Panasonic 100-400mm List Of Maximum Aperture Value Video

This might help people wanting to compare the Panasonic 100-400mm aperture at each focal distance to their own MFT lenses. The Panasonic is only a F4.6 at 150mm vs the Olympus 150mm pro at F2.8  Panasonic 100-400mm List Of Maximum Aperture Value At Every Focal Distance

Why do you need a video to get this information? A simple text table would be better.

hindesite wrote:

Tim Love wrote:

This might help people wanting to compare the Panasonic 100-400mm aperture at each focal distance to their own MFT lenses. The Panasonic is only a F4.6 at 150mm vs the Olympus 150mm pro at F2.8

Terrible!

But what is the m.Zuiko like at 400mm?

Maybe we'll know later this year once it is officially released.

hindesite wrote:

Tim Love wrote:

This might help people wanting to compare the Panasonic 100-400mm aperture at each focal distance to their own MFT lenses. The Panasonic is only a F4.6 at 150mm vs the Olympus 150mm pro at F2.8

Terrible!

But what is the m.Zuiko like at 400mm?

Expensive.

Tim Love wrote:

This might help people wanting to compare the Panasonic 100-400mm aperture at each focal distance to their own MFT lenses. The Panasonic is only a F4.6 at 150mm vs the Olympus 150mm pro at F2.8 Panasonic 100-400mm List Of Maximum Aperture Value At Every Focal Distance

Why are you comparing apples against oranges. The subject lenses are totally different! How does your Olympus 150mm Pro 2,8 perform at 400mm?????? Sorry but your comparisons lack logic.

Bryan wrote:

Tim Love wrote:

This might help people wanting to compare the Panasonic 100-400mm aperture at each focal distance to their own MFT lenses. The Panasonic is only a F4.6 at 150mm vs the Olympus 150mm pro at F2.8 Panasonic 100-400mm List Of Maximum Aperture Value At Every Focal Distance

Why are you comparing apples against oranges. The subject lenses are totally different! How does your Olympus 150mm Pro 2,8 perform at 400mm?????? Sorry but your comparisons lack logic.

Darn, I was going to post the very same thing but you beat me to it. 

I think these idle, illogical pis***g contests are starting to wear me down and affect my usually lively and youthful (!) disposition...

How about a nice FF/Fuji vs µ4/3 debate for a change?

Oh interesting 300mm is F5.7 that's only a tad slower than the 40-150 F2.8 with the MC-20 when it comes out.  Right?

AshleyMC wrote:

magnesus3 wrote:

Why do you need a video to get this information? A simple text table would be better.

Here you are:

100mm f4

110mm f4.2

124mm f4.4

150mm f4.6

167mm f4.7

180mm f5.8

200mm f5

250mm f5.4

300mm f5.7

350mm f5.9

400mm f6.3

So quite linear and reasonable.

(Hope Olympus will show a similar lens since my PL100-400 broke and I am afraid to buy a second one, especially because it had too many flaws even when it was working - stiff zoom, shaving off mount etc.).

Thanks for taking the time to type the list above. Reasonable, as you said.

BTW, PL 12-60/2.8-4 is f/2.8 at 12mm ONLY. Get 12-35/2.8 of you want constant f/2.8.

Hmm feeling bad about your problems with PL 100-400. The zoom ring on mine is not stiff at all -- firmer than most zoom rings on other lenses, but not annoyingly stiff. It's the first time I heard of the mount shaving off -- perhaps I use the lens with Panasonic G9 and GX8, not with an Olympus OM-D body?

There have been numerous reports of this lens not mounting well on the Oly EM1.2. Some people force it, resulting in metal shavings ending up inside the body.

I've bought/tried about 6 or 7. Most did not fit. In fact, in a visit to a camera store I tried the Panny 100-400 on my body (too tight) and a store demo. The salesman forced it and had to clean inside the body!

The lenses that did fit had a very stiff zoom (such that I had to hold the lens and twist the camera), and one had problems focusing consistently on stationary objects (plus the stiff zoom).

I know some people rave about this lens. I certainly went above and beyond to get a suitable copy.

I recommend trying the copy before purchase or make sure you can live with the return policy. It's about $35 to ship, which adds up if you have to send a copy or two back.

Panasonic's decision not to repair this lens has also generated negative reaction by others, who seem to feel it's disposable after the warranty runs out.

I'm awaiting the Oly 150-400.

Mark Ransom wrote:

hindesite wrote:

Tim Love wrote:

This might help people wanting to compare the Panasonic 100-400mm aperture at each focal distance to their own MFT lenses. The Panasonic is only a F4.6 at 150mm vs the Olympus 150mm pro at F2.8

Terrible!

But what is the m.Zuiko like at 400mm?

Expensive.

And non-existent... The OPl AFAIK, is talking about the 40-150 F2.8 Pro which will never go to 400 even with the help of a 2x TC. As for the upcoming 150-400 F4.5, yes it IS going to be expensive ... but is not F2.8.

It would be fun to see the size, weight and price of an eventual (!) 150-400 F2.8 though...

Well, I have been catching a lot of crap for posting this thread.  The video is not mine. I just saw it on youtube and remembered people asking about the f-stops on the 100-400mm so I thought it might help someone out.  As for why they didn't just put up the f-stops in text, well it's on youtube so how would you do that?

I posted the link to the video because they went to the trouble to make it and do all the work.  I had the respect for someone else to not just steal their work by coping and pasting the results on here like others have and then complain about them making a video that produced the info.

Tim Love wrote:

Well, I have been catching a lot of crap for posting this thread. The video is not mine. I just saw it on youtube and remembered people asking about the f-stops on the 100-400mm so I thought it might help someone out. As for why they didn't just put up the f-stops in text, well it's on youtube so how would you do that?

I posted the link to the video because they went to the trouble to make it and do all the work. I had the respect for someone else to not just steal their work by coping and pasting the results on here like others have and then complain about them making a video that produced the info.

I hope you didn't think I was complaining about your original post when I complained about it being a video. You're right, it's useful information. Nor was I asking you or anyone else to plagiarize someone else's work.

It was just a more general comment on the state of the internet. Everything has to be a video these days, even things which are obviously better in another format.

Mark Ransom wrote:

Tim Love wrote:

Well, I have been catching a lot of crap for posting this thread. The video is not mine. I just saw it on youtube and remembered people asking about the f-stops on the 100-400mm so I thought it might help someone out. As for why they didn't just put up the f-stops in text, well it's on youtube so how would you do that?

I posted the link to the video because they went to the trouble to make it and do all the work. I had the respect for someone else to not just steal their work by coping and pasting the results on here like others have and then complain about them making a video that produced the info.

I hope you didn't think I was complaining about your original post when I complained about it being a video. You're right, it's useful information. Nor was I asking you or anyone else to plagiarize someone else's work.

It was just a more general comment on the state of the internet. Everything has to be a video these days, even things which are obviously better in another format.

No really what you said but from the next comment on down it turned into a Pana 100-400mm bashing thread. That's one of the reasons I don't start many threads on this forum anymore.