100-300 Panasonic not as Sharp as i wanted

Carlo11 wrote:

Thanks! I haven’t done Much tests. Here are Some samples shots (almost) wilde open and with bigger f-stops. I dont see much difference (a good thing😀)

F 5.3

F8

F9

F5.6

Tests of the mkii show that the peak sharpness is at F7. With your shots at F5.6 and F9, you have straddled the peak very nicely

More informative would be shots at F5.6, F6.3, F7.1, F8 (at 300mm)

The other point to note is that sharpness at center is typically the best. Where the lens starts to fail first is at the corners, and the edges (measure midway between two corners).

However, the depth of field is quite narrow wide open, and the fieold of focus is typically not flat.

Option 1) Oject with a flat surface - BUT the lens should be postioned exactly at right angles to the surface

Option 2) Use one smaller defined object (like your soup can label).

2.1 point the lens center at the object and fix the focus; take image(s)

2.2 Rotate the camera slightly so that the object falls at the edge of the image; take image(s).

2.3 Refocus on the object with the object positioned at image edge; fix focus; take image(s)

2.4 Rotate the camera so that the object is at image center; take image(s)

Now you will see the effects sharpness fall off from center to edge, as well as the effect of object plane curvature.

BTW in your deer picture I observe the deer's butt is in perfect focus. Not so much the eyes.:-D  (done that, got the T-shirt)

joeletx wrote:

Because F8.0 is more than adequate for m43 cropped factor is 2.

Yeah, I believed that nonsense when I started shooting with my 100-300. Learned it the hard way how wrong this mantra is.

Carlo11 wrote:

Hallo, First contribution To this site! I have bought The Panasonic 100-300 mii in combination with a G80. Here are Some pictures. It lacks real sharpness in my opinion. I keep Shutter speed fast enough to reduce motion blur. And use AFS and 1-area for focussing. Any thoughts?

F6.3 1/640 iso 640

The fact that you got that bird in focus through all of those branches is quite a feat in itself.

F8 1/640 iso 400

Looks perfectly fine to me.

F7.1 1/2000 iso 800

Overexposed a bit. The bright parts all blend to white. The raw file might still contain recoverable detail there, but on the JPEG it's all gone.

F11 1/640 iso 2500

Again, perfectly fine apart from the clipped highlights. Maybe the ISO should have been a bit lower.

Note, out-of-camera JPEGs at high ISO will have pretty heavy handed noise reduction (note how there's barely any trace of noise in your last shot, which is completely unrealistic at ISO 1250). This nicely gets rid of noise but also removes a lot of detail. If you like shooting JPEG, I would suggest dialing down noise reduction settings to minimum value (it's still going to be there) and maybe bump the sharpening a bit (but note that sharpening can make noise more visible). When shooting RAW, you have a lot more control and can apply more sophisticated and more selective noise reduction and sharpening.

And keep in mind that lighting plays a big role in how much "detail" you will see in a photo.

And often, when shooting at long distances, heat haze will get in your way as well. Not an issue in those photos, though. Just something to keep in mind. Especially when shooting over water.

And finally, the 100-300 is not a high end premium lens, don't expect it to deliver the sharpness of a $2500 prime. The good news is, your copy looks perfectly fine.

I have the same combo and i discovered that at 250-300mm F7.1 F8 helps to keep up the DoF sharpnes. Diffraction isn't your problem at that focal length so even F9 or good havens god forbit F11.

On horizontal shots of birds on the grass at 300mm you notice the dof limitation the most. I try to keep it f8 as long as i can.( for longer focal length.

the focus i mostly use  single box. pin point, the little plus, is less usefull. you can use backbutton focuslock to avoid mis focus due your own wobbling at 300mm.

It's softer at 300mm then 270mm but just a bit.

So 280mm and some feed zoom is better then lazy 300mm. 😋

As shuttertime. In the old day's it was 1/focallength as guideline. The dual IS2 helps to get slower shutterspeeds but not for motionblur as moving leafs or animals.

And indeed with raw you have more wigglespace.

-2EV underexposure for bumping shutterspeed for instance or keeping ISO down.

Manual sharpening and much better auto lens modules in the software.

Mind you that editing RAW is not somthing you learn in a week. Shoot jpeg plus raw so you have a example, a benchmark.

I still do so i can use 1,4x EZ modes and other jpeg depending features in the G80. Just throw the ooc jpegs away after a quick look.

I think every Panasonic camera ships with Silkypix on a disk.  That is a free (for Panasonic owners) Raw developing program.

If you get really hooked on shooting raw (I did) you can pay $9.99 a month to Adobe and get Photoshop and Lightroom (or Lightroom Classic, my pick) on subscription.  Benefit: auto update, you'll always be current.  Downsides: 1) You will have to buy a book : I recommend "Adobe Lightoom CC and Photoshop CC for photographers".   It's from 2017 and what they refer to as Lightroom CC is now called Lightroom Classic.  This is the "Official training workbook from Adobe" it says, and I believe it. I've learned useful things from it and refer back to it.   Lightroom and (especially) Photoshop have a learning curve, and if you want to Edit in Photoshop from Lightroom and get a Raw image back (amazingly, not the default) this book will tell you how to make that happen.   2) $9.99 a month.

1st image is a miss. I'm quite familiar with those 

#2 is sharpest where the neck joins the body. Was this a focus and recompose? Or perhaps you cropped for composition.

#3&4 look pretty good and about what I'd expect from this lens.

Here's a thread I started a week or so ago on the P100-300mm: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/63992888

This was using a G85 - which I happen to adore - shooting fine jpg, NR -5, sharpening was at 0 I believe. They were adjusted lightly in post, selective sharpening, and cropped for composition.

The common factor shared by all the photos is that none were taken from a great distance. That makes a big difference with a lens like the 100-300. These are all cropped, some fairly severely, but I had enough good pixels to work with mainly from a close in subject distance.

If you want distance tele work with high IQ you're going to need a traditional style prime and a top shelf sensor. Or you can save a bundle by refining your tele lens technique and trying to get closer to your subjects. The 100-300 is an excellent lens for this kind of work. I'm trying to further my hand holding technique under field conditions so I can use slower shutter speeds thus keeping ISO values down. Minimizing noise improves the quality of your files thus making your inevitable crops look better.

I'm far from an expert so take these comments as they are intended... from one enthusiast to another. You have a very good camera and a nice all around tele lens for the natural world. The three of you will only get better with time in the field.

Carlo11 wrote:

spike29 wrote:

I have the same combo and i discovered that at 250-300mm F7.1 F8 helps to keep up the DoF sharpnes. Diffraction isn't your problem at that focal length so even F9 or good havens god forbit F11.

On horizontal shots of birds on the grass at 300mm you notice the dof limitation the most. I try to keep it f8 as long as i can.( for longer focal length.

the focus i mostly use single box. pin point, the little plus, is less usefull. you can use backbutton focuslock to avoid mis focus due your own wobbling at 300mm.

It's softer at 300mm then 270mm but just a bit.

So 280mm and some feed zoom is better then lazy 300mm. 😋

As shuttertime. In the old day's it was 1/focallength as guideline. The dual IS2 helps to get slower shutterspeeds but not for motionblur as moving leafs or animals.

And indeed with raw you have more wigglespace.

-2EV underexposure for bumping shutterspeed for instance or keeping ISO down.

Manual sharpening and much better auto lens modules in the software.

Mind you that editing RAW is not somthing you learn in a week. Shoot jpeg plus raw so you have a example, a benchmark.

I still do so i can use 1,4x EZ modes and other jpeg depending features in the G80. Just throw the ooc jpegs away after a quick look.

Thanks! So much response to this sample Photo’s! time to learn RAW editing...

jpeg + RAW is a good suggestion. I Wil do that. Will take time to learn. Any tips on an RAW editing programme? ( paid of free)

LIghtroom?

If you are a newbe, first user, don't go flatout on a expensive imidiatly.

SILKYPIX is tailored for Panasonic g80 in a matter it can read some camerasettings and can use ires and idyn settings. I asked and unfortunatly they don't bring out a Brand selective release. I don't know but i think you can download a panasonic SE version for free to get a peek in the world of raw.

Me i use DxOPL elite suite.

M43 and there optical module and prime(denoise) makes me happy.

There are many applications in many price levels.

Start "cheap" and see what you like and don't like.

Use that to home in on your preferred main development product.

AdamT wrote:

Nothing wrong with those whatsoever for a lens which is a 1st generation design and can be bought for as little as just over £200 secondhand ......

I`ve seen worse examples from the expensive PanaLeica 100-400 (which has a very Polarised reputation)

Is the 100-400 not worth buying?

Wigelii wrote:

AdamT wrote:

Nothing wrong with those whatsoever for a lens which is a 1st generation design and can be bought for as little as just over £200 secondhand ......

I`ve seen worse examples from the expensive PanaLeica 100-400 (which has a very Polarised reputation)

Is the 100-400 not worth buying?

opinion on whether its worth the money is polarised also whether or not its sharp at 400mm wideopen given that it`s already 1/3 of a stop too slow at F6.3 (even F5,6 is starting into diffraction) and not exactly cheap at £1100

I have no personal opinion on it, I live in the UK where its dull 90% of the time, F2.8 rules here - LOL

AdamT wrote:

Wigelii wrote:

AdamT wrote:

Nothing wrong with those whatsoever for a lens which is a 1st generation design and can be bought for as little as just over £200 secondhand ......

I`ve seen worse examples from the expensive PanaLeica 100-400 (which has a very Polarised reputation)

Is the 100-400 not worth buying?

opinion on whether its worth the money is polarised also whether or not its sharp at 400mm wideopen given that it`s already 1/3 of a stop too slow at F6.3 (even F5,6 is starting into diffraction) and not exactly cheap at £1100

I have no personal opinion on it, I live in the UK where its dull 90% of the time, F2.8 rules here - LOL

Same here in Belgium (that's in Europe 😉)

-- hide signature --

** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

The one with no goverment?

We ,north of you , offer a change to be free and be "brabant zuid"  😂

Or you live in the south part then your eh  bound to a larger type of Europain country.