.

Another option been the xx-300s and the 100-400s cold be the PL50-200 + TCs, the latter are hard to source separately in the US but it gets you a lens that's better thru 200mm and probably comparable at 280mm, pricey option for the flexibility tho. I'm pretty happy with my Pana 100-300 II, mostly used on my E-M5 II/III, but I use it more for compressed landscapes than wildlife.

I've been looking at higher end options but I think for the size and $ I'll likely end up with a FF 100-400 or 150-500 since I'm actively shooting both formats and my FF body has better C-AF/tracking. I'd probably keep my 100-300 II tho, I've even used it on the GX850 on occasion, it and the 35-100 make for a relatively lightweight tele duo.

Edit: The 3rd party Roesch tripod collar was one of the reasons I opted for the 100-300 II over the 75-300, even tho I use it handheld at least half of the time... I think the shorter short end is probably the biggest advantage to the Oly since it might mean you can get away with just a prime under it rather than another zoom. YMMV there...

StevenAdler · Mar 29, 2022

da7329 said:
The oly 100-400 is 1120gr!! That is close in weight to several FF 100-400’s. Heavy Slow Expensive! If this lens is the best oly could do for a non pro zoom maybe they saw writing on the wall and dumped the whole camera company.

DA

The best solution for overcoming the weight of heavy lenses is going to the gym and working out 3-4 times a week.

Adrian Harris · Mar 29, 2022

M_digicapt said:
Adrian Harris said:

Hi Hazel, I have and use both the Olympus 75-300 mk2 and 100-400 Panasonic lenses for wildlife.

When I use the Panasonic 100-400 I curse the weight, when I use the Olympus 75-300 I curse I didn't carry the Panasonic instead!

I now use the olympus em1-mk2 camera and the lens stabilisation of the Panasonic, it's truly a marvel.

I like the lightness of the 75-300 but it's slower to focus which causes me to miss many bird shots. And although it's very good at the wide end, after about 150mm the Panasonic 100-400 seriously out performs it for detail and contrast. Obviously the Panasonic also has more reach and let's in more light also. The zoom action is however a little stiff.

The 75-300 is about a 1/3 of the price and balances well, but has no monopod or tripod fitting.

Click to expand...

I use an RRS arca plate to have more room for my little finger. With it I can fit a 70mm arca plate parallel to te lens to use the monopod with the 75-300mm.

I know the 75-300 is very light for a long zoom. But unless the Arca plate actually has a support for the lens body (?), the length of the lens will still exert a lot of leverage against the camera & lens mount flanges, ...which would concern me, as damage to either will be extremely expensive to remedy.

M_digicapt · Mar 29, 2022

Adrian Harris said:
M_digicapt said:

Adrian Harris said:

Hi Hazel, I have and use both the Olympus 75-300 mk2 and 100-400 Panasonic lenses for wildlife.

When I use the Panasonic 100-400 I curse the weight, when I use the Olympus 75-300 I curse I didn't carry the Panasonic instead!

I now use the olympus em1-mk2 camera and the lens stabilisation of the Panasonic, it's truly a marvel.

I like the lightness of the 75-300 but it's slower to focus which causes me to miss many bird shots. And although it's very good at the wide end, after about 150mm the Panasonic 100-400 seriously out performs it for detail and contrast. Obviously the Panasonic also has more reach and let's in more light also. The zoom action is however a little stiff.

The 75-300 is about a 1/3 of the price and balances well, but has no monopod or tripod fitting.

Click to expand...

I use an RRS arca plate to have more room for my little finger. With it I can fit a 70mm arca plate parallel to te lens to use the monopod with the 75-300mm.

Click to expand...

I know the 75-300 is very light for a long zoom. But unless the Arca plate actually has a support for the lens body (?), the length of the lens will still exert a lot of leverage against the camera & lens mount flanges, ...which would concern me, as damage to either will be extremely expensive to remedy.

I’ll let you know if it ever rips the mount off.

Seriously though, the 75-300mm is lighter than the 12-100mm and not much heavier than the O.12-40mm f2.8. When one uses a strap the lenses are dangling and bouncing around without. At least when using a monopod the left hand adds support most of the time.

I’m more scared of using a heavy TC with the 75-300mm even with a support bracket…

The main drawback is the added weight. I mostly use the 75-300mm with an E-M10 mkii without a monopod, but if I need to keep things compact but need fast AF then pick the E-M1 mkii + 75-300mm.

WileEC_ID · Mar 29, 2022

Impulses said:
I've not read thru the thread so I dunno if it has been mentioned, but a monopod with a Wimberley Monogimbal could be an option for easier handing of a 100-400... Basically balances it over the monopod so you can tilt it up/down with the tip of a finger while still retaining the mobility of a monopod.

I use a small RRS Ballhead on my monopod - when I'm not using a tripod with the same.

Jack Tingle · Mar 29, 2022

Adrian Harris said:
M_digicapt said:

Adrian Harris said:

Hi Hazel, I have and use both the Olympus 75-300 mk2 and 100-400 Panasonic lenses for wildlife.

When I use the Panasonic 100-400 I curse the weight, when I use the Olympus 75-300 I curse I didn't carry the Panasonic instead!

I now use the olympus em1-mk2 camera and the lens stabilisation of the Panasonic, it's truly a marvel.

I like the lightness of the 75-300 but it's slower to focus which causes me to miss many bird shots. And although it's very good at the wide end, after about 150mm the Panasonic 100-400 seriously out performs it for detail and contrast. Obviously the Panasonic also has more reach and let's in more light also. The zoom action is however a little stiff.

The 75-300 is about a 1/3 of the price and balances well, but has no monopod or tripod fitting.

Click to expand...

I use an RRS arca plate to have more room for my little finger. With it I can fit a 70mm arca plate parallel to te lens to use the monopod with the 75-300mm.

Click to expand...

I know the 75-300 is very light for a long zoom. But unless the Arca plate actually has a support for the lens body (?), the length of the lens will still exert a lot of leverage against the camera & lens mount flanges, ...which would concern me, as damage to either will be extremely expensive to remedy.

I wouldn't worry about the bayonet flange. The E-M5 Mark III showed the female 1/4 × 20 thread mount is the worst point*. And, no, an Arca plate won't help much there. The 75-300mm should be OK, but I wouldn't trust a lens much longer/heavier. I'm careful to be gentle handling mine.

A long Arca plate does help with balance if you slide it aft.

*That seems to have been a fatigue failure due to an unanticipated load case on an over lightened part, so careful handling should prevent failures.

Mait · Mar 29, 2022

Today i shot one lapwing from pretty far distance, the 100-400 got pretty good detail even from bird that far away:

100% crop:

And then he left:

Hazel123 · Mar 30, 2022

M_digicapt said:
Adrian Harris said:

Hi Hazel, I have and use both the Olympus 75-300 mk2 and 100-400 Panasonic lenses for wildlife.

When I use the Panasonic 100-400 I curse the weight, when I use the Olympus 75-300 I curse I didn't carry the Panasonic instead!

I now use the olympus em1-mk2 camera and the lens stabilisation of the Panasonic, it's truly a marvel.

I like the lightness of the 75-300 but it's slower to focus which causes me to miss many bird shots. And although it's very good at the wide end, after about 150mm the Panasonic 100-400 seriously out performs it for detail and contrast. Obviously the Panasonic also has more reach and let's in more light also. The zoom action is however a little stiff.

The 75-300 is about a 1/3 of the price and balances well, but has no monopod or tripod fitting.

Click to expand...

I use an RRS arca plate to have more room for my little finger. With it I can fit a 70mm arca plate parallel to te lens to use the monopod with the 75-300mm.

Useful tip, thank you.

Hazel123 · Mar 30, 2022

Impulses said:
I've not read thru the thread so I dunno if it has been mentioned, but a monopod with a Wimberley Monogimbal could be an option for easier handing of a 100-400... Basically balances it over the monopod so you can tilt it up/down with the tip of a finger while still retaining the mobility of a monopod.

Another option been the xx-300s and the 100-400s cold be the PL50-200 + TCs, the latter are hard to source separately in the US but it gets you a lens that's better thru 200mm and probably comparable at 280mm, pricey option for the flexibility tho. I'm pretty happy with my Pana 100-300 II, mostly used on my E-M5 II/III, but I use it more for compressed landscapes than wildlife.

I've been looking at higher end options but I think for the size and $ I'll likely end up with a FF 100-400 or 150-500 since I'm actively shooting both formats and my FF body has better C-AF/tracking. I'd probably keep my 100-300 II tho, I've even used it on the GX850 on occasion, it and the 35-100 make for a relatively lightweight tele duo.

Edit: The 3rd party Roesch tripod collar was one of the reasons I opted for the 100-300 II over the 75-300, even tho I use it handheld at least half of the time... I think the shorter short end is probably the biggest advantage to the Oly since it might mean you can get away with just a prime under it rather than another zoom. YMMV there...

Thanks that is really helpful. I have read of some mounting issues between the Panasonic 100-400 and olympus cameras but assume that is not the case with the 100-300?

Impulses · Mar 31, 2022

Hazel123 said:
Impulses said:

I've not read thru the thread so I dunno if it has been mentioned, but a monopod with a Wimberley Monogimbal could be an option for easier handing of a 100-400... Basically balances it over the monopod so you can tilt it up/down with the tip of a finger while still retaining the mobility of a monopod.

Another option been the xx-300s and the 100-400s cold be the PL50-200 + TCs, the latter are hard to source separately in the US but it gets you a lens that's better thru 200mm and probably comparable at 280mm, pricey option for the flexibility tho. I'm pretty happy with my Pana 100-300 II, mostly used on my E-M5 II/III, but I use it more for compressed landscapes than wildlife.

I've been looking at higher end options but I think for the size and $ I'll likely end up with a FF 100-400 or 150-500 since I'm actively shooting both formats and my FF body has better C-AF/tracking. I'd probably keep my 100-300 II tho, I've even used it on the GX850 on occasion, it and the 35-100 make for a relatively lightweight tele duo.

Edit: The 3rd party Roesch tripod collar was one of the reasons I opted for the 100-300 II over the 75-300, even tho I use it handheld at least half of the time... I think the shorter short end is probably the biggest advantage to the Oly since it might mean you can get away with just a prime under it rather than another zoom. YMMV there...

Click to expand...

Thanks that is really helpful. I have read of some mounting issues between the Panasonic 100-400 and olympus cameras but assume that is not the case with the 100-300?

I've not had any issues in that regard, with the two differently Oly bodies I have at least. The PL100-400 seemed to have a pretty peculiar bout of QC/fit issues but I've had more Pana lenses than Oly ones overall and they've all been fine on bodies from both brands tbh.

Mephistopheles* · Mar 31, 2022

Hazel123 said:
Fantastic pictures. That is quite a difference in lens size.

But the PL100-400 is significantly lighter than the 300mm f4 and Oly 100-400mm. For my money, it's the best long telephoto image quality per ounce there is in the m4/3 lineup. It is my go to lens for birds, wildlife, and any bugs I shoot at a distance, such as butterflies and dragonflies.

Maceairsidh · Mar 31, 2022

very, very nice shot of the little guy

Wildlife lens weight versus IQ

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Well-known member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts