Panasonic Leica 100-400mm and Panasonic Lumix 100-300mm mk II comparaison for wildlife photography

[@ronjopp7169]

I tried out both lenses and had similar results like you mention. I decided to go for the 100-300 for three reasons. First the weight. The 100-400 is twice as heavy as the 100-300. I went from full frame gear to MFT because my FF gear had become too bulky and heavy for my trips. The 100-400 would have been a challenge to bring along on all my trips. Second reason was the price. The 100-400 is more than double the price of the 100-300. The third reason has to do with a combination of factors. I would have been inclined to go for the 100-400 if the image quality would have been a big leap up from the 100-300, if it had been stellar compared to the 100-300. But the difference is modest and the main difference lies in a bit more 'softness' at the long end of the 100-300, while the 100-400 also becomes softer in the 300-400 range. This 'softness' is a known issue with longer MFT lenses with higher F-numbers. It is probably diffraction related. The beauty of this is that this kind of softness can easily be sharpened in the right image processing. There are some excellent sharpening tools available that produce ultra sharp images without any or very minute deterioration penalties. So basicly for the 100-400 I would have to pay twice the price, cary double the weight just for the extra 100mm reach while in that range the lens performs its worst. The 100-300 was the most logical choice for me. Even at 300mm it produces images that can easily be processed to look ultra sharp. Good enough for me.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Ron, Nice to hear from you again and thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and observations in such a detailed manner. This is what this channel is all about, I field test different things, report on my observations and share them with the group to get a discussion going so that we can collectively learn from each other. You bring some very valuable points, but I must admit that because I absolutely try my best to disturb the wildlife as little as possible I am somewhat of a "longest possible focal length" fan hence my interestin the 100-400mm. This having been said I have kept both lens and use them in different ways. The 100-400mm is my go-to lens for day hikes and traveling when weight and space aren't restricted but when going on multi-day backpacking excursions in the backcountry the 100-300mm is my go-to lens because of the quality, light weight and how small it is. Cheers,

[@gaylonh7889]

Nothing better than a real world demonstration of lens & camera. Thank you for taking the time and effort to do this.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Gaylon, Thank you very for your positive feedback it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in my videos. Cheers,

[@rvnmedic2709]

I watched a couple of your videos on the lenses and I must say I really like your style and presentation. No theatrics, great content, excellent pace and wonderful sample photos and videos. I am definitely subscribing and look forward to future videos. Thanks. You also helped me make a decision on which lens to buy.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Bruce, Thanks for the positive feedback it's always very much appreciated. I try to make the videos that I would like to see. I test, observe and report trying to understand or verify for myself certain precise points without losing track of the bigger picture. My end goal is always to try get a discussion started on nature photography related topics so that we can all learn from each other. I'm glad to hear that my videos were of some help and hope that you have lots of fun with your new lens. Cheers

[@mediamannaman]

Great job. As to your question about what length of video we prefer, my vote goes for the 6 - 12 minute video that gives more detailed information. People who watch these videos are enthusiasts who want to either hone their craft or make a decision on what gear to buy. These folks are going to want the detailed information, and they will want to see as many samples as you can fit in.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts on the topics. My goals has always been to strike a balance between too little and too much information while maintaining the quality of the content. Cheers

[@Princeton_James]

I just found your channel. This was so good. Specifically this video helped take things into consideration moving forward with a lens choice. Great job! Very professional clear and concise.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Erik, Thank you very much for the positive feedback it's always very pleasant to hear that viewers find the comparison videos useful. Best of luck in your lens choice. Cheers

[@rayjenkins2754]

This presentation was well done & helpful. My beginning 3 yrs of learning photography has been with the Pany Fz2500 bridge camera with the Leica 24 ~480m, f 2.8 @ wide open ~ 4.5. This all-in-one has been accommodating & fun to use. I recently bought the G9 & the 100 ~ 300m lens. I tried doing a comparison - same subject, at different distances with these 2 units. It turned out that the Fz bridge camera images were sharper ! I gave the camera store a call & was told as long as I had the receipt, undamaged lens & packaging, I could return it - the 100 ~ 300m - & apply the full purchase price to the 100 ~ 400m lens. Though It's cost me more, in the end, I'm much happier with the 100 ~ 400m - for all the things you mentioned. Thanks again.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Ray, Thanks for the positive feedback it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in my videos. Thank you also for taking the time to share your observations. The 100-400mm lens is a wonderful lens and when paired with the G9 it offers a great light weight system. I hope of have a great time with your new gear and get some amazing shots. Cheers

[@benmcconnell6008]

Thanks for a nice overview. I lean toward longer videos but putting a general summary at the 6-8 minute mark with added details for those that have more time. Again thanks for the good work.

[@prabhakarrao4922]

Another extremely professionally done review. Thank you. After watching your previous review of the 100-400mm Leica went into my local store and tried the 100-300mm Lumix and the Leica and one obvious difference that I noticed pretty much straight away was the fact that the Leica locked into focus noticeably faster than the LUMIX. I’m not a pixel peeper but I felt the images with the Leica has better image contrast which may make it appear to take sharper images. However at 400mm the Leica seems to put a bit of added weight stress with prolonged handholding. The 100-300mm LUMIX is definitely lighter and therefore very comfortable. Thanks so much for creating such well informed discussion on KZbin. I own a G9 so your reviews are extremely relevant to my situation.

[@PaulBawby]

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts and experiences with the community, it's very much appreciated. We all come from different backgrounds and have different needs, so the more people share their thoughts on a subject the more we can collectively learn and grow. Getting photography enthusiasts to share stories and information in a helping way is the main motivation behind the Field Notes series. Again thanks for taking part in this effort. Cheers

[@Ulrich.Bierwisch]

I bought the 100-300 a few month ago for most of the reasons you brought up in the video. To me the lower weight and size is most important. I'm fine with the longer videos. I think your kind of content is easily good for 6-12min without getting boring.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Ulrich, Thank you for taking the time to comments and answer the question, it's very much appreciated. The 100-300mm lens proves the old saying that good things come in small packages. It's often said that the best camera is the one you have with you, that's true and all fine but if your interest is wildlife or certain sports then a smartphone most likely won't work and that's where a system like a MFT and a 100-300mm lens makes so much sens. Before I use to ask myself do I really want to carry my full frame camera and big 200-500mm lens just in case I see some interesting wildlife and often the answer would be not really. Now with the 100-300mm I hardly ever ask myself that question and I get more occasions to have fun with my camera. Cheers!

[@GermanViking]

Hi, I'm a new subscriber! I'm a portrait photographer but I have a couple of years doing some casual wild life photography but I'm not getting paid for that so I can't spend too much on it now, so I decided to go for the 100 300mm... BTW nice video and I personally like long and detailed videos.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, Thanks for taking the time to share your experiences and for your kind words about the video. I don't get paid either for my wildlife photography, I do it out of passion for nature and for learning. I hope you have many great photo adventure with your 100-300mm. Cheers

[@GermanViking]

Paul Bawby Thank you!

[@LA3198]

Thank you Paul for a nice real world comparison of these two lenses. I was on the fence regarding which lens to purchase. Your video had helped me make my decision. The Panasonic Leica100-400mm mk II will be my next purchase. I liked you comment at the end about not crowding the wildlife.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Don, Thank you for taking the time to share your feedback, it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in my videos. I'm glad you share my views on not crowding wildlife, because a great photo is nice, but in the end it's not just about the photo but about the time spent in nature and preserving it for our children and grandchildren. I hope you make some beautiful photos with your next purchase and more importantly that you have lots of fun in the great outdoors. Cheers

[@kaczuchasly5174]

Hi Don, I hope you are very well... I'm interested to buy a 100-400mm, and you mentioned ''The Panasonic Leica100-400mm mk II will be my next purchase'' I can not find any information regarding the 100-400mm Mark II in google.... You are sure there are Mark II available? Or you made a mistake and you want write 100-300 Mark II? Kind regards. Bart

[@smiff4748]

Greetings from the UK Paul. I really enjoy your videos. I have subscribed and look forward to seeing more from you. You have the perfect blend of content and personally I prefer a longer video because the content is excellent. Thank you for sharing.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Smiff, Thank you for the very positive feedback it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in the videos I make. I'm working on several photo and KZbin projects at the same time while keeping a regular day job and taking care of my family... so unfortunately the KZbin videos don't roll out as fast as I'd like, but there's more coming. Cheers

[@danielgoldberg2129]

Thank you for your review. I currently own the 100-300mm LUMIX lens but I just ordered the Leica 100-400mm and it’s being delivered tomorrow! (No camera shops near me carry the Micro 4/3’rd systems. I use a LUMIX G85.) The reason for the upgrade is that I travel a lot and take a lot of landscape and wildlife photos and I felt like I was ready to upgrade my equipment. I am going to Africa next month, and it’s probably a once in a lifetime trip, so I wanted the best chance for some quality pictures. I have taken some really nice photographs with the 100-300mm so if the price and/or size is important to you, I can recommend it. I did like the length of your review.

[@Acornoa]

Hey! I really liked this video. I recently just purchased a used 100-300 and have been loving it. I would have appreciated your thoughts narrated on the photo comparisons, and maybe some zoomed in shots of what you were peeping at. The length, I thought to be perfect. I get the feeling you enjoy the rigors of science from your video.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Aaron, Thank you for the positive feedback it's always appreciated. I'm glad to hear you found value in this video and I'll keep your suggestions in mind while working on my next videos. I have to admit that you nailed it, I work in the applied sciences but enjoy tremendously the creativity of visual arts, so I try to approach each video with scientific rigor while showcasing the beauty of nature photography. Cheers,

[@deenugent473]

I'd just purchased the 100-300mm mkII and will receive it today. Your closing thoughts on the 100-300mm are spot on and it describes "me". I just want this lens for fun and to try out wild life photography and I don't want to pay too much either, so I hope I'll be happy with this purchase. I'll be using this lens on my Olympus E-M1MarkII.

[@BogeeDee]

Are you happy?)

[@deenugent473]

@@BogeeDee So far I am happy with the lens. I haven't had a chance to shoot any birds yet, but I have taken some flower shots and the lens performed very well.

[@andrear9500]

Your video are well thought and you speak clear and slow. Very well done. The 100-400 is my choice as it gives more quality at the long end and more room for cropping. I also think build quality matters in safaries and rain forests. Lenght is fine because you split content in more videos. Otherwise I would have prefered a few more minutes. Thank you

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Andrea, Thank you for taking the time to share yours thoughts and for your kinds words of encouragement, it's very much appreciated! Cheers

[@robertstrickland1979]

Thank you for the review. I am getting into the Lumix system so all the info I can get is a worth for me. your videos from 6 -12 minutes is just right for me. I am closing to making purchases so your comparison was a must for me

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Robert, Thank you very much for the positive feedback it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in the videos I make. The G9 has on sale at various prices for quite some time now. Does this signal that Panasonic could be coming up with a new MFT model in 2020? I do not know. Olympus is, according to many, poised to come out with a newer version of the E-M1 (the mk III) around mid February... So if you're not in a rush, maybe you'll want to wait a little and see what comes up and what impact all of this, if any, will have on the prices. Cheers

[@gregpatterson134]

I really enjoyed your video and the way you presented the comparison. Straight to the point, but clearly objective. I wish more reviewers were like this. Do you still feel like the 100-300 is the better option for the hobbyist and yet gets very close to the quality of the 100-400 especially if you clean up the images in post? I prefer to get the best shot possible without editing in post. So many images these days are essentially a "virtual" photo due to extreme manipulation. Don't get me wrong, this can be art, but it seems there is room for also working to get the best shot possible with out editing. Thanks

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Greg, I'm glad to hear you thought the video was useful. There's absolutely nothing wrong with the 100-300mm, it's a very good lens. The main reason I got the 100-400mm lens is because I shoot a lot of photos of small birds like warblers, very small and fast moving birds that are nearly impossible to get close too, so having an extra 100mm (200mm full frame angle of view equivalence) was significant for me. I still own the 100-300mm lens and it's my go to lens when on multi-day backcountry hiking trips where I want long reach but must manage the weight. My philosophy has always been to try not to spent too much money on the gear (it's really easy to do) and to keep funds to be able to go on fun hiking trips with my camera. I hope this information is useful. Cheers

[@kayem2565]

excellent video, many thanks. I will try the 100-300mm out with my recently purchased g85 ;)

[@NiSE_Rafter]

Did you get it? How are you liking it? Im thinking of getting it for my g95.

[@kayem2565]

Hello. Yes I did and it's my primary lens for birding now. It doesn't weigh me down on my walks but more often that not I don't get close enough to the birds. That's a trade off from the 100 to 400mm which is significantly heavier and longer. Still I get good image quality when it's close enough :D

[@kayem2565]

​@@NiSE_Rafterare you using it for birds as well ?

[@NiSE_Rafter]

@@kayem2565 Probably more miscellaneous animals while hiking like mountain goats and foxes, but that'll include birds as well if they show up

[@kayem2565]

@NiSE_Rafter then I think the 600mm full frame equivalent reach will suffice:) i think you'll love how compact it is. Plus it's quite affordable now. Good luck buddy take care now

[@toxictabasco]

Another great video. Tanks for making the effort to compare these two lenses. I've been on the fence with the 100-300 II, and was looking at the 100-400 or 50-200 with TC. The 100-400 clearly looks better the longer the range gets. And at 300 the difference is very noticeable. But what surprised me is both looked pretty darn good up to 250 even magnified 200%. Both are very sharp lenses. As for video content. The duration doesn't matter much for me as long as it's not over 20 or 30 minutes. If the content is good, and flows great, like your videos, I'll watch to the end. Your content is very well thought out and organized and you should do as you see fit. Keep up the good work Paul.

[@PaulBawby]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I agree there's value in both lens I can see applications for both of them. I would very much like to try the 50-200 with TC as I've heard good things about it. Thank you also for the feedback, it's appreciated. I'm always trying to bring added value and I know I can sometimes go too much in details so it's nice to have feedback. Cheers

[@UMS9695]

Thanks for this comparison. As an enthusiast with a heavy lean towards light gears, it has helped me focus on my priorities.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, Glad to hear you found this video useful. Thank you very much for your kind words. Cheers,

[@ajs1501]

Very good review my only problem is the writing over the pictures cant see the need.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts on the subject it's appreciated. A fair number of my viewers are not native English speakers and having the text helps them to understand... I've been experimenting with variations of this approach in my more recent videos to try and find a better balance. Lately I've been writing less text and when I do I try to select images that are loosely related to the topic at hand without being central to the points being made... It's an ongoing process and finding the right balance is not easy. Cheers

[@akilghosh]

Thanks Paul. Loved the woodpecker shot

[@studio1966]

Thank you for the work. My next Setup will be the G9 with 100-300mm

[@wcbibb]

Nice video, Paul! I own both of these lenses and a G9. I have had six months with the Panasonic-Leica 100-400mm now. I used the Panasonic 100-300mm Mk II on my G7. The increased weight and size of the 100-400 is noticeable on a long hike. But that extra super-telescopic reach makes the difference in many shots. The image quality is superior at some focal lengths. Shooting photographs of birds requires the extra reach often enough to justify the 100-400 price, weight, and size. But the 100-300 allows greater mobility in some situations where a larger weight and size would slow you down. The woodpecker videos were amazing. I am looking forward to the most recent firmware update. I cannot imagine "backpacking" with a full-frame camera and equivalent lenses of either the 100-300 or the 100-400. A day hike is all I can manage these days at 71 years old.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi William, I agree with you the extra reach of the 100-400mm is very useful for birds, but sometimes the weight restrictions require the lighter 100-300mm. It's nice to have options. I own the D750 and the Nikon 200-500mm and there's no way you can convince me to go backpacking in the backcountry for several days with that lens with my usual hiking bodies (and I'm just 55). Cheers!

[@Texasphotoguy]

Great review, and it’s the perfect time range. I’m new to the MFT community (long time Cannon user) and have exhausted myself trying to decide on the best wildlife lens. Both of these seem to do great, but I’m leaning towards the Sigma 159-600 with a speed booster. About the same cost as the 100-400, but with more reach AND can stop down to 3.9. Have you ever used a full frame lens on. MFT?

[@PaulBawby]

No sorry can't say I have. But I know of others who do it for shorter focal lengths and are happy with the results. The main reason for going to MFT for me was to get good reach with a much smaller and lighter kit that I could take with me on multi-day backpacking trips in the backcountry without having to hire a sherpa... 😉

[@neonbirding2680]

Great video and illustration. First, I opt for you to keep doing your videos the lenght you deem is right for the content you are communicating. The 100-400 Elmar is what I use for Birding. The G9's Ex Tc Conv and 2X digital zoom allow for even greater ranges shooting 4K wildlife video. This range was a big incentive for getting the 100-400. And that 5m to infinity AF ability makes getting video shots fast. Nevertheless, I liked the 100-300 II for the compact and light weight factors, and it's AF tracking ability with the G9 (perhaps the large EVF had something to do with it). Thanks for making this video, and keep up the great work.

[@PaulBawby]

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts on this comparison it's very much appreciated. I hope you have a great time with your camera gear and make many extraordinary photos! Cheers

[@zeitiOnTour]

Great Work! I do appreciate more detailed videos. I just bought the 100-300mm and I am happy with it. Im pretty sure I will upgrade to the Lumix 100-400mm. The closer I can come the better because Im a huge Birdfan ;-)

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, I totally agree with you, I've found one of the best ways to get good photos of birds is to get to know them really well and one of the good ways to learn as much as possible about birds is to get as close as possible with a long zoom of course and study them with your photos! Cheers

[@williesoh7025]

Very good knowledge sharing and comparing on this two lenses performances which will help us knowing what’s best for beginners and season Photographers....thanks!

[@pompommom4904]

I enjoyed it very much. I feel like buying the 100-400 for my G85. But just a thought. If i bought the 100-300 instead, and used the digital zoom to get the extra reach, will the image quality be seriously compromised?

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Pom Pom Mom, Very interesting question and somewhat tricky to answer for several reasons. First I don't own a G85 and can only base my answer on results with the G9. Second the G9 manual warns that the use of the digital zoom will result in image quality loss but doesn't quantify it... So to answer your question I took some sample shots with both lens on the G9 with the digital zoom and without the digital zoom. Long story short, yes there's an image quality deterioration when using digital zoom and in my opinion it is noticeable. In any case I would not go more than a 2x Digital zoom. What bothers me more is that digital zoom can only be used when shooting JPG file format (so no raw files, this may not be important to you but it's significant to me) and when using the digital zoom I can't seem to be able to move the focus point around... So yes you can get reasonably good photo with the digital zoom but there's a loss of quality and of functionality (at least with the G9). Best of luck with your very difficult decision. While you making up you mind you may want to have a look at my other videos where I compare G9 with the 100-300mm II to the Nikon D750 with the 200-500mm ( kzbin.info/www/bejne/rWjcYXalmK93p68 ) and the one where I compare the G9 with the 100-400mm to the Nikon D750 with the 200-500mm ( kzbin.info/www/bejne/i5bHfomibZV_sKc ). These two videos may (or may not) help you to decide by showing how image quality of the two Panasonic lenses compare with that of a full frame system. I hop you find this at least somewhat useful, and again thank you for this very interesting question. Cheers,

[@pompommom4904]

Paul Bawby thank you very much Paul for your reply. Much appreciated. I know in my mind digital zoom will cause a deterioration in image quality, but dont know bu how much. I still would like as clear an image resolution as possible. I will check out those comparisons you mentioned. As for the 100-400, though i am impressed with the reach and clarity, i wonder if the weight might hamper my use of it. I am still seriously considering the 300 as such. Regarding the lack of Raw format using digital zoom, i didnt realise it could only shoot in JPG. i know also if i shoot in RAW, i cannot transfer these raw files from camera to ipad. I wonder why? Thank you again..

[@PaulBawby]

@@pompommom4904 Hi Pom Pom Mom, I agree the weight difference between the two lenses is not insignificant that's why I'm keeping the 100-300mm for multi day backpacking trips where keeping the weight down as much as possible is important. As for why you can't import raw files to your iPad I'm afraid I can't help you much since my son dropped mine, screen side, on a concrete floor... As a work around, have you tried importing raw files to your computer and syncing the files to your iPad? That's how I do it with my phone. Cheers.

[@TheGregWallace]

Digital zoom is FAKE ZOOM. Don't use it!

[@pompommom4904]

I finally bought the 100-300mm and i enjoy it so much.

[@danieldougan269]

Thank you for your information, tests, and samples. Have you tried the Olympus 75-300mm f4.8-6.7 II? I own that one, and it's pretty good but I don't know if the Panasonic 100-300mm II is significantly better. Obviously, the Panasonic Leica 100-400mm lens is superior to both of them. As a bit of constructive feedback, it's not necessary to cover the whole screen with the exact text you are saying. Maybe just include a few short bullet points (like two or three at a time, each about two or three words long) and possibly off to the side so we can focus more on the image.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Daniel, Sorry for not getting back to you before but I was in Yosemite national park hiking in areas where cell coverage is minimal at best, when there’s any. Unfortunately I’ve not had the opportunity to test the Olympus 75-300mm f4.8-6.7 II, because my budget is somewhat limited at this point. But I would love to test it if I have a chance. Thanks for taking the time to share your constructive criticism it’s always appreciated. I Always strive to strike the perfect balance between too little and too much information. Because a lot of photographers are more visual I've taken to writing down on the screen most (not all) of what I'm saying in the video. So that it's not just boring text on the screen or a video of me talking to a camera, I put background images behind the text. I carefully select those background images so that they are peripheral to the topic but not central. The test images, that are central to the topic, have very little text or no text. I hope this all makes sense. Again thank you for your comment, I will it keep it in mind and try to find a better balance for the next videos. Cheers

[@pompommom4904]

Daniel Dougan i own the G85; i had tried the Olympus 75-300 on my camera and i actually liked it. I am tossing up between this lens or the 100-300ii. The only thing on my mind is the Panasonic lens has OIS, and weather sealing, so it I wonder if it may be a better choice for me to go with a Panasonic lens. If cost wasn’t a factor, the 400 would be my choice .

[@angusmcdonald1223]

I have heard that the 100-300 can have purple fringing is that true and if so does it happen often?

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, excellent question. Purple fringing happens with a lot of lens and generally it is more pronounced with the more affordable ones. It is more noticeable when zooming on a photo of a back-lit subject when the background is "white-ish" or "grayish" (for example think of a bird perched high on a branch of a dead tree with a bright cloudy sky behind). Most post production software (like Lightroom) do a good job of reducing significantly the amount of purple fringing. Yes I have noticed it on the 100-300mm. Cheers

[@GertHellevig]

Thanks Paul for this video. For sure one of the most valuable tools to evaluate the differences between these lenses. I am interested in bird photography, and to be able to compare very fine detail is indeed interesting. Like side-by-side the teddy bear's scarf. Cheers!

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Gert, Thank you for kind words, it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in my videos. I find that bird photography can be both very challenging and rewarding. Birds are everywhere, in the city, in the suburbs, in mountains, in the plains, by the ocean... seasons bring migrations and changes in the plumage... Birds in flight are a unique challenge... so lots of fun can be had taking photos of birds. Best of luck with your photography. Cheers!

[@brandon1941]

I also own both lens but am going to sell the 100-300. The 100-400 is really a superior lens in almost every way. I strongly agree with your conclusions. This lens points out that a 350 or 400 f4 lens would be a wonderful combination on the G9. The image stabilization on this lens is very good, especially given its lens and the lens balances very well on the G9. I like the length and content of your videos. Would appreciate one on the settings you use in making a wildlife video with the 100-400. You speak very clearly and well, so I don't think a transcript on screen is necessary.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Brandon, Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experiences on the subject. There will be a follow up to this video involving the G9/100-400mm combo and I'll make sure to include the settings. In the meantime you could also have a look at my previous video (episode one - three) as I've posted a fair amount of info on the settings (if there's specific info you would like more details and it's not covered in the previous video leave a comment and I'll see what I can do). Thank you for the feedback on the length of the videos it's very much appreciated. Cheers

[@HappyGrl41]

Great video, Paul. Thank you for doing this comparison. I'm happy with the 100-300 mark ii but it's a compromise for me. On its first outing, I was photographing some ibis when a beautiful spoonbill just dropped in to hang with the ibis. I got some great shots of the spoonbill with this lens. I would still like to get the 100-400 but first I will rent it and see what I think. I've read about the repairability issues and that's a concern given the cost of the lens. I also own the Olympus 75-300 which is also a good lens but I really didn't have a lot of confidence in it but it did surprise a few times. I have more confidence in the Panasonic lens. These micro 4/3 cameras and lenses are simply amazing.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Janet, Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and for your kind words, it's very much appreciated. The 100-400mm is an expensive lens and I agree it's always a good idea, whenever possible, to try a lens before buying it. I've heard of photographers having issues with this lens (mostly complaining about a stiff zoom ring) but I can't really comment on the durability of the lens as I've only had mine for a relatively short period. I totally agree with you, micro four third systems are amazing. For me one of the best thing is they're lighter and smaller, so I find myself taking my camera out more often and taking more photos, which is always a good thing. Cheers

[@ammadoux]

love this so much. time and way you make comparison is excellent. i need your opinion here. i have the olympus 300 mm f4 pro. and as zoom i got the olympus 40-150 mm f2.8. which i use usually with the 1.4 tc which makes it f4, that is sometimse not as bright as i need for early morning shots. my question is if ots worth it to go for the Leica 200 mm f2.8. i find it a bit expensive. i have used the 300 mm prime with pana bodies and got very good results no issues with stabilization for at least. so i guess the 200 prime will work well hand held with the olympus body.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Ammadoux, My advice would be try before you buy. I've been exchanging with another viewer who said that the his Panasonic Leica 100-400mm lens wasn't playing well with his Olympus EM1 mk II and this viewer saw a very significant difference when he switched to the Panasonic G9... So the Dual IS and Sync IS don't always seem to work well together... Cheers!

[@XHItube]

Great review! Loved it and subscribed. My preferred video length is somewhere between 4-8min. :) Depends a bit on the content. One of my favorite KZbin channels is by Dave2D and he has a mix of 4-8min videos, depending on the topic and so on. Please keep up the work! I had one question: Why do you overlay the image with your spoken words? Do you also update a clean version? I would prefer to listen and just look at the image/video being shown. Thanks again!

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, thank you for the positive feedback it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in my videos. I always start my videos with the intend of keeping them short (5-10 min) but often I end up with something longer...I'm still learning... I will be checking out Dave2D. Cheers

[@i.i.iiii.i.i]

I bought the 100-300 mk1 about 7 years ago and I'm thinking about upgrading to he Leica for the DualISO and the better image quality. I took some great photos with the 100-300 but in many cases I wish it would be a little sharper and had faster autofocus. Despite its non-weather-resistance it also survived being splashed by ocean water and even a bad drop without any problems... I still like this lens very much.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the subject. The 100-300mm is a great lens and it's my go to lens for wildlife photography when doing multi-day hiking trips because it has good image quality, it's lightweight and robust (I've shot with it when there was some heavy wet snow falling and didn't notice any issues after). Cheers!

[@sdc9368]

I'm glad I've started watching your superb video's. I assume the stabilization difference of the two lenses along with IBIS is negligible. Since youtube doesn't give us adequate imagery, price is the obvious difference. How does the zoom feel between the two lenses?

[@PaulBawby]

Hi SDC, Thanks for your kind words, it's always nice to hear viewers find value in my videos. To be honest (based on a sample of one of each lens) the zoom on the 100-300mm is smoother and more fluid than on the 100-400 which to my taste is a little too sticky (but I'm being a little picky here). For me reach was a significant factor and if you're a pixel peeper the 100-400mm is better, but if you're concerned by weight then the 100-300mm is the way to go. I Hope this is useful. Cheers

[@ivanwhitehall2830]

I purchased the 100-400 leica, because I want the reach without carrying the Canon 7D mkii with a Tamron 150-600 G2. I find that the IQ is similar. (Like your Ottawa images - it gave me a couple of ideas to try. Thanks)

[@dihavssom1463]

God bless you for such concise review

[@PaulBawby]

Thank you for your kind words, this is one of the nicest things someone has written in the comments in a long while 🙏

[@alanplatt888]

I have just purchased the 100-400. I own the 75-300 Olympus. I particularly enjoyed your presentation of the 2 videos I've watched so far, re 100-300 100-400. Just about the right length in time for me. Nice one.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Alan, Thanks for positive feedback it's very much appreciated! I haven't had the chance to use the Olympus 75-300mm, just curious, how would you say it compares with the Panasonic 100-400mm for image quality? Cheers

[@alanplatt888]

@@PaulBawby I can't compare with the 100 400, it hasn't arrived yet. 75 300 compared to my Olympus 40 150 x 1.4 f4 the autofocus is slow. The reach was good but in fast action, nowhere near as quick.

[@leoyoung6]

Still amazed at how you're able to get sharp focused images hand held. Some reviewers have problem getting sharp images even using a tripod or mono pod. Do you find the 100-400mm easier to get BIF (birds in flight) than the 100-300mm?

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Leo, Getting good sharp images hand held requires practice, practice and more practice. In my opinion the 100-400mm is somewhat faster at focusing than the 100-300mm but one must keep in mind than speed and accuracy are two different things. Measuring the "in focus hit rate" of a camera lens combo is a difficult thing to do scientifically... There's always a significant user and environmental component this is hard to get out of the equation... BIF are a difficult subject to get in focus with either lens. When the the G9 was launched in December 2017 it was a very good camera and despite having a better focusing system than the original GH5, it wasn't ground breaking. Fast forward to early 2022 and advanced animal/Bird eye AF of the Sony A1, Canon R3 , R5, R6 and to some degree the Nikon Z9 have made getting good sharp photos of BIF way easier, but this technology remains the domain (at the present time) of higher end cameras. Now this is not to say that you can't get good BIF photos with the G9 and 100-300mm (or 100-400mm), as I've done it, but this is meant to help keep the expectations in perspective. The Sony A1 is one year old and cost 6500 USD and the G9 is more than 4 years old and currently at 1200 USD (I paid way more for it back then). Am I disappointed that the G9 can't keep up with the best of the cameras that are coming out at multiple times the price of the G9, no because I didn't buy the G9 expecting it to do what other cameras couldn't at the time. Things have changed, the bar has been raised... This having been said you can have a lot of fun shooting, landscapes, birds at rest, BIF, animals (Marten, coyotes, deer, moose...) and make excellent photos with the G9... Not convinced?maybe you should check out my intagram account: paulbawby you can also checkout the account of another talented G9 user: freeselloyd on intagram. Hope you're having fun with your gear! Cheers

[@jettysplash]

Thank you Paul. I like your videos and channel and I subscribed. Very valuable information. The length is fine.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, Thank you for your words of encouragement and positive feedback. I'm happy to hear you find value in my videos. I tried answering the comments you left in my previous video but we I click on the notification to get to the comment it doesn't open your comment. Is KZbin playing a trick on me? Anyway if you have any question that I haven't answered please feel free to resubmit them (sorry for the inconvenience). Cheers

[@jettysplash]

@@PaulBawby No Worries. After I saw your last video I looked deeper at what I was doing and "discovered" Spot Metering and that fixed the problem I was having when I added it to an increased ISO with crazy faster shutter speed using Shutter Priority (which opened the aperture giving me nice color too). No more crushed dark colors or washed out light colors at max zoom and I eliminated a lot of the blur; ie. my max zoom photos don't look like the Loch Ness Monster or Big Foot anymore... LOL. And my close ups at the lower mm zoom on a tripod are coming out amazing. Even though all I have is a P530 bridge I can tell now I am reaching doing the best I can within the limits of the camera, sensor, and glass, which is my objective before upgrading. Keep leading the way! :)

[@PaulBawby]

Hi again, The Nikon P530? Hey for a number of years my go to camera for long backcountry expedition was a Nikon P510 bridge camera and I loved that camera. I took many very nice photos with it, photos that to this day are still very special. Don't stop exploring, trying, testing and sharing. You're on the right track, your curiosity and efforts will open a world of photographic possibilities. Cheers

[@Joostered]

I noticed a protective filter on the 100-300, can't tell if there's one attached to the 100-400 too. In my experience these destroy image quality at longer focal lengths. It's true that the 100-300 is at its worst at 300mm while the 100-400 peaks around there, so there's a noticeable difference in sharpness, but I'm afraid the filter(s) may have exaggerated that difference.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Joostered, Thanks for this excellent question. All my lenses have a protective filter for everyday field use. I select quality filters made by excellent companies and sold by my favorite camera shop (brick and mortar, not online). The only exception I make is when taking photos or shooting video for an evaluation (then I remove the filters). I understand that filters can make somewhat of a difference, but it's not the only variable in the equation and it may not even be the biggest one. As I mentioned in the video I only had a sample of one of each lens to work with... if for some reason one of the copies I got underperforms (let's say the 100-300mm for the sake of the argument) and the other one performs as intended or performs better (than the average of that lens) then we get a more significant spread in results... This is why one should never make a final decision based on one evaluation only. This having been said I think the 100-300mm is a very good lens. If you look at my "unfair comparison" video where I "pitted" the G9 and 100-300mm against the Nikon D750 and the Nikon 200-500mm ( yes I know it's completely unfair and maybe somewhat crazy...) kzbin.info/www/bejne/rWjcYXalmK93p68 you'll see that the 100-300mm is a very capable lens (in my opinion at least). I hope this all makes sens. Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts and experiences, it's very much appreciated. Cheers

[@ИльнурБеркутов]

Do you think the dimensions and weight are optimal for the G9? Or do you want to see the heir easier and more compact?)

[@PaulBawby]

Hi I'm not sure what your questions is exactly but I'll try to provide an answer. If I don't get it right don't hesitate to ask again. I think that the G9 and lens are a sweet spot when it comes to the enthusiast-amateur segment of wildlife photographers who are looking for a light weight and compact system. The size and light weight are ideal for my multi-day backpacking trips in the backcountry. Given time and with the implementation of more computational powers in the cameras, I wouldn't be surprised if they got even more smaller. This having been said, I don't think that Panasonic needs to put much effort into reducing the size of their mft cameras, they need to improve the focusing system as far as I'm concerned. Cheers

[@ИльнурБеркутов]

@@PaulBawby GX9 is more compact with its skin capabilities. Have you considered it? Many put on a 100-300 obktiv, it looks more compact, which is especially important in the forest, in summer or winter on skis)

[@PaulBawby]

@@ИльнурБеркутов Hi, The G9 and GX9 are similar but there are some differences if I remember correctly. I was an early adopter of the G9 and at that time the GX9 wasn't out yet, so I didn't consider it (actually I couldn't consider it). Cheers

[@Visual_Ghoul]

What mic did you use to record the wildlife audio?

[@PaulBawby]

To be honest, I've been using several microphones over the years, so I'm not 100% sure, but it was most likely the rode video micro.

[@ryzgms]

Just got the lens and love it with my em1 mkii. I have used the 100-300ii for years now and it's an amazing lens but it doesn't have the resolution for anything far away. I find the 100-400 equal to my canon 400mm f5.6 prime in sharpness and resolution at 400mm f7.1 and definitely 2-3 times more resolution and sharpness than my 100-300ii

[@MrFirstdance2000]

I've got the 35-100mm Panasonic but wondered what I could go with for the the next level below the 100-400?

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, thank you for the positive feedback. Both the Panasonic 100-300mm and the Panasonic 100-400mm have their advantages and disadvantages. One thing to note is that to get better reach you'll be sacrificing light in with both lens compared with the 35-100mm. Cheers

[@dhoogduin]

45-200 .. its not a bad lens .. just lacks the reach of the 300 and 400 offcourse :)

[@michischultz9048]

Thank you for this very informative video. I live in the northern part oft Burgenland (in Austria) and take photos of birds. I use the Lumix 100-300 ii since 3 years, and i am very happy with this lens. But i want more reach. So i will buy the Olympus 100-400 for my OMD-Em5iii. And i will, keep the 100-300, because it is really a very good lens.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts on this subject. I agree with you. I firmly believe that you can't go wrong with more reach for bird photography. This having been said I've kept both lens because when I go on long multi-day treks in the backcountry I appreciate the lighter lens. Cheers

[@Ronroncho]

nice video, i got the 100-400 pretty cheap, 580 USD but scratched in the rear element, but i had not notice any problem at least at f11. i like this lens but i realized in low light is complicated, cuz at f6.3 it feels not that sharp at 400mm long distance, at f8 is super sharp tho, have you tried the leica 200 f2.8? i read is sharper and fast even with the 2x teleconverter, pricey though XD another question, at 400mm to maintain the sharpness how far the object should be, like 20m? Regards keep it up with this amazing videos

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Eder, Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and experiences, it's always appreciated to hear from other photographers. Yes I agree the 100-400 is sharper at f/7,1 or f/8,0 but it was the same with my Nikon 200-500mm lens. I think it's because zoom lens are always to some extent built on a series of compromises. For this reason fixed lens are generally sharper. Unfortunately, I don't have much experience with the 200 f/2,8. Generally teleconverters do degrade the image quality (to what extent I don't know in this case exactly) and when you add the price of the lens and of the teleconverter it's becomes to expensive for me... Also I know that for the type of photography I like to do 200mm (400mm FF) just isn't enough reach. If you do decide to try the 200 f/2,8 let me know what you think" Cheers

[@HDBerlin]

Excellent and helpful comparison and assessment of pros and cons, thank you so much. Though I still am undecided, it's weight against quality :)

[@PaulBawby]

Glad I could be of some help. I totally understand, there is no perfect camera system and no camera system that meets every photographer needs, it's all about finding what will work best in the present and for your future needs as well... best of luck in your decision process. Cheers

[@lfcmarkeb7124]

nice again to have a video straight to point on the item in question , no need to FF half way through th video to get the info we need 👍

[@PaulBawby]

Thank you for all the positive feedback, it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in my videos. Cheers

[@helsfury]

Very good channel - subscribed. I shoot the Olympus OM-D EM1X. Very helpful channel

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, Thank you for your positive feedback, it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in my videos. I've heard some very good things about the EM1X, but unfortunately I haven't had the possibility to test it yet. How do you find the autofocus? Are you happy with the image quality? Cheers,

[@rickkoloian4179]

Thanks for the excellent review & my preference is for the more detailed videos of 6-12 minutes.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Rick, Thank you for kind words and for sharing your thoughts on this subject. I try to strike the best balance between too much and too little information while keeping in mind that some viewers have a wealth of experience and knowledge while others are just starting out. Cheers

[@rolanddoerffer6865]

Thanks for excellent video, vry focused. I think 6-12 minutes is ok, of course subject dependent. Best regards (I use the 100-400 with GH5)

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Roland, Thank you for your thoughts on the subject. I hope you're enjoying your GH5 and 100-400mm lens! Cheers

[@paulsehstedt6275]

Well 3 to 6 minutes should be the best length to get out the message - after six minutes watchers go out for pop corn. I've the 100-400 for my GX8 and it's great for paparazzi shooting, concerts, nature and landscapes. It's a pro lens and worth every penny.

[@ИльнурБеркутов]

hello, I love photographing birds, animals, airplanes. lens 100-300 m2 - is it enough for an amateur?)

[@PaulBawby]

The 100-300mm m2 is certainly a good starting point for wildlife photography and it is my preferred lens when going on multi-day backpacking trips in the backcountry because of how small and light weight it is. When not on multi-day hiking trips I prefer the 100-400mm because of the longer reach and slightly better image quality. In my personal opinion there is no such thing as too much reach when shooting smaller birds or very wild animals like bears, moose, cougars, bisons that you can't easily get close too... If you have the choice between getting the 100-300mm and having money for traveling to good places for wildlife photography on the one hand and on the other buying the 100-400mm and having to stay home (because you don't have enough money), I think getting the 100-300mm is a good choice... I hope this is useful. Cheers

[@ИльнурБеркутов]

@@PaulBawby g9 or g90?)

[@PaulBawby]

@@ИльнурБеркутов Hi very good question as the G90 offers a lot. To be honest though I have a limited real world hands on experience with the G90 but Gordon Laing has a great detailed review ( kzbin.info/www/bejne/enmVlGSphZ2kbdE ) of the G90 that features a comparison with the G9. Cheers

[@MrFirstdance2000]

One of your bullet points suggests that if you don't earn a living with photography and don't have the best equipment then the logic seems to suggest that to earn a living or make money with your photography you must own the best. I'm not arguing with you on this point but, I do think that there are some real "editing magicians" out there that are using things like a Canon 6d with a 17-40 f/4 or 100-400 f/4 lens (the older version on the latter) and are making good money with their landscape shots. I do think that as many comparisons that are being offered on youtube regarding lenses or camera bodies, some excellent sharing regarding your editing workflow/process would also be most welcome. Enjoy your channel and your practical nature of assessments!

[@PaulBawby]

Hi MrFirstdance2000, Thank you for sharing you thoughts. I could see why someone could think that, but it wasn't the point I was trying to make. In my videos I've been trying to to deflate some of the marketing hype around big sensor, big lens and expensive gear. What I was trying to say is unless you depend on your gear to earn a living and thus feel you need the absolute best gear to get the competitive edge and nail photos that would otherwise be impossible to make, you can make great photos with MFT cameras and more "basic" lens like the 100-300mm. To me it's more important to go out and enjoy nature with the gear you have than to stay at home waiting to get the perfect gear. Great gear doesn't necessarily mean great photos, more affordable or older gear doesn't necessarily mean that the photos can't be outstanding, wildlife photography is more than just gear. I think my videos show that with some rather average priced gear you can manage to get great photos and though I'm not a professional some of my photos have been published in national publications so the quality must be there... Thank you for your suggestion regarding a video on my editing workflow. My workflow is rather minimalist (in my opinion good photos don't need much more than a little tweaking), other than the fact that I shoot raw I'm not sure there would be much to talk about but I will take that in consideration. Cheers

[@nickkemp3661]

Nice shots of the woodpecker I have the G9 and the 100 to 400 I had the 100 to 300 and trade it in for the 100-400 yes it is heavier. when i was out shooting it happen to rain and the camera got water on it and it shut down. I got the water out of the SD card spot it started up well I thought I should it back to Panasonic to have it checked they said it got water in it and it is not covered under warranty $800.00 to fix it.Quot from Panasonic, Splash Proof does not guarantee that damage will not occur if this camera is subjected to direct contact with water, so I ask what rain was made from no answer but I do like my G9 and Leica 100-400mm lens

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Nick, Thanks for taking the time to share your experiences with the G9 "splash proof" and Panasonic warranty services. I've often wondered how far I should push this "splash proof" thing... I've just got my answer... not very far at all. Question: have you ever considered getting a rain cover of some sort for your G9? I've been toying with this idea, but now I think I should look into this more seriously. I've had a very unpleasant warranty experience with Nikon myself... the focal length ring on my Nikon 200-500mm lens got stuck between 400mm and 500mm. I had to send it in only to be told that it wasn't under warranty, because there was a minute crack on the filter ring and according to them it ment the lens had been dropped or had received a hit. Being the only user of the lens I knew full well that it had never been hit or dropped... There was no reasoning the "customer care" people at Nikon... So I feel you pain. Cheers

[@SchatzFamilyHF]

Good comparison telling info we can’t get from the specs alone. Prefer longer videos. Thanks!

[@leef3167]

Has anyone used the 100-400 in the rainforests of central america recently?

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Lee, Excellent question. I can't say I have. But I've used it on numerous occasions in heavy wet snow and the lens wasn't adversely affected by the very generous water that accumulated on it. Now that not at all the same has been in the rainforest for several days... Cheers

[@nerdMike]

I agree mostly about 100-300 ii, great for the price but.. expecially in sunlight and inside trees the vegetation renders a bit soft around subject, it lacks of contrast expecially in the first part out of focus near the subject, image look lose a bit of bite, lot of CA also under F8. Even the sharp focus on the main subject doesn't give sometimes a "great" image, because of the out of focus area bokeh and quality (like small tree branches looks kind of "blurry", not a great render quality). On the focused subject details are usually sharp, but the overal look seems more "amateur" because how the out of focus render, I'm not referring to a larger DOF, that's not the problem. The 100-400 of course it's better, 3 times the price by the way, and details are sharper expecially on hard situations of light and small details. The Olympus 40-150 2.8 with TC seems also better than 100-400 Leica and of course 100-300 II, even when croppin' you can see a better contrast and detail expecially with light in the background. Great results for me. But you have the choice according to your budget... that's the m4/3 power. :)

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Nerd Mike, Thank four sharing your thoughts and experiences on the subject at hand. I haven't yet tried the Oly 40-150mm with TC but I've heard good thing about it, so yes, given it's more limited focal range it's quite possible that it could pull ahead of the 100-300mm II and possibly the 100-400mm image quality wise. But in my experience using a teleconverter does impact the quality of the image and even with a 2x teleconverter the 40-150mm would not have the same reach as the 100-400mm. So in the end, no one system is perfect, it's always a question of tradeoffs and what works for one person might not work for someone else. Cheers

[@Buzza235]

Hey great video 👌. I've got the GX80 (85) and I've been searching for a decent video testing for the 100-300ii. I love the look of the Leica but I can't afford it so it's the 100-300ii for me and I'm going to get some great shots. I've got some great shots from my mobile so I know I'll be ok with it. For me, image quality isn't th bee all and end all, it's what comes out of your mind that tells the story. Anyway I've subscribed obviously because of how well you tell it and show it so thanks.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Buster, Thank you for your words of encouragement, it's always appreciated to know that people find value in my videos. All systems have their advantages and disadvantages, it's all about knowing your needs, finding what works best for you and more importantly getting outdoor to enjoy nature with a great hobby. I think you have the right approach don't worry about having the latest and newest, use whatever you have and get the shots that bring happiness in your life. Cheers,

[@Buzza235]

@@PaulBawby ok, thank you so much for your reply, much appreciated.

[@GeorgijusPavlovas]

It is ok, but Panny, where is Panasonic Leica 60-200 f4-5.3 for 1000Eu for me? I need a telephoto partner for my Panasonic Leica 12-60 f2.8-4 with a similar pictures character, sharpness and color rendering!

[@minglam5145]

What is the different between the Panasonic 100-300mm Mk I and the Mark II? Thanks.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Ming, I have never shot with the Panasonic 100-300mm mk I so I can't comment on the image quality, but I know the mk I has mega OIS and the mk II has power OIS which is compatible with dual IS. I hope this is useful. Cheers

[@malcolmspargo2955]

How does the100- 400 compares with the 50-200, is the later model an improvement over the 100-400? MJS Photo

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Malcom, Excellent question. I've heard great things about the 50-200mm lens but I don't have enough hands on experience with it to be able give a fair image quality comparison. I would love to have the 50-200mm but personally I think that for the kind of photography I do it's too short. I could get a 2x teleconverter, but then I would loose the lower f/stop advantage, would have to pay more (600$) and using a teleconverter very often bring a lowering of the image quality. So at this point in time it doesn't make much sense for me to be investing in the 50-200mm. So I would say that it's depends on what you're shooting, how much light and/or reach you need. I hope this is somewhat useful. Cheers

[@lfcmarkeb7124]

thanks , another straight to the point explanitary video, have watched many on both the 1 to 300 and the 1 to 400 ,th Leica designed lens is obviously the better built,better quality item , giving better results over all,sadly I'm constricted at present and am having to slump ( if you can in fact call it that) for the 100-300mm MK2.no doubt will serve me well with good results ,if in th future may well trade up to the Leica 👍

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, I think you're doing the right thing by getting started with what you can get. Every photo you take will increase your knowledge/understanding of your gear, of photography and of the wildlife. I wish you lot's of fun making precious photographic memories and I hope enjoy your time in nature. Cheers

[@NE_Pigeons]

Great review, but please don't pollute the images with the text. Makes it hard to really appreciate/study the pics. If anything next time leave the captions in the info tab.

[@Ferda1964]

great review , thanks

[@santosohartono5101]

Interesting comparison. 100-400 for sure better option if quality is the mandatory factor. But with the weight and size, for hobbist photographer like me, 100-300mm ii is best value option. I would happy to have 100-400mm but it will be taken for serious photography session. I am considering buy 100-300mm ii at these moment. Can you make video of 100-400 vs 50-200mm plus multiplier 2x. I know it is different grade, but would be interesting to see.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think the Panasonic DMW-TC20 2x teleconverter works with the Panasonic 50-200mm f/2.8-4 (stil trying to officially confirm this). My understanding is the 2x Tele is meant to work with the Panasonic-Leica 200mm f/2,8. Even if they did work together, the combinaison of the 50-200mm and the 2x teleconverter would cost about 600 $ US (at the time of writing this) more than the Panasonic-Leica 100-400mm alone. Also the 2x teleconverter with the 50-200mm would give you an equivalent of 100-400mm at f/5,6-8 (because you would loose two stop of light) so it would not be such a great combo in my opinion (less light for more money). Thank you for taking the time to share you thoughts and comments, because this is what this channel tries to be, a forum for discussion and sharing ideas to collectively improve our photography skills. I hope you find this useful. Cheers

[@trevorcooper5876]

Thank you very much for the comparison of the two lenses. I own the 100-300 MK2 purchased just before the Leica was released, since then have been looking to upgrade but it is quite a jump in cost, your reasoning is very sound which is much appreciated so will delay moving up to the 400. You asked how long you video's should be well in my opinion they are so well presented with excellent images of your local wildlife, the longer the better!

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Trevor, Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the subject and for the feedback on the length of the videos it's very much appreciated. Cheers

[@MzuMzu-nx1em]

Probably some options could reduce the softness of the 300mm Reaching a pro level image quality

[@enigma8018]

Great video I really appreciate the insight

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Nirav, Thank you for your kind words, a lot of time, effort, money and hard work goes into making such a video, so it's always nice to know that viewers find value in them. Cheers!

[@GordLamb]

I recently upgraded from the 100-300mm MK II to the 100-400 Leica, not for IQ or the extra reach, but almost exclusively for the focus limiter. To me personally, that's the biggest difference and it's a real shame it was omitted from the 100-300. It makes focusing on moving subjects lightning fast, in comparison, especially on a CDAF platform like the G9. I do miss the light weight of the 100-300, though!

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Gordon, Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts on the subject, it's very much appreciated. I agree with your assessment, for me the extra reach and faster focus of the 100-400mm are significant. But I'll be holding to my 100-300mm for when size and weight are at a premium, like on multi day backpacking trips. Do you see an advantage in keeping both lens in your style of photography? Cheers

[@GordLamb]

I've got the 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6 which, at 140mm, is "good enough" for me out in the backcountry. :) Sold the 100-300. Generally on weight conscious trips I now bring the 14-140, the Laowa 7.5/2, and the Lumix 20/1.7 for any low light work. Super portable kit!

[@46ace]

Great ,helpful videos!

[@PaulBawby]

Thank you very much for your kinds words of encouragement, it's very much appreciated. Cheers

[@tw8e60]

Thanks so much this really helps!!!

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, I'm glad to hear you found value in the video. Thanks for the positive feedback, it's very much appreciated. Cheers,

[@deniseneuendorf3577]

Definitely option C. Thanks

[@BirdinginMalaysia]

I have been using Panasonic 100-300mm mk II ever since I got myself a used Panasonic G7 in Malaysia. Generally, I am happy with the lens and the body. I enjoy taking it out while I go out guiding birders around Malaysia. For this combo, I use a Benro travel tripod. It works fine. I have even brought the whole setup for my birding trips to Indonesia and Borneo. I would somehow agree that the extra 100mm of Panasonic Leica 100-400mm. There is nothing wrong with having the 100-300mm but sometimes I prefer the extra length for video. The 100-400mm lens will be heavier and probably doesn't suit some of my oversea trips that require lots of hiking. I don't have. G9 but I tried using my Olympus E-M1 Mark II with 100-300mm lens. I don't think it work as good as the G7. Maybe I need to adjust some settings on the camera body.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, I agree with you the 100-300mm is a great light weight and affordable lens. Even though I have the 100-400mm and appreciate the extra 100mm, I'm still keeping my 100-300mm lens for my multi days backpacking/camping expeditions in the mountains when weight and space are at a premium. I hope you have a great time with your gear and take some amazing shots. Cheers

[@TheGregWallace]

I prefer videos that are detailed as need be no matter what that length of the video.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Greg, I strive to find the right balance between too much information and videos that are just too long. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the subject, it's appreciated. Cheers

[@ИльнурБеркутов]

Best test, thanks !)

[@PaulBawby]

Again, thank you very for you positive feedback it's always appreciated! Cheers,

[@edwinjansen6729]

Very good video, ty 🤜

[@PaulBawby]

Hi Edwin, Sorry for not getting back to you before but I was in Yosemite national park (California) hiking in areas where cell coverage is minimal at best, when there’s any. Thank you for you kind words. A lot of work, money, resources and efforts go into making such videos and it’s always nice to know that viewers find the videos interesting and of some use. Cheers!

[@studio1966]

the difference in focal length is irrelevant for a church, but it is certainly decisive for birds, in my opinion.

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, Yes, I agree the focal length is more or less relevant for buildings but I was trying to illustrate the effect of atmospheric distortion on far away subjects, which can happen if your doing an environnemental animal portrait... Cheers,

[@haak737]

Is the conclusion the same after firmware 2 update on G9? Just heard today that the 100-400mm version II is coming soon with a 20% price increase (here in Norway) but no news about the improvments. I also wonder if there could be some lens variations. The sharpnes on this video with the 100-300mm II is realy excellent: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pqfFZGufbK2Ehas

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, Great questions and interesting comment. I've not used the 100-300mm much since the firmware upgrade, I've been too busy testing Animal detect AF with the 100-400mm in different scenarios, but I'll I'm planning on testing the 100-300 soon. Yes the 100-300mm is really good, but if you don't mind the extra weight and more expensive price the 100-400mm gives more magnification which is often useful. I know that Olympus is working on a new M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 IS PRO lens and a M.Zuiko Digital ED 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 IS lens but I've not herd anything from reliable sources about Panasonic working on a 100-400mm mk II. Can you point me to a reliable source? Cheers

[@haak737]

@@PaulBawby I have it only from a Norwegian site, and when i chat with them they confirm the news...but they could be wrong. (though the price was 20% higer) It is 3-4 years since this lens was introduced so we could hope for a even better upgrade with more sharpness at 400mm

[@PaulBawby]

@@haak737 Hi Haakan, Thanks for the update. The fact that I haven't heard about it doesn't means much... it's quite possible that Panasonic could be working on a better version of this very well loved lens... I'll be paying more attention for the next little while to see if can find out more. Cheers

[@haak737]

@@PaulBawby After asking one of the main camera stores in Oslo, they confirmed that the lens have a new item number, but that is becuase the lens is now made on another factory...so that is no version II yet...but maybe minor upgrades they do not tell you about. And I see several stores are now increasing their price with up tp 20%. on this lens

[@PaulBawby]

@@haak737 Hi Haakan, Again, thank you for the update, that makes a lot of sense. Let's hope that for the price increase they managed to do away with the sticky zoom issue. I didn't get to go to my favorite camera shop recently but I've noticed through their website that the 100-400 is on sale right now (about 15% off). So are they selling off the "older" lenses before bringing in the "newer" ones? 🤔 I don't really know, but it will be interesting to see in the manufacturer's code changes or not. Cheers

[@eustreaming3874]

Great video thanks. Long videos are better

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, Thank you for the positive feedback it's always appreciated to know that viewers find value in my videos. I always start my videos with the intend of keeping them short (5-10 min) but often I end up with something longer... it's a complicated balance between having too little and too much information... I'm still learning... Cheers

[@magneticeagle]

C of course.

[@dominiclester3232]

C. Thanks!

[@PaulBawby]

Hi, thank you for your feedback.

[@dongee1664]

Excellent video apart from the irritating music.

[@FunnySurpriseToys]

Hello My Dear Friend! Great video! Like #488 and sub.

[@garybrown9719]

Just right

[@ab122459]

❤️❤️❤️

[@PaulBawby]

Thank you!

[@strougi]

B

[@EugenBrinzoiu]

C…

[@PaulBawby]

HI Eugen, Thanks for submitting your opinion on this question. Cheers

[@EugenBrinzoiu]

@@PaulBawby it was a pleasure watching you.Thank you