100-300: is the OIS this bad??

[luisflorit]

Hi folks,

I am a wildlife shooter seriously considering switching from Oly 43rds to Pany m43rds. As such, the GH2+100-300 is my absolute first combo of choice. I am interested in handholdable lenses only, since I walk hours in rainforests and tripods are not practical.

However, I've seen many times people complaining about the 100-300 OIS, saying that even at 1/500s you get blurry shots (when handholding of course). For example, in this review:

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_g_vario_100_300mm_f4_56_mega_ois_review/conclusion/

This sounds pretty strange to me. The rule of thumb says that, at 600mm EFL, you should get sharp results at 1/600s without any stabilization. I use(d) my old Pany FZ50+TCON17 (714mm EFL) at 1/250s without any problem. I use E5 + 50-200 + EC14 at 560mm EFL @1/250s, although less reliably than the FZ50, still Ok. Yes, I found the FZ50 stabilization way more reliable than the Oly """"""pro"""""" setup, even at longer focal lengths (!!!?).

Then, how can the 100-300 OIS be so much worse than an old P&S of the same brand?

And there is another issue. As you read above, I wrote several times 1/250s. This number is important, since it is the fastest flash sync of all my cameas. In rainforests, with a non FF camera, flash is a must. But the GH2 has flash sync of 1/160s ($%%#@$#^!!!!), so I should have to shoot at 600mm EFL and 1/160s, with flash...

So, I want your opinion on the OIS of the 100-300. As you can see, it would be a killer for me if not really good (2 stops at least).

Thanks!

Cheers,
L.

-
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos



Oly E5 + E3 + 12-60 + 50-200 + EC14 + FL50R
Pany FZ50 + Oly FL50 + TCON17 + Raynox 150 & 250

 

[Jerodequin]

No, definetely not that bad at all...

I've only shot handheld with this lens so far... here's a few (mostly snapshots and fairly poor light, but you get the idea)

300mm f/5.6 1/250s ISO1600



300mm f/5.6 1/400s ISO1600



300mm f/5.6 1/250 ISO1600

 

[rpm40]

This sounds pretty strange to me. The rule of thumb says that, at 600mm EFL, you should get sharp results at 1/600s without any stabilization. I use(d) my old Pany FZ50+TCON17 (714mm EFL) at 1/250s without any problem. I use E5 + 50-200 + EC14 at 560mm EFL @1/250s, although less reliably than the FZ50, still Ok. Yes, I found the FZ50 stabilization way more reliable than the Oly """"""pro"""""" setup, even at longer focal lengths (!!!?).

Then, how can the 100-300 OIS be so much worse than an old P&S of the > same brand?

Are you shooting with the screen, or do you have a viewfinder?

I try to always keep my shutter speed equal to my focal length like you say, but that rule of thumb came about when cameras were stuck to your face with a viewfinder. Shooting at arms legnth is HORRIBLE for stability. I generally just hope that IS is enough to counteract the arms legnth effect which probably introduces 2 or 3 stops worth of shake. That problem will just get worse with the arm positioning and movements required to handle a longer lens.

I still try to stick to the shutter speed => focal legnth rule.

 

[mpgxsvcd]

Your logic totally ignores the fact that camera shake is not the only thing that causes blurry photos. Subject movement is the culprit more times than not. IS does nothing for subject movement. Sometimes even 1/4000 of a second isn't enough at the extreme telephoto lengths the GH2 can obtain.

IS is not a cure all. In fact most of the time it really isn't helping you at all. However, it can be very affective in medium range hand held video. Remember you have control over how much the camera shakes. You have no control over how much the subject moves.

--
GH2, GF1, & ZS3 Sample movies
http://www.youtube.com/user/mpgxsvcd#play/uploads
http://vimeo.com/user442745
GF1 Pictures
http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/4222674355/albums

 

[Anders W]

I try to always keep my shutter speed equal to my focal length like you say, but that rule of thumb came about when cameras were stuck to your face with a viewfinder. Shooting at arms legnth is HORRIBLE for stability. I generally just hope that IS is enough to counteract the arms legnth effect which probably introduces 2 or 3 stops worth of shake. That problem will just get worse with the arm positioning and movements required to handle a longer lens.

Well, it sounds like you have pretty good reasons to buy yourself an add-on viewfinder. Personally, I couldn't imagine to do without one, especially with a lens like the 100-300.

I have been asking myself exactly the same question as the OP. So additional reports on the efficiency of the OIS of the 100-300 are more than welcome. Previous reports on the efficiency of the OIS on other Panasonic lenses, for example in the reviews here on DPReview, have been rather promising so it would be quite odd as well as unfortunate if the OIS on this particular lens, where it is even more important than on any of the others, turned out to be a failure.

Also, I would be interested in the efficiency of mode 1 (OIS always on) as compared to mode 2 (OIS on only when you press the shutter). According to Panasonic itself, shake reduction should be more efficient in mode 2 than in mode 1 (although mode 1 might help you focus and frame more precisely). See here:

https://panasonic.ca/english/audiovideo/camerascamcorders/digitalstill/megaOIS.asp

However, according to the tests reported by DPReview, mode 1 is to be preferred on all counts, except battery life.

 

[MNE]

Agreed. Subject movement is much more lilkely to cause softness or blur. For example, even though the deer I have been shooting stare at me while perfectly still, a slight breeze moves their fur enough to make the image soft. I always focus on the eyes whever possible to salvage most of the image. At 150mm(300mm equiv) I try to shoot with a min of 1/250, but would rather bump up ISO to 400 in order to reduce the fuzzy-fur effect.

 

[Anders W]

Subject movement is the culprit more times than not. IS does nothing for subject movement. Sometimes even 1/4000 of a second isn't enough at the extreme telephoto lengths the GH2 can obtain.

IS is not a cure all. In fact most of the time it really isn't helping you at all.

I think most of us are already well aware that camera shake is not the only source of blur. Nevertheless, I strongly disagree with what you say. Unless you are a dedicated action shooter or carry a tripod wherever you go, camera shake is a very significant source of blur, and IS helps a lot (provided it works as intended). It is particularly helpful for long teles where camera shake rather than subject motion often determines how far down you can go in terms of shutter speed.

BTW: Why would shorter shutter speeds (even shorter than 1/4000) be required to stop subject motion with "extreme telephoto lengths" than with shorter focal lengths?

 

[orchidofiets]

Just some examples with 1/125, 1/80 and 1/15!. All taken with the viewer securely pressed to my face at 300 mm! Would'nt miss my 100-300 for the world!

 

[tinpusher]

I leave the OIS in Mode 1 and have no complaints.

The eye level viewfinder is almost a must because of the extra stability it brings to shooting but , provided you use a shutter speed appropriate to the focal length and raise the ISO to keep it there , handheld images are quite sharp even at 300mm.

But at speeds below 1/200 and 300mm , I would expect camera shake to be an issue.

 

[TrapperJohn]

Holding at arms length, using the LCD to frame, I've had motion blur at 150mm and shutter speeds in the 125-200 range, which my E3 and 50-200 could handle easily. Likely a result of unstable holding position plus very light camera.

Held to the face using the EVF, much better. The arms out position just stinks for stability, especially at longer focal lengths.

Keep in mind, what you hear about M43 comes from a real mixed bag: some amateur photogs, some P&S types moving up, some newbies.

 

[viorel]

Hi folks,

I am a wildlife shooter seriously considering switching from Oly 43rds to Pany m43rds. As such, the GH2+100-300 is my absolute first combo of choice. I am interested in handholdable lenses only, since I walk hours in rainforests and tripods are not practical.

Hi, you should consider that m4/3 set up is much lighter than equivalent 4/3 set up and this is not good for stability at long tele; this only originates in improved handling and stability with heavier systems. Overall I consider 4/3 better suited for telephoto work than smaller/lighter setups (like m4/3). (I mean handhold)

Example: sometimes I get better shots with E1+40-150 than with Epl1+40-150 (IS1 on) at same focal length.

-
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos



Oly E5 + E3 + 12-60 + 50-200 + EC14 + FL50R
Pany FZ50 + Oly FL50 + TCON17 + Raynox 150 & 250

--
Viorel
http://viorelp.smugmug.com/

 

[EXR]

This sounds pretty strange to me. The rule of thumb says that, at 600mm EFL, you should get sharp results at 1/600s without any stabilization.

The rule of thumb is from old times, when people viewed their photos on paper. The rule of thumb means an acceptable sharpness at typical sizes, not pixel-peeping on 16MP-images.

If you do 100% pixel-peeping you are effectively using digital zoom, which means an increase of the crop-factor. For example if you watch a picture from the GH2 on a FullHD-screen at 100% you get an effective focal-length of about 1600mm, so your rule of thumb results in a necessary shutter speed of 1/1600s, not 1/600s.

And 1/500s then will be about 2 stops too slow, and this is what you can expect from an IS-system, but not much more (I know manufacturers like to tell you 4 stops or even more improvement, but in reality no IS-system will give you much more than 2 stops)

I use(d) my old Pany FZ50+TCON17 (714mm EFL) at 1/250s without any problem. I use E5 + 50-200 + EC14 at 560mm EFL @1/250s, although less reliably than the FZ50, still Ok.

Yes, I found the FZ50 stabilization way more reliable than the Oly """"""pro"""""" setup, even at longer focal lengths (!!!?).

No surprise. The FZ50 has a central shutter, µ4/3 has a focal-plane-shutter which will inevitable induce some shake. With DSLRs it is much worse the mirror + shutter will create even more shake.

I also doubt you compared them correct, which would mean at the same output-size. The lower resolution of the FZ50 means images will look sharper when they are viewed at 100%.

Then, how can the 100-300 OIS be so much worse than an old P&S of the same brand?

It isn´t worse, there simply is more shake and higher resolution means you are likely to see more shake.

And there is another issue. As you read above, I wrote several times 1/250s. This number is important, since it is the fastest flash sync of all my cameas. In rainforests, with a non FF camera, flash is a must. But the GH2 has flash sync of 1/160s ($%%#@$#^!!!!), so I should have to shoot at 600mm EFL and 1/160s, with flash...

When the flash is the main-exposure the shutter-speed is irrelevant. You could shoot at 1/10s and the image still will be sharp. When light-levels are low and you use the flash exposure isn´t influenced (significantly) by the shutter-speed, the flash makes the exposure and it is very fast (estimated about 1/10000s)

So, I want your opinion on the OIS of the 100-300. As you can see, it would be a killer for me if not really good (2 stops at least).

The OIS is good (at least I expect it to be, I don´t have the lens, but I have never seen a Panasonic-lens with bad IS)
The problems are the expectations of some people.

A IS-system always can just react. So with shutter-speeds where camera-shake becomes significant there will always be some blurring. IS will decrease this blurring but it will not prevent it completely.

The farther you are away from the needed shutter-speed to prevent blur, the bigger the difference will be.

Camera-shake will also be different in each photo, and an IS-system will increase your rate of usable photos, but it will never guarantee it, so in critical situations it is always best to shoot more pictures.

The next thing is, that especially with long focal-lengths there are several environment-influences that will prevent photos from being sharp in 100%-view. There is always dust in the air and when you shoot over long distances, the dust will "accumulate" and cause the picture to be soft.

 

[luisflorit]

This sounds pretty strange to me. The rule of thumb says that, at 600mm EFL, you should get sharp results at 1/600s without any stabilization. I use(d) my old Pany FZ50+TCON17 (714mm EFL) at 1/250s without any problem. I use E5 + 50-200 + EC14 at 560mm EFL @1/250s, although less reliably than the FZ50, still Ok. Yes, I found the FZ50 stabilization way more reliable than the Oly """"""pro"""""" setup, even at longer focal lengths (!!!?).

Then, how can the 100-300 OIS be so much worse than an old P&S of the > same brand?

Are you shooting with the screen, or do you have a viewfinder?

No, please, with the viewfinder.

Actually, the screen of my FZ50 was always facing inwards. My FZ50 doesn't even need an LCD. Unfortunately, my E3/5 has OVFs, so LCD is needed for reviewing (one of the reasons for my switch is go back to EVF).

I try to always keep my shutter speed equal to my focal length like you say, but that rule of thumb came about when cameras were stuck to your face with a viewfinder. Shooting at arms legnth is HORRIBLE for stability.

Certainly I wouldn't be able to shoot that way with my 2.5kg combo.

I generally just hope that IS is enough to counteract the arms legnth effect which probably introduces 2 or 3 stops worth of shake. That problem will just get worse with the arm positioning and movements required to handle a longer lens.

I still try to stick to the shutter speed => focal legnth rule.

That would make the 100-300 useless for my needs.

Thanks,
L.

--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos



Oly E5 + E3 + 12-60 + 50-200 + EC14 + FL50R
Pany FZ50 + Oly FL50 + TCON17 + Raynox 150 & 250

 

[normsmith]

Luis,

I covered some of this subject in this thread - which may be useful.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1041&message=38013476

I feel that my EPL-1 and 100 - 300mm combo are less forgiving of bad holding technique. I am now much more discipled in how I hold the camera and I have bought an VF-2, both have substantially enhanced the value of this lens to me.

Most of my wildlife subjects move, so higher shutter speed is important but regardless of that, IS is also VERY helpful on a long lens like the 100-300mm, especially on a x2 crop.

I also think that while sharp is good, looking for for absolute sharpness at 100% pixel peeping is not the way to go as animal shots can look 'too digital' by over sharpening.

 

[luisflorit]

Your logic totally ignores the fact that camera shake is not the only thing that causes blurry photos. Subject movement is the culprit more times than not. IS does nothing for subject movement. Sometimes even 1/4000 of a second isn't enough at the extreme telephoto lengths the GH2 can obtain.

IS is not a cure all. In fact most of the time it really isn't helping you at all. However, it can be very affective in medium range hand held video. Remember you have control over how much the camera shakes. You have no control over how much the subject moves.

Of course. But this has nothing to do with my question. Forget about subject movement if you want: I only want to know if the 100-300 OIS is good enough to handhold at 300mm and 1/160s, shooting a building if you wish.

Thanks,
L.

--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos



Oly E5 + E3 + 12-60 + 50-200 + EC14 + FL50R
Pany FZ50 + Oly FL50 + TCON17 + Raynox 150 & 250

 

[luisflorit]

Just some examples with 1/125, 1/80 and 1/15!. All taken with the viewer securely pressed to my face at 300 mm! Would'nt miss my 100-300 for the world!

Nice pics. Indeed a bit soft, but this is what I would expect from the speeds you used.

Thanks!
L.

--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos



Oly E5 + E3 + 12-60 + 50-200 + EC14 + FL50R
Pany FZ50 + Oly FL50 + TCON17 + Raynox 150 & 250

 

[luisflorit]

I leave the OIS in Mode 1 and have no complaints.

The eye level viewfinder is almost a must because of the extra stability it brings to shooting

Don't worry. I am sure the LCD of my GH2 would be almost permanently facing inwards, like the one of my FZ50, except possibly a tricky macro below a leaf or something like that.

but , provided you use a shutter speed appropriate to the focal length and raise the ISO to keep it there , handheld images are quite sharp even at 300mm.

But at speeds below 1/200 and 300mm , I would expect camera shake to be an issue.

MMmmm... what a pity. As I wrote, I'd need to shoot at 1/160s because of the slow flash sync of the GH2...

Thanks!
L.

--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos



Oly E5 + E3 + 12-60 + 50-200 + EC14 + FL50R
Pany FZ50 + Oly FL50 + TCON17 + Raynox 150 & 250

 

[luisflorit]

Holding at arms length, using the LCD to frame, I've had motion blur at 150mm and shutter speeds in the 125-200 range, which my E3 and 50-200 could handle easily. Likely a result of unstable holding position plus very light camera.

Held to the face using the EVF, much better. The arms out position just stinks for stability, especially at longer focal lengths.

Don't worry. I don't even plan to use the LCD, except probably once in a while in tricky situations (some macros). I seldom used the one in my FZ50.

Keep in mind, what you hear about M43 comes from a real mixed bag: some amateur photogs, some P&S types moving up, some newbies.

I understand. Still, what I posted was a review of a decent site...

Thanks,
L.

--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos



Oly E5 + E3 + 12-60 + 50-200 + EC14 + FL50R
Pany FZ50 + Oly FL50 + TCON17 + Raynox 150 & 250

 

[luisflorit]

Hi folks,

I am a wildlife shooter seriously considering switching from Oly 43rds to Pany m43rds. As such, the GH2+100-300 is my absolute first combo of choice. I am interested in handholdable lenses only, since I walk hours in rainforests and tripods are not practical.

Hi, you should consider that m4/3 set up is much lighter than equivalent 4/3 set up and this is not good for stability at long tele; this only originates in improved handling and stability with heavier systems. Overall I consider 4/3 better suited for telephoto work than smaller/lighter setups (like m4/3). (I mean handhold)

Example: sometimes I get better shots with E1+40-150 than with Epl1+40-150 (IS1 on) at same focal length.

Interesting. Still, my experience is the opposite. My FZ50 +TCON is much more stable than my relatively heavy 43rd setup, despite the fact that the focal length is much bigger (714mm vs 583mm). I suspect that the OIS is more effective than the IBIS, but the review of the 100-300 seems to point in the opposite direction.

Thanks,
L.

--
My gallery: http://luis.impa.br/photos



Oly E5 + E3 + 12-60 + 50-200 + EC14 + FL50R
Pany FZ50 + Oly FL50 + TCON17 + Raynox 150 & 250

 

[ANAYV]

Not everyone who uses the LCD has there arms out at arm length!

I hold mine about 6" to 8" away.....not sure why anyone would hold it out any farther than that.

It's harder to see the LCD and minimize shake,with arms fully out.

As far as the built in O.I.s. , with my previous FZ's one can shoot at 1/60 @ 400mm and need no tripod.

I'm thinking it's not as good, with the m 4/3 lenses.

I only have the 45mm to 200mm...and so far so good, at 200mm focal length(400mm)

ANAYV

This sounds pretty strange to me. The rule of thumb says that, at 600mm EFL, you should get sharp results at 1/600s without any stabilization. I use(d) my old Pany FZ50+TCON17 (714mm EFL) at 1/250s without any problem. I use E5 + 50-200 + EC14 at 560mm EFL @1/250s, although less reliably than the FZ50, still Ok. Yes, I found the FZ50 stabilization way more reliable than the Oly """"""pro"""""" setup, even at longer focal lengths (!!!?).

Then, how can the 100-300 OIS be so much worse than an old P&S of the > same brand?

Are you shooting with the screen, or do you have a viewfinder?

I try to always keep my shutter speed equal to my focal length like you say, but that rule of thumb came about when cameras were stuck to your face with a viewfinder. Shooting at arms legnth is HORRIBLE for stability. I generally just hope that IS is enough to counteract the arms legnth effect which probably introduces 2 or 3 stops worth of shake. That problem will just get worse with the arm positioning and movements required to handle a longer lens.

I still try to stick to the shutter speed => focal legnth rule.