Panasonic G9 or a 100-400 lens

Eightace wrote:

I currently have a GX9 and the 100-300ii.

I'm massively into wildlife photography and i thought both the lens and G9 would improve that, even if not by a huge amount.

...

I really want both but i just hate spending so much at once I will probably end up with both so i should just get them now. But i won't.

I used a GX9 for a week. I mounted my 100-400mm lens a couple of times just to prove that the small body can be used with a large lens if I support the lens in my left palm. Then, all my right hand does is steady the camera and click.

I photographed wildlife only once:

Since you don't want to purchase both at the moment, get the lens and become accustomed to using it. Later, you can get the newer camera you want.

Hi,

Get the lens.

I have the Pana-Leica 100-400 since the Summer when before I had the Pana 100-300 II and it's a good improvement for wildlife. You'll always want more zoom and better quality, but the 100-400 is a very good step-up.

A Carolina Wren taken with the GX85 + 100-400 Pana/Leica.

Regards,

Fran

JasonTheBirder wrote:

Lens first, always. The 100-400 will improve your photography much more than the G9. 300 on a 20mp micro four thirds is too short in my opinion and the 100-300 is weak at 300.

With birding there is no way around getting a long lens. However, I really do suggest you post the shots you don't like for evaluation because there may also be some basic technique that could be improved also.

Jason is absolutely correct, there is literally no way to get around getting an long lens regardless of format for birding. Not unless you have all your birds, trained to pose.😉

I do go to a bird feeder out in the countryside but even then I need to crop as they only let you get so close.

Usually though I can crop and get nice images. The extra reach will only help.

When times are tough bird wise, I go there as they are guaranteed. Its not the same as coming across them on a walk though.

They do actually pose at this bird feeder 😀

Eightace wrote:

I do go to a bird feeder out in the countryside but even then I need to crop as they only let you get so close.

Usually though I can crop and get nice images. The extra reach will only help.

When times are tough bird wise, I go there as they are guaranteed. Its not the same as coming across them on a walk though.

They do actually pose at this bird feeder 😀

I don't have any problem with folks using their bird feeder then take full advantage to get far closer. I however won't use them. It's just against my DNA an the natural order of things, mostly. That's just an personal thing for me.

I do however have an multitude of fruit trees an others that attract birds. But good luck with any decent pose most times as they move among branches an or leaves. But every once in an while, they do seem to pose for us, regardless of bird feeders. I think sometimes they check us out just as much as we do them on occasion.

Went out today. Stopped by a bird feeder place to get some guaranteed opportunities as the last two days i haven't had much luck.

Luckily i'm not proud and its not against my dna lol.

Couldn't quite get close enough to the nuthatch so had to crop and the yellowhammer was the most skittish bird i've ever seen. Got probably two decent ones out of a fair few.

A couple of birds i did photograph away from the bird feeder using my own tracking skill

The nuthatch and yellow hammer i struggled to pin down and i did have to crop.

What i did realize was that the 100-300 is so light and easy to swing about and zoom in and out with. I think the 400mm will take some getting used to.

I'm going to get the lens as everyone says it's sharper and there are many times the range will really be nice. But i think i'll still definitely keep hold of the 300mm.

Eightace wrote:

Went out today. Stopped by a bird feeder place to get some guaranteed opportunities as the last two days i haven't had much luck.

Luckily i'm not proud and its not against my dna lol.

Couldn't quite get close enough to the nuthatch so had to crop and the yellowhammer was the most skittish bird i've ever seen. Got probably two decent ones out of a fair few.

A couple of birds i did photograph away from the bird feeder using my own tracking skill

The nuthatch and yellow hammer i struggled to pin down and i did have to crop.

What i did realize was that the 100-300 is so light and easy to swing about and zoom in and out with. I think the 400mm will take some getting used to.

I'm going to get the lens as everyone says it's sharper and there are many times the range will really be nice. But i think i'll still definitely keep hold of the 300mm.

Thanks for sharing. Nice photos by the way. I already have an Alpha 6600- APS-C but have yet to buy an proper long lens for it. I hope you didn't take the bird feeder comment as an bad thing. I enjoy photos presented regardless.

Buying an proper long lens for my Sony, I could get instead the G9 plus your Panasonic 100-300 ii. I was always curious about how well the Panasonic 100-300 ii might perform an your shots have given me an better idea.

The red-breasted nuthatch and the white-breasted nuthatch. I know for certain that I have the white nuthatch. Daily I also get the titmouse and the black capped chickadee. They seem to love the Pecan Trees in my front yard. Without the proper focal length, at least for me, consistently getting an good shot is an challenge. Like you stated, I think the weight advantage helps compared to other lens. Nice job, again.

No i took it like you meant.

Part of it for me is the searching for them. Then you have the struggle with the bird that jumps about like a flea.

But if i want good opportunities there are a couple of decent places.

Believe it or not the bird feeder isn't as easy as you'd imagine.

I'm not camo'd up and you can't really get close enough with a 600mm without cropping most of the time.

Yes i can get the goldfinches and blue tits that are glued to the seed dispenser but the others, not so easy.

The blackbird i got sneaking about in thick woods. There were a few branches between it and me and it knew i was there. One photo i have is of of it scowling at me like they do.

I just usually use it at 300mm. People say its not as sharp there but i'm not sure using at 250 and cropping even more is the answer.

It wasn't a particularly great day light wise. Its capable of more on sunny days. Bargain for the £380 i paid in used/excellent condition.

But i'm still after the 400mm. Just got to order it when i know i'll be in or it will get left next to my door

Eightace wrote:

Anybody had experience of going from GX9 to G9 or the 300mm to the 400mm?

I've never had the 100-300 but have the GX9, G9 and 100-400.  Since you're very much into bird photography I think it's an easy suggestion to get the lens first.  I think it'll provide the biggest improvement in that endeavour.

I've used my GX9 (and GX7) with my 100-400 a few times and it's not a terrible experience but obviously not as comfortable or effective as the G9 (faster AF, better stabilization, better grip & EVF, etc).

BTW I find that, due to the slow-ish max aperture of the 100-400 and long focal length, you'll often find yourself shooting at higher ISOs.  DxO's DeepPrime noise reduction is a great way to improve high ISO results and also getting better colour saturation.  You have to shoot in raw mode, though.

Yeah i just discovered it.

Got 19 days left of the trial but going to buy it this week as its 50% off i believe.

One thing i noticed with the GX9 is that i keep knocking the aperture dial.

Today i suddenly realized i was at F8 when i thought i was at 5.6.

I like the lighter smaller body but i do eventually want two MFT cameras.

But i think if you master the camera (i haven't yet) you can't do anything if the subject is too far.

Eightace wrote:

Yeah i just discovered it.

Got 19 days left of the trial but going to buy it this week as its 50% off i believe.

Yes, now's a good time to buy.

One thing i noticed with the GX9 is that i keep knocking the aperture dial.

Today i suddenly realized i was at F8 when i thought i was at 5.6.

Aperture dial?  You mean on the lens? If you can't train yourself to stop bumping it, you can always disable the lens's aperture ring (assuming it's a Panasonic lens).

I like the lighter smaller body but i do eventually want two MFT cameras.

I've found that to be best for me, too.  One lightweight RF style, and a larger, better performing SLR style.

But i think if you master the camera (i haven't yet) you can't do anything if the subject is too far.

That's true, too.  Finding the subject and getting close enough for a decent photo is where the hard work lies.

No i mean the rear dial next to the thumb grip.

I must knock it a few notches ,maybe when i'm panning right or carrying the camera with it still switched on.

Not often but i did it a few times today.

Since part of what you say is a problem, not getting close enough, perhaps it is time to consider a blind, especially when you are trying feeder birds but works for all.  The 100-400 will still help but then you will not be so obvious to the birds.  Also, remember that at 400mm (800mm crop), it will be harder to find the bird and harder to keep the bird in the finder.

Glenn JK wrote:

Since part of what you say is a problem, not getting close enough, perhaps it is time to consider a blind, especially when you are trying feeder birds but works for all. The 100-400 will still help but then you will not be so obvious to the birds. Also, remember that at 400mm (800mm crop), it will be harder to find the bird and harder to keep the bird in the finder.

I have considered dressing a bit more stealthily. But i do most of my wildlife photography by chance as i go on regular 5-8 mile walks

One place i go actually has hides. I don't know if 800mm will always be enough but its tough luck if it isn't. At least i have that option.

I'm sure i'll enjoy the lens.

Eightace wrote:

No i mean the rear dial next to the thumb grip.

I must knock it a few notches ,maybe when i'm panning right or carrying the camera with it still switched on.

Not often but i did it a few times today.

Funny -- the reason I like those easy-to-turn dials is that they don't change anything when the camera is off.  The difference is that I compulsively turn my camera off all the time (which is also why I value cameras with a fast on/off time).  With something like my LX100 or my X100V, I've accidentally changed the dedicated click-stop dials while the camera was off and it caused me to miss some photo ops.

AdaTiada wrote:

Add Lumix Leica 50-200 plus TC 2x add your list.

You will get about par with 100-400 and without TC you could use it for portrait and middle tele with excellent quality for 50-200, including better low light wildlife photos.

No, not really. 
I have owned the 50-200mm and the 100-400mm, and the 50-200mm is indeed a fabulous lens, even with the TC 1.4X. With the 1.4 TC, which maxes out at 280mm, you can do very well with the 50-200mm...but the OP wants to go longer than what he has now (300mm) so it is not the optimal choice for his purposes.

Unfortunately, with the TC 2X, you have to stop down to f10 to get reliably sharp images without chromatic aberration when you are out at the long end, so at 400mm, you are a lot slower than than with the 100-400mm (which has a max aperture of 6.3, and is sharp at it)

For shooting at 400mm, the 100-400mm is definitely a better choice.

-J