We sometimes forget just how good m43 is! (It goes to 11)

This is not much more than a snapshot, but I thought I'd share it as I'm always staggered when the kit is able to deliver this sort of quality.

Below the snap, I'll say a bit about the conditions and the gear.

Charlie Salvidge - drummer of TOY, on the Castle Stage, Victorious Festival yesterday.

I don't have many decent shots of drummers.  They're usually far away, at the back of the stage, in the dark, hidden behind a battery of opaque percussion instruments.  And they move a lot.

This was late afternoon.  Most of the light came from the clear, blue sky (yes, I know, on an English bank holiday weekend!).

For shooting bands, you normally need to turn everything up to 11.  So, Panasonic 100-300mm at full stretch (300mm), and wide open (f/5.6).  ISO turned up as high as I dared (6400 on an EM-5.1).  And, with all of that, I was able to get a shutter speed of 1/1000s, which is fractionally slower than I'd choose, in an ideal world, to hand hold at this FL.  (I keep the OIS turned off, and use IBIS for this lens.)

I set the exposure to +1, as I usually prefer to ETTR.  I brought down one stop in LR, and tweaked the sliders a bit.

This is impressively sharp, and noise free, by my reckoning.  Particularly considering that this camera is now 5 years old, and the 100-300mm is not considered an exceptional performer, particularly at the long end.  It's a shot I could never have got with my OM4.  I'd happily print it A4, or even A3, if the 'artistic' merits had been better.

My 100-300 is sitting in the closet because I bought a 100-400.  Must admit I prefer the weight of the `100-300.

I put the 100-300 on Fred Miranda's site to sell it last week and there hasn't been one bite.  I'm wondering if people are resisting version 1 since version 2 came out.

Isabel

I agree with the post, and the picture is impressive for the situation.

I'd think that a slower shutter may give you a more artistic look as you described.  A lot of photos may be a mush of movement, but some might give you nice blurry hands with a reasonably sharp face.  That would of course also reduce the need for high ISO.

A fine capture, thank you for sharing. One does not often need to have the latest and greatest to get a good shot.

I do not have that camera, nor that particular lens. I do have the 100-300 f/4.0-f/5.6 II and have been pleased with its ability in shooting.

jennajenna wrote:

Isabel Cutler wrote:

My 100-300 is sitting in the closet because I bought a 100-400. Must admit I prefer the weight of the `100-300.

I put the 100-300 on Fred Miranda's site to sell it last week and there hasn't been one bite. I'm wondering if people are resisting version 1 since version 2 came out.

Isabel

what is the diff with vers 2?

I don't have v2 just v1.  But i believe the v2 has the same AF technology / motor as the 100-400 (which i do have), and its AF is *orders of magnitude* better than the 100-300 v1.  So, the usage is just a much more pleasant experience. v1 will focus hunt A LOT