-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Birds & wildlife options
- Thread starter InkedMarie
- Start date
Skeeterbytes
Forum Pro
Very insightful comments on the RX10. Have pondered one just for taking to venues that forbid "professional cameras with detachable lenses" but because of its imposing size, figure my odds of being turned away anyway (it's not like security folks are versed in cameras) are still higher than passing my GM5 off as a P&S. Which can be done on occasion.
I'd say a couple of your issues would be deal-killers anyway. It's not exactly a bargain camera and for light travel would not earn its place. An RX100 series holds more interest TBH, even if not a birding camera for the OP.
Cheers,
Rick
InkedMarie
Senior Member
Rick, a year or so ago, I was looking for a camera to take to concerts. No ILC allowed, must be compact. That left my EM10ii and the Nikon P950 I had. I picked up a Stylus 1s for those times. Ended up being my take everywhere camera.
Marie
I wasn't aware I had commented on the Sony.Olympus 300 f4 pro... 3.25lbs.great sharp lens but a brick. Add camera, you're over 4 lbsLink comparing Olympus 100-400 and Panasonic 100-400.
https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/mi...-100-400mm-vs-panasonic-100-400mm/#more-21872
So far I have not suggested anything specific....
The above link concludes that the Panasonic is better for video with a Panasonic camera and for lighter weight. The Olympus for everything else.
So OLY 100-400 or 300mm f4 pro.
The 300mm pro is sharper and, with a wider maximum aperture of f4, is better in lower light to keep a lower ISO and higher shutter speed. Just a walk through trees and the light drops a lot. If you end up with an E-M1 ii or iii then the synch IS is amazing. The last photo in my gallery of the Lady's Smock was a 15 frame stack hand held with the 300mm. The synch IS made it possible. It is a wonderful lens to use. I have no regrets at all buying the 300mm. BUT I had been using a fixed 300mm before I bought it and knew I did not need the zoom. I am in the U.K. so our wildlife is small and I don't use it for airshows etc. I can imagine a scenario where I am in a hide and something comes really close and too close for the 300mm. It hasn't happened but if it did then I would use my 12-100, that I would have on a second camera in that situation, and use that to create an environmental shot or crop later. If there was an occasion where I missed the shot completely then - I take photos for fun not as a pro and for me the benefits of synch IS, sharpness, the physical body with the manual clutch, lens button and the wider f4 that I gain every time I use the 300mm f4 would outway the missed shot. And hopefully I would have some when the creature was further away.)
So the 300mm lens wins in all departments compared with the Oly 100 to 400 except price and zoomability.
As I said I started with my 300mm f4 on an E-M10 whilst waiting for Olympus to improve their CAF focussing. If you are unsure about the need for CAF then start with what you have, get the lens, learn long lens technique then add CAF later in the body of your choice from the E-M1, ii, iii (or X if you fancy what it offers.)
Which forum have you moved to?
Good luck.
Stephen
Sony R10 IV - 2.5 lbs
Not sure why I need to know the weight of the Sony. I am happy with what I have.
Last edited:
That's a good point against the OP's "My 12-100 is as much weight as I want on it." But that requirement seems to have softened in later posts (having been based on the feeling that heavier lenses would be unbalanced on such a small camera) and your phrasing reads like a blanket statement that a gimbal is necessary for a 400mm lens on MFT - I understand now that wasn't the point you were making.
Of course, the 12-100 is a pretty chunky lens. Whilst the PL 100-400 is almost a pound heavier, either of the 300mm zooms would be lighter.
Oly 12-100 - 561g
Oly 75-300 - 423g
P 100-300 - 520g
PL 100-400 - 985g
Of course, the 12-100 is a pretty chunky lens. Whilst the PL 100-400 is almost a pound heavier, either of the 300mm zooms would be lighter.
Oly 12-100 - 561g
Oly 75-300 - 423g
P 100-300 - 520g
PL 100-400 - 985g
InkedMarie
Senior Member
A very generous forum member has given me a very nice deal on a G9. I’m still looking at lenses.
Thank you so much! I knew DPR has great people; this solidifies how much I’ll miss it!
Marie
Thank you so much! I knew DPR has great people; this solidifies how much I’ll miss it!
Marie
Atho
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,378
- Solutions
- 1
- Reaction score
- 1,350
Reflecting back on your statement that the em 10 II & 12100 was your limit, I hope you’ve factored in the extra 300 grammes or 0.66 lbs that the G9 brings.
Adrian Harris
Veteran Member
I don't posses the olympus 100-400 so can only compare the 2 lenses mentioned in my title.
On olympus cameras :
The olympus 75-300 mk2 is superight and inexpesive and appears quite sharp up to just over 200mm (ff equiv 400). It is also of very slow aperture and needs decent lighting conditions.
The Panasonic is more expensive and heavy 'ish. But it handles really well has brilliant stabilisation and it's results are superb from 100-400.
The pl 100-400 focuses really fast, the olympus 73-300 focuses slower hence fails to photograph fast feeding birds like coal tits and Marsh tits (they have grabbed the seed and gone before auto-focus allows the shot to be taken).
I hate carrying weight and sometimes unable to. But most importantly when I do use the lightweight oly 75-300 am always cursing when back at home that I didn't take the pl100-400.
Only thing to watch out for is some pl100-400 have a stiff zoom ring.
Best wishes.
--
Adrian
http://www.artfotografia.co.uk/
On olympus cameras :
The olympus 75-300 mk2 is superight and inexpesive and appears quite sharp up to just over 200mm (ff equiv 400). It is also of very slow aperture and needs decent lighting conditions.
The Panasonic is more expensive and heavy 'ish. But it handles really well has brilliant stabilisation and it's results are superb from 100-400.
The pl 100-400 focuses really fast, the olympus 73-300 focuses slower hence fails to photograph fast feeding birds like coal tits and Marsh tits (they have grabbed the seed and gone before auto-focus allows the shot to be taken).
I hate carrying weight and sometimes unable to. But most importantly when I do use the lightweight oly 75-300 am always cursing when back at home that I didn't take the pl100-400.
Only thing to watch out for is some pl100-400 have a stiff zoom ring.
Best wishes.
--
Adrian
http://www.artfotografia.co.uk/
Last edited:
Brandon birder
Veteran Member
The RX10 is a great travel camera that will also do birds and insects very well. It is ideal for the travelling wildlife enthusiast. This is my main use for it. It also hangs nicely on the shoulder with a neck strap.
However when not travelling but going out to shoot birds and other wildlife, an EM1m2 to OM1 camera range are best with a 300 f4 pro and TC’s, but I prefer my very sharp PL 100-400, in so far that it is the one I use most of the time.
The mz 75-300 is a fine zoom lens on a smaller bodied EM camera as others have attested.
I have and use all these combinations and they all work well handheld at full zoom with good technique.
InkedMarie
Senior Member
Yes, I have. I was more “worried” about a lens heavier than the 12-100 on the em10 which people told me was fine.
This camera was on my list since Panasonic & Olympus lenses can be used on both. I looked up various weights of cameras and lenses and compared to others I’ve used.
Marie
InkedMarie
Senior Member
Brandon birder
Veteran Member
Yes and also an AF system that is closer to the A9 and OM1with brilliant focus and hold option that lets you take a perfectly focussed snapshot(s) of a flying bird, whatever mode or subject you are working on and then get straight back to what you were doing. Did I say brilliant? The OM1 has also a similar system.
Similar threads
- Question
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum