4/3 for wildlife

[jeffharris]

I just discovered this particular forum. Am seeking a lightweight alternative to my Canon 5D w/400mm L -for wildlife. Its too bulky for longs hikes into rough terrain. I just tested the Sony NEX7 with kit lens. Surprisingly sharp & noise-free. A little heavy & expensive with the 70-300. Am considering the Panasonic GX1, GF5 with 100-300mm lens. A good value, but I am concerned about lens build, and system IQ. The DPR gallery for the GX1 has some very soft images (esp. man with goatee: http://www.dpreview.com/...046?inalbum=panasonic-lumix-dmc-gx1-review-samples )

Anyone here using the GX1 with 100-300mm for wildlife? BIF?

While the GX1 is a very nice little camera, my main concern would be trying to use it with a long lens like the 100-300mm without an EVF. When you add the cost of the add-on EVF to a GX1 it becomes quite uneconomical. Just get a GH2. Others have mentioned the G3, but I find it's handling not very good: tiny "grip" and slippery finish aren't a good combo. It's dearth of external controls compound the problem.

I use a GH2 and really wouldn't consider using my 100-300mm without an EVF. With that combo, and OIS activated, I've been able to shoot hand held at 300mm in good light. Using a monopod works well with less light.

The 100-300mm is a bit soft at 300mm, but with a bit of tweaking in Lightroom images sharpen up. Over all, it's a pretty nice lens.

 

[Jim4496]

400mm f5.6 on a Rebel body is a 640mm equivalent lens.

No need for pack animals.

 

[Jim4496]

I have a G3 with the 100-300mm lens. In general its good for wildlife and birds.
Birds in flight is a challenge as the EVF goes blank between shots.
The solution is a red dot sight to allow you to continuously follow the bird.

I like the compact build and weight compared to my DSLR, but I get better results with my T1i and 400mm f5.6 lens. Its a trade off.

My experience is that you need the Vvew finder to use the 300mm end hand held.

You just can't get good enough stability holding the camera out from your body to see the rear screen. Good long lens technique is still important.

 

[tomnorth]

I am not a wildlife photographer, but I do have a GX1 and the 45-200 lens. I took the shot below while hiking in the woods in the early evening, hence the ISO of 3200. I was pleasantly surprised with the results. This was shot handheld. If you are looking for a significantly lighter kit, I think the GX1 or G3 are great options.

 

[Fleabag]

rofl

 

[Keith66]

Intriguing, because I also used the smaller centre AF box. One thing I discovered is that if it doesn't like the target it increases the box size, and I think that's when it goes awry.

I took a photo of a dog, which had black and white markings on its neck, and it didn't focus at all on the dog!! It doesn't appear to like black and white markings - herons of course have black and white feathers on their neck - and seems to ignore them.

I also tried the "tracking" focus. That seems to do its own thing totally, and once it's found something it wants to focus on, it's the very devil to get it away from that point!

I went to my camera shop with it this morning to compare with a 550D, and showed the technical guy what it was doing; he was astonished, to say the least! Interesting to note that the G3 has a proper spot metering arrangement, whereas the G2 does not. But I'm not prepared to take the risk of buying a G3, and the G2 is going to depart next week. It's a shame, because I like the lenses, and when I manage to get a good shot, it produces very sharp results.