GX-8 great specs but MFT 100-300 lens not? (for Birding)

My wife gets phenomenal detail from her 24MP APS-C sensor and 55-300 (450mm eq.) lens, but from a weight standpoint she is at her limit.  She wants more reach without losing detail but does not want to carry the Nikon 80-400 weight.

On paper (and in the DPReview Studio Compare tool) the GX-8 seems to be the closest MFT camera yet to her D5300.  But, when I compare the Dx0 lens scores of her Nikon lens (score 15, sharpness 9) to the Panny 100-300 (score 10, sharpness 5), it doesn't seem like she will be happy.

Any birders want to weigh in?

You are correct, the 100-300 has limitations, among them the fact it can only provide bursts of 2-3 fps even if the camera does more.  The Oly 75-300 is a more recent design but wont have In lens IS, although I think the GX8 does have some in body stabilization so it may be ok.

alanmcdonley wrote:

My wife gets phenomenal detail from her 24MP APS-C sensor and 55-300 (450mm eq.) lens, but from a weight standpoint she is at her limit. She wants more reach without losing detail but does not want to carry the Nikon 80-400 weight.

On paper (and in the DPReview Studio Compare tool) the GX-8 seems to be the closest MFT camera yet to her D5300. But, when I compare the Dx0 lens scores of her Nikon lens (score 15, sharpness 9) to the Panny 100-300 (score 10, sharpness 5), it doesn't seem like she will be happy.

Any birders want to weigh in?

Personally not a fan of Oly, but in your wife's situation, EM1 + 40-150 f/2.8 & 1.4x TC (roughly 420mm eq FF) might offer the needed f/stop speed, premium IQ, weatherproof combo, fast AFC, better stabilization and similar reach. Total package would weigh around 1.55Kg.

Sadly Panny 100-300 is slower, an older design doesn't support high burst fps, slower AF and not compatible to GX8's EM5-II rival Dual IS. Would it support DFD for faster AF-C is also not cleared.

Unless waiting for the forthcoming Oly 300 f/4 OIS or the heavy weight Panny Leica 100-400 next year, Oly might have a slightly better edge although a bit bigger and heavier than GX8.

Its 400mm at 35 and much lighter than the 100-300. You can find it in ebay at about 200€ or even less in USA.

Bob657 wrote:

You are correct, the 100-300 has limitations, among them the fact it can only provide bursts of 2-3 fps even if the camera does more. The Oly 75-300 is a more recent design but wont have In lens IS, although I think the GX8 does have some in body stabilization so it may be ok.

I guess I must have a really strange copy of the 100-300 since I routinely shoot it at all burst rates on my Olympus E-M5 II with good results. Here's two shot at 10 fps. Tight crops on both

Below shot with Panasonic 100-300 on an Olympus E-M10 + 2x internal teleconverter ( 1120mm Equiv)

alanmcdonley wrote:

My wife gets phenomenal detail from her 24MP APS-C sensor and 55-300 (450mm eq.) lens, but from a weight standpoint she is at her limit. She wants more reach without losing detail but does not want to carry the Nikon 80-400 weight.

On paper (and in the DPReview Studio Compare tool) the GX-8 seems to be the closest MFT camera yet to her D5300. But, when I compare the Dx0 lens scores of her Nikon lens (score 15, sharpness 9) to the Panny 100-300 (score 10, sharpness 5), it doesn't seem like she will be happy.

Any birders want to weigh in?

I would place money that the differences between the 55-300, on a 24MP APS-C, and one of the 300mm lenses on M4/3s will be negligible for birding, where you most probably are working at maximum focal length and have to crop anyway.

In fact, I suspect that the Oly 75-300 will be better, as it's a rather tidy piece of glass for the cost. It's also remarkably lightweight.

Martin.au wrote:

alanmcdonley wrote:

My wife gets phenomenal detail from her 24MP APS-C sensor and 55-300 (450mm eq.) lens, but from a weight standpoint she is at her limit. She wants more reach without losing detail but does not want to carry the Nikon 80-400 weight.

On paper (and in the DPReview Studio Compare tool) the GX-8 seems to be the closest MFT camera yet to her D5300. But, when I compare the Dx0 lens scores of her Nikon lens (score 15, sharpness 9) to the Panny 100-300 (score 10, sharpness 5), it doesn't seem like she will be happy.

Any birders want to weigh in?

I would place money that the differences between the 55-300, on a 24MP APS-C, and one of the 300mm lenses on M4/3s will be negligible for birding, where you most probably are working at maximum focal length and have to crop anyway.

In fact, I suspect that the Oly 75-300 will be better, as it's a rather tidy piece of glass for the cost. It's also remarkably lightweight.

Maybe not an exact comparison, but my wife gave up her nearly new Canon 7D Mark II and Canon 100-400 in favor of the Panasonic 100-300 on her Olympus E-M5 II after seeing little or no difference in Image Quality at 100%. Reach is about the same, given the difference in sensor size (about 600 Equiv.)

We both get more keepers hand held just because of the smaller form factor and lighter weight. No going back.

I would suggest that you stop reading specifications and look at examples. I've said it a few times on here already but I'll repeat there are lots of people out there getting better bird pictures than me. They are easily recognisable by the very large object that sits in front of their cameras which gives them a bad back often accompanied by the necessary tripod.. Also another great id feature is their very empty wallets. I'm happy to compare my G7 and 100-300 output with anybody at a level playing field of weight and cost.

If you're wife gets much better shots than these than yes she will be disappointed and will need to stick to her DSLR or wait and see what the Oly 300mm and Panny 100-400 are like, although pf course the price differential is likely to be huge.

A few recent shots and many more in my Picasa link below

.

alanmcdonley wrote:

My wife gets phenomenal detail from her 24MP APS-C sensor and 55-300 (450mm eq.) lens, but from a weight standpoint she is at her limit. She wants more reach without losing detail but does not want to carry the Nikon 80-400 weight.

The D7100 and D7200 have a 1.3x crop mode I don’t know if the D5300 shares this option. This gives you the same 2x crop factor as mFT. The Nikon 55-300mm is a very cheap low end lens so I wouldn’t expect miracles from it. High quality long telephoto zooms are invariably larger heavier and more expensive. So something has to give

On paper (and in the DPReview Studio Compare tool) the GX-8 seems to be the closest MFT camera yet to her D5300. But, when I compare the Dx0 lens scores of her Nikon lens (score 15, sharpness 9) to the Panny 100-300 (score 10, sharpness 5), it doesn't seem like she will be happy.

The lens scores are a combination of sensor + lens where the 24mp has an advanatge of the mainly 16mp mFT cameras. Many mFT lenses are excellent quality. The 100-300 is capable of very decent results I think a lot of casual shooters forget the impact of the effective focal length. This link gives good tips on how to get the best from the lens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgzLfLa2acA

The GX8 body is excellent, but the 100-300 is an acquired taste.  It requires a learning curve and it also requires and aperture of 7.1 when out at full extension.  If you do not support the lens from below with the left hand it can be a problem.  The OIS in the lens is very good if you learn to work with it.  At the present time, it is the best telephoto for wildlife which is offered by Panasonic.  There is another lens in the wind, but who knows when the 100-400 will become a reality...and how heavy it will be in weight and price.  I should add that I have gotten some very sharp shots at 300mm and I know that the lens is capable of d 'delivering'.

I'm sorry if I sound rude Trevor but I wont be giving up my d7200 for some of those shots. I am waiting to pair my gx8 to one one of the new teles before getting rid of the 'big' stuff. Personally and I stress personally I find there is a lack of feather detail that is available with the bigger systems. Here's hoping for the new lenses.

Are you shooting using C-AF or S-AF?

The 100-300mm problem occurs when shooting at rates over 2-4 fps using C-AF.  The type of diaphragm used in the older Panasonic lenses cannot open and close fast enough for high speed C-AF.

My 100-300mm could only shoot at 2-3 fps in C-AF mode which is why I changed it for the Olympus 75-300mm.

oldbaldeagle wrote:

I'm sorry if I sound rude Trevor but I wont be giving up my d7200 for some of those shots. I am waiting to pair my gx8 to one one of the new teles before getting rid of the 'big' stuff. Personally and I stress personally I find there is a lack of feather detail that is available with the bigger systems. Here's hoping for the new lenses.

No need to apologise. As I said above there are plenty of solutions better than mine just not at the weight that I carry with a total solution cost of < £1000.

Great point Trevor - stop looking at the specs and second opinions, start looking at the results. It's the user not the equipment that makes the image. Granted every camera/lens combo has strengths and limitations, but you have been producing images of this caliber back to the FZ50 + TCON days. Artist makes best use of the equipment, ain't the paintbrush that makes the artist.  For my aging back/neck and wallet FF never was an option, and I also have gotten some great images over the years with FZ and now mft equipment, at a great size/weight/cost balance.  I've been on birding walks/preserves next to someone with the FF Canon 100-400 white bazooka and my back just aches looking at it.  Yes, the feather detail is better, but I'm satisfied with what I carry and come home with.

On a related note I just ordered the German tripod collar for the 100-300 to be able to effectively use a tripod with central balance and get better stability.

Chris R-UK wrote:

Are you shooting using C-AF or S-AF?

The 100-300mm problem occurs when shooting at rates over 2-4 fps using C-AF. The type of diaphragm used in the older Panasonic lenses cannot open and close fast enough for high speed C-AF.

My 100-300mm could only shoot at 2-3 fps in C-AF mode which is why I changed it for the Olympus 75-300mm.

Good to know, since I have been shooting only in S-AF, and have been planning to try the C-AF setting this afternoon. I'll let you know how it works out with the E-M5II.

Thanks for the heads up....

Gary

I hate to be the Devil's Advocate, BUT.......I couldn't help point out that:

• Nikon D5300 is one of the smallest lightest DSLR ever produce
• Nikon 55-300mm is one of the smallest lightest 300mm zoom ever produce

then you go ahead and pick

• Panasonic GX8: one of the biggest/bulkiest m43 camera ever produce
• Panasonic 100-300: perhaps the bulkiest telephoto lens ever produce

I couldn't find the image of Nikon 55-300mm, but its only a tad longer than 55-200mm VR

Also keep in mind is much easier to shoot ACTION oriented BIF with an OVF in a DSLR than using EVF.  I would heavily advice you to look twice and consider a differnt M43 package instead.  For example: a smaller/lighter Panasonic G7 + vernearble Panasonic 45-200mm