Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Next PZ lens test report: Panasonic LUMIX G VARIO 100-300mm f/4-5.6 MEGA O.I.S.
#1
Hi Zoners,



here is the [url="http://www.opticallimits.com/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/684-pana100300"]Panasonic LUMIX G VARIO 100-300mm f/4-5.6 MEGA O.I.S.[/url] review...



...comments are welcome.



Sebastian
#2
Thanks Sebbi,





A bit disappointing performances in the end. The general idea I had reading other reviews was that it was noticeably better than the 45-200.



Just two comments,



I think a size comparison would have been more appropriate with the 45-200, but I guess you didn't have one handy.



Regarding build quality. I've read that very often of other panasonic lenses that they are good build quality. I've posted about this before but will say again.

Owning the 20mm, the 14-45 & the 45-200, I think theses lenses have decent out of the factory build but they all suffer from two things :

-tangible loosening over time. Not specially a long time. And I'm careful. Very careful.

-high influence of operating temperature. The lenses will tighten considerably in the 0-5°C range and inversely above 25°C to a point where their functionality is slightly compromised. I have never witnessed such tangible tightening/loosening with any of my other canon gear (Even the crap build of the EF-S 17-55mm).



These are probably hard to spot in a short term review but they make the lenses qualitative feeling go down a notch or two, IMHO. After all, how can the lens keep a proper centering if it's so easily wearing out? Still, relative to Olympus plastic MFT lenses, they are indeed better, but in absolute terms, I'd rather use "decent" than "very good".



The 20mm for instance, is actually very weak. I had mine hit a metallic part once and it made a dent quite deep and dislodged the drive mechanics, revealing a grossly glued on plastic ring. It fixed by pushing it back in place with a click. It's still as sharp and functionnal but so much for the build quality feeling. I know they're aiming at a pricepoint but hey, aren't panasonic lenses already considered expensive ?



Maybe this 100-300 is an exception but it looks like the same build levels.

Just something to keep in mind while assessing their build quality?



Hoping to see proper "engineering" in the new 12-35 & 35-100 lenses.



Thanks again,

S.
#3
[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1321825153' post='13075']

Thanks Sebbi,



Much appreciated as I'm looking for something else than the 45-200 bottle glass. Let's read this...

[/quote]



ooops, I hope you won't be disappointed than <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Rolleyes' />
#4
[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1321825153' post='13075']

Thanks Sebbi,





A bit disappointing performances in the end. The general idea I had reading other reviews was that it was noticeably better than the 45-200.



Just two comments,



I think a size comparison would have been more appropriate with the 45-200, but I guess you didn't have one handy.



Regarding build quality. I've read that very often of other panasonic lenses that they are good build quality. I've posted about this before but will say again.

Owning the 20mm, the 14-45 & the 45-200, I think theses lenses have decent out of the factory build but they all suffer from two things :

-tangible loosening over time. Not specially a long time. And I'm careful. Very careful.

-high influence of operating temperature. The lenses will tighten considerably in the 0-5°C range and inversely above 25°C to a point where their functionality is slightly compromised. I have never witnessed such tangible tightening/loosening with any of my other canon gear (Even the crap build of the EF-S 17-55mm).



These are probably hard to spot in a short term review but they make the lenses qualitative feeling go down a notch or two, IMHO. After all, how can the lens keep a proper centering if it's so easily wearing out? Still, relative to Olympus plastic MFT lenses, they are indeed better, but in absolute terms, I'd rather use "decent" than "very good".



The 20mm for instance, is actually very weak. I had mine hit a metallic part once and it made a dent quite deep and dislodged the drive mechanics, revealing a grossly glued on plastic ring. It fixed by pushing it back in place with a click. It's still as sharp and functionnal but so much for the build quality feeling. I know they're aiming at a pricepoint but hey, aren't panasonic lenses already considered expensive ?



Maybe this 100-300 is an exception but it looks like the same build levels.

Just something to keep in mind while assessing their build quality?



Hoping to see proper "engineering" in the new 12-35 & 35-100 lenses.



Thanks again,

S.

[/quote]





Hi Sylvain,



thanks for your detailed comment - it's very much appreciated! This is exacttly what I'm looking for as we can't provide "long term" reviews. I promise that I will keep it in mind for the upcoming reviews...



...by the way - If you could could choose - Panasonic 45-175 or Olympus 45mm?



Bye,



Sebastian
#5
Olympus 45mm for sure. One has been shipped to me and is awaiting for me at home <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='Smile' />. Eager to try.



Being an olympus shooter, I'm not sure yet with the 45-175. Lately, the MFT "standard" has hit the dirt with more and more "incompatible" features than ever. It seems the OIS of the 45-175 is disabled on Olympus cameras and that it then relies on the IBIS. I have to check that fact, if it is true, it's a no go. Sadly, there's no physical switch anymore to counter this. But I sure like the size & shape of the 45-175 x and its apparently decent performance (when there's no vibration issue).
#6
[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1321865481' post='13089']It seems the OIS of the 45-175 is disabled on Olympus cameras and that it then relies on the IBIS. I have to check that fact, if it is true, it's a no go.[/quote]



Is IBIS that bad?
#7
Not that it's bad, but it doesn't stabilize the aiming. At anything above 80mm, it gets annoying.
#8
[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1321874125' post='13097']

Not that it's bad, but it doesn't stabilize the aiming. At anything above 80mm, it gets annoying.

[/quote]

Does Olympus only stabilize during the actual exposure?
#9
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1321874801' post='13099']

Does Olympus only stabilize during the actual exposure?

[/quote]



Yes
#10
[quote name='Sylvain' timestamp='1321877619' post='13102']

Yes

[/quote]



Ouch ... why that?



-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)