G9 and Panasonic 100-300 II at the zoo

Not a lot wrong with these.

They look pretty good to me. However, I'd check the white balance as some of them appear to have a purple cast to them.

As someone considering buying that lens, what are your doubts about it?

I borrowed one for a brief test on my E-M1 II and thought centre image quality was good, even wide open. However one corner was soft. I also had bad CA in the soft corner, although my testing was limited and that could have been a co-incidence.

Overall pretty nice shots, but you have a pronounced magenta cast to almost all of them. Were you using AWB? I'd try a custom WB next time if you were.

These are very comparable to what I used to get out of my 100-300mm (first version).  (You can do quite a bit of careful sharpening in PP and they will look really great, by the way.)

I have the 100-400mm now, and love it, but the 100-300mm is no slouch if you are willing to do a little bit of work on the files in PP.  For more casual use, I'd say to stick with the 100-300mm, as it is smaller and can give you very good results if you use care in shooting technique and in processing the images.  The 100-400mm is wonderful, but it is bigger, and it requires good technique to get the most out of, especially at the long end.  The 100-300mm is easier to carry, and a lot cheaper, and may just fill the bill, especially if you don't need to shoot past 300mm or use it for close up shots (minimum focus distance in the 100-400mm is closer than the 100-300mm so I can also use it as an ersatz macro if I want to, where the 100-300mm just couldn't quite get close enough for that).

Enjoy it.  If you find you need more, the 100-400mm is always out there, but you may find the 100-300mm more than meets your needs.

-J

jalywol wrote:

Overall pretty nice shots, but you have a pronounced magenta cast to almost all of them. Were you using AWB? I'd try a custom WB next time if you were.

These are very comparable to what I used to get out of my 100-300mm (first version). (You can do quite a bit of careful sharpening in PP and they will look really great, by the way.)

I have the 100-400mm now, and love it, but the 100-300mm is no slouch if you are willing to do a little bit of work on the files in PP. For more casual use, I'd say to stick with the 100-300mm, as it is smaller and can give you very good results if you use care in shooting technique and in processing the images. The 100-400mm is wonderful, but it is bigger, and it requires good technique to get the most out of, especially at the long end. The 100-300mm is easier to carry, and a lot cheaper, and may just fill the bill, especially if you don't need to shoot past 300mm or use it for close up shots (minimum focus distance in the 100-400mm is closer than the 100-300mm so I can also use it as an ersatz macro if I want to, where the 100-300mm just couldn't quite get close enough for that).

Enjoy it. If you find you need more, the 100-400mm is always out there, but you may find the 100-300mm more than meets your needs.

-J

I was thinking the same, nice shots but the colors are just not as pleasing as i would have expected. Maybe some artificial lighting or iffy awb or maybe processing?