Olympus 100-400mm/5.0-6.3 IS - my review

I have seen this on quite a few pro zooms and  I have seen it on this 100-400 too: onions rings that are very harsh, much like pdreview tv shows and to me this ruins the pic and in  fact makes the Oly for me a no go.

I love my 100-400 when it comes to totall IQ.

And I missed that in your review but it is personal. What is not personal and a very clear advantage on the Panasonic is the 100 mm at f4.0. How is that not mentioned as clear pro.

Also: Panasonic does not allow Procapture? I think it is Oly that is not allowing Panasonic procapture. While it is an  advantage on an Oly cam it not a downside of the lens when a camera decides not to support some features on  nonnative lenses. and Oly ahs this tendency and it is may  be a reason for its downfall. Just so so compatibility much  like both brands not supporting eachothers Dual/SyncIS. restricting clients in  one mount to my mind is annoyting your customers and really a way  to keep them in...

It is a bit liek blaming the Oly lens for not doing so well on a G9 because Panasonics DFD is not taylored for the lens. The lens can do it, Panny refuses to support it (supposedly). And this is now a problem of the lens? I think not.

- It is not just the overal length, it seems the Oly also wider so it is just a bigger and heavier lens.

Not up to your usual standard I'd say.

acfo wrote:

Petr Bambousek wrote:

acfo wrote:

Petr Bambousek wrote:

Joe Lynch wrote:

Thanks for the review, Petr. I'm spoiled with the 300f4 so I will probably hold out for the 150-400 Pro lens, but this one looks much better for the current market than I could have hoped for. Very encouraging to see Olympus release new hardware. Maybe a substantial 1X firmware update is coming after all. Best to you, and keep up the good work.

Joe

Thank you, Joe. I fully understand your point of view. This lens is all-around midrange lens but very promising for upcoming 150-400 which I believe will be absolutely TOP in terms of sharpness and microdetail. And based on preproduction pictures it will also focus from 1.3m. In combination with announced Bird tracking I expect to be really interesting lens Just few corona more waves and it will be here

If it is an all-around midrange lens how would you say the Oly 75-300mm compares to it?

I don't know, never even hold in my hands

Pity.

So do I get the Pana Leica 100 to 400 because it is smaller and lighter, the Oly 100-400 because it has a blue ring or do I get the 300f4 because of the IQ?

All this choice is making me crazy... maybe I should wait an see what the Oly 150-400 is like.

Isn't it great to have so many good to great choices.   I already own the 300/4.0 and it has great image quality.  It is great when paired with the 12-40/2.8 and 40-150/2.8.  I am considering the new 100-400/5.0-6.3 to pair up with the 12-100/4.0 for a two lens kit.  This kit will be good for family outings and fitness walks out in nature where a longer lens might be nice.    I am still want the 150-400/4.5 for when I am out on a real wildlife outing.

-
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3571/3380136992_7c5a0986ea_m.jpg

Jorginho wrote:

I have seen this on quite a few pro zooms and I have seen it on this 100-400 too: onions rings that are very harsh, much like pdreview tv shows and to me this ruins the pic and in fact makes the Oly for me a no go.

I think it also depends on style of shooting and choosing right distant background, but yes, there are better options on the market

I love my 100-400 when it comes to totall IQ.

And I missed that in your review but it is personal.

I wrote something like it was better then random feedbacks I had before testing, but yes it is far from "I love it", niether I wrote to Oly 100-400

What is not personal and a very clear advantage on the Panasonic is the 100 mm at f4.0. How is that not mentioned as clear pro.

Good point. Thanks, you are right, I missed it as I have no reason to try this end of lens. Just added to my article.

Also: Panasonic does not allow Procapture? I think it is Oly that is not allowing Panasonic procapture. While it is an advantage on an Oly cam it not a downside of the lens when a camera decides not to support some features on nonnative lenses. and Oly ahs this tendency and it is may be a reason for its downfall. Just so so compatibility much like both brands not supporting eachothers Dual/SyncIS. restricting clients in one mount to my mind is annoyting your customers and really a way to keep them in...

I have no opportunity to try opposite (let say G9 and Oly lens) to find what is (if anything) blocked from Panasonic features. I tried to describe it in simple way not to dig deeper who's fault it is. Just described fact about funtionality.

It is a bit liek blaming the Oly lens for not doing so well on a G9 because Panasonics DFD is not taylored for the lens. The lens can do it, Panny refuses to support it (supposedly). And this is now a problem of the lens? I think not.

- It is not just the overal length, it seems the Oly also wider so it is just a bigger and heavier lens.

Yes, it is bigger and more heavier lens, no daubt.

To summ up I did my best to compare those lenses in relatively short period side by side in real life. My goal was not to cast a bad light on the panasonic lens (to be hones, I foud it to be very nice lens). There are always a number of points of view, so it is a good idea to take a lens physically in hand and try it to suit your investment in addition to reading reviews.

All the best.

Petr

Jorginho wrote:

Not up to your usual standard I'd say.

I processed the image in the same way as usual, I struggled with e.g. Laughtingthrush as there are lot of structures and it is hard to keep them all on this reduced sized images. This is also reason why I attached 27 full res pictures free to download.

Thx for your explanation, it is why I wasn't absolutistic and wrote I found them "looking" oversharpened because I did not see the full size so I was hesitant to say they "were oversharpened".

Sure it is personal. I did note how you were describing how the Oly zooms etc and that is a sure big pro over the Panny which tends to be ranging between very stiff and stiff depending on the copy.

I like your review and the loads of samples are things I miss with other reviewers more often than not. So this was not meant as criticism but, as you take it by the, way things I missed or things of which I wonder what you thought because I did not read it.

Thx again!

Auf Reisen wrote:

Petr Bambousek wrote:

Auf Reisen wrote:

Amazing shots as always, Petr.

Do I understand it correctly that you are saying that this lens is not offering Sync-IS with Olympus bodies? Or that the Sync-IS did not work as well as other lenses? Could that have to do with this being pre-production?

It is not IS synchro lens at all. I thought it was just sample lens "feature" but it is not officially synchronized (don't ask me why 😂).

If the people who say that this is a redesigned Sigma lens are correct, this may have something to do with it? I am wildly speculating here and have no evidence either way.

Attached on E-M1 III or E-M1 X it is 7EV vs 7,5EV difference so not big deal at all. But yes, once IS on the lens, why not allow sychro...

That is actually something I wondered about for some time now. It is common wisdom that lens IS is better than IBIS for long lenses. I wonder if that is just a relict from the times when other manufacturers had to defend the fact that they didn't have IBIS in their bodies or if there is something to it. Can anybody attest to that?

Based on comparing my PL 100-400..

On my E-M1 I, I found the lens OIS to be superior to the camera IBIS, on my E-M1 II they were equal, and now with the E-M1 III, I use the IBIS and forego the lens OIS. The current IBIS really is that good.

Jorginho wrote:

Sure it is personal. I did note how you were describing how the Oly zooms etc and that is a sure big pro over the Panny which tends to be ranging between very stiff and stiff depending on the copy.

I like your review and the loads of samples are things I miss with other reviewers more often than not. So this was not meant as criticism but, as you take it by the, way things I missed or things of which I wonder what you thought because I did not read it.

Thx again!

It is ok, I just tried to explain separately my point of view as you covered many topics.

Thanks for that.

Thank you for the time to put togheter the review, for the large size samples and for the comparison with the PL 100-400.

As I am shopping for an upgrade to the Oly 75-300mm, the information you have provided is very useful.

Thanks for posting. Good that there is now a wider choice.  If I were an Olympus user, this lens  would be the obvious choice for wildlife. The starting price, compared to the Panasonic, is attractive too and will, hopefully, move lower. 
As a Panasonic user, with the street price of their 100-400mm now at a more reasonable figure, the choice is now a little harder to make. Dual IS might well be the deciding factor. Irrelevant for me as I’ve had the Panasonic 100-400mm for over three years, bought as a grey import at a price that is only now being matched at U.K. special offer prices.

Overall, both lenses have very acceptable IQ and fantastic reach. Choice is good and it’ll be interesting to see if the Olympus option pushes Panasonic’s price down.

IQ is poor. Either the lens lacks sharpness or it's because of denoising. Can you share a full size image?

DeathArrow wrote:

IQ is poor. Either the lens lacks sharpness or it's because of denoising. Can you share a full size image?

LOL I love m43 haters Feel free to open my article, you will find package of full res images. Based on your anti-m43 feeling I don't expect will find anything interesting on those pictures either. But enjoy

Petr Bambousek wrote:

DeathArrow wrote:

IQ is poor. Either the lens lacks sharpness or it's because of denoising. Can you share a full size image?

LOL I love m43 haters Feel free to open my article, you will find package of full res images. Based on your anti-m43 feeling I don't expect will find anything interesting on those pictures either. But enjoy

I don't see any hate. I've just seen two low quality low res pictures posted here.

DeathArrow wrote:

Petr Bambousek wrote:

DeathArrow wrote:

IQ is poor. Either the lens lacks sharpness or it's because of denoising. Can you share a full size image?

LOL I love m43 haters Feel free to open my article, you will find package of full res images. Based on your anti-m43 feeling I don't expect will find anything interesting on those pictures either. But enjoy

I don't see any hate. I've just seen two low quality low res pictures posted here.

My comment was based on your recent forum activity not just from this particular comment "IQ is poor", "It might be the last Olympus camera." "No amount of interviews will resurrect Olympus." and I am not willing to continue Don't tell me you are Oly fan and REALLY interested what it can deliver instead of make yourself sure it can't deliver anything you like

Thanks Petr for your review. It was very helpful.

Can you tell me if you can use Handheld focus stacking, Handheld HiRes and Starry sky when this lens is connected to an EM1mIII? I can't so find that info.

Thanks.

Petr Bambousek wrote:

Sleepy Capybara wrote:

So my PL 100-400 is only 340mm on the long end. Reason enough for me to opt Olympus.

I was confused with that as well. It happens only at short focus distance about 3m.

This is focus breathing in action. It's a consequence of the fact that using small focusing group inside a lens changes focal length of the whole optical system to some degree. For example, Olympus 30mm Macro is in reality around 20mm at its maximum magnification. Panasonic 100-300 II is about 200mm on the long end when focused at the closest distance.

The Olympus 100-400 for sure is not 400mm at the closest focusing distance either. However, as you have demonstrated, it is definitely longer than Panasonic. Which is very good.

Either way, the close focusing capability of this new Olympus is a big selling point to me. And a big reason to pair it with a teleconverter (which increases magnification without impacting minimal focus distance).