Olympus 100-400mm f5-6.3 lens review vs. Lumix/Leica 100-400mm

[@hnahler]

This was an excellent review / sales pitch. As you rightly said, we can all read the specs. Your comparison to the ‘alternatives’ makes your review so valuable. For most of us it’s an either / or decision. Not many can afford the 40-150Pro, 300Pro, all the converters and now the 100-400 on top. Your recommendation of the 100-400 + MC14 really makes sense. Better safe some money.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks, Hendrik. Happy to help!

[@phxtravis]

I am considering this for a future purchase, problem is I have a G7 and am looking to add either a G9 or EM5 iii... question if you don't mind? Would this combo work on a Panasonic? I know the lense would, but not sure on teleconvertors. Thank you!

[@JimsPhotographyArt]

I use this Olympus lens on the EM-1iii and love it. I used the 7Dii with the Sigma 150-600mm for years and have no regrets changing over to this much smaller and lighter Olympus combo for birding etc. Image quality is just as good or better....Love the Olympus system so much I sold all my Canon gear and bought a 2nd EM-1iii body and some lenses and now use the Olympus system for almost all my nature and landscape photography. With age creeping up on me my knees and back enjoy lugging around much less weight!

[@johnniewelbornjr.8940]

I just obtained this lens to go with my new E-M1X (I finally upgraded from my old 4/3 gear after all these years lol) and even though it's been a while since your review, I appreciate the thoughts that were shared here without a lot of hype. I debated the 300mm prime vs. the 100-400mm with a lot of different points to consider but this simply seemed the better value with greater versatility. The IS comparison between lenses was interesting but after running some handheld tests on moving subjects last night, I have zero complaints with the number of well-focused, sharp images I had to sort through on the computer after downloading the files. The variable aperture isn't something that bothers me greatly, for the versatility pros vs. cons simply made this the better value for me. Thanks for sharing the insights, even if I'm a wee bit behind the times.

[@markusbolliger1527]

I am in the same situation: 100-400 or 300 PRO? Image quality of the 300 ist better, stabilisation too, and it is faster. On the other hand: It's longer and heavier, and more expensive. But the main argument for the 100-400 is it's versatility - what for me ist much more important than a little more resolution and contrast. I made some test shots with the 100-400 and I was really impressed by the image quality - good enough for nearly everything.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the comments, gentlemen!

[@irishrose89775]

As someone who is on a limited budget this was such a great review. I wouldn't be able to afford the 300mm f4 but this is within my reach. The review pretty much made up my mind as the flexibility of the zoom with the sharpness you described and show in the photos makes my decision easy. The other option is the 40-150 f2.8 pro and teleconverters. This still would leave me short focal length wise for wildlife. I could purchase both the 40-150 pro and this lens for the same or less cost than the 300 pro and have much more flexibility. Certainly the 150 - 400 will have to wait for my lottery win!

[@cherylwolfson718]

Thanks. I was investigating this lens and it was helpful to hear your comments.

[@RobKnight]

Glad to help

[@yeldarbrellef]

Great review. Thank you for sharing your experience with both the Panasonic 100-400 and the Olympus. I know you like the Olympus lens better. However I have the G9 body. I have mostly Olympus glass and very happy with my 12-100, and 40-150 Pro’s. I was just wondering what your thoughts were as far as one of the 100-400 lenses with the G9. Would you still go Olympus which seems like a no brained or the Panny as it may be better stabilized with the matching stabilization technologies? Thanks for any feedback. Definitely leaning towards the Olympus as I already have the 1.4 TC

[@rayjenkins2754]

Maybe you should have, in your review, mentioned more @ what camera bodies were being used with a given lens ? The DFD on the Pany G9 may have had more to do with the increased % of soft photos than the Leica 100-400mm lens. I do wish Panasonic would come out with a future G9 mk 2 camera with phase detect AF.

[@BobK58]

I'm hoping to get this lens next Spring. Pretty excited about it.

[@RobKnight]

I'll cross my fingers for you!

[@rossthefiddler5890]

I've since bought the 100-400 lens (at the end of November) & have been getting some very nice photos with it (see Ross the fiddler in Flickr), but that doesn't mean every frame was great, the birds not positioned well, movement, or I didn't get the best focus or stabilised shot, but I am very pleased with it (I can't justify the 150-400 f/4.5 lens). Thanks again Rob for your videos on this lens.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for sharing your experience, Ross!

[@Collingwoodharbour]

Excellent Review, I quite enjoyed it. I have been using the Pana-Leica (100-400) for a few years now and have never been 100% happy with it. Based on your review I've ordered the Olympus 100-400 and both teleconverters. I think I'll likely pick up one of the 150-400 lens as well but they are a fair bit more money (at least in Canada) so will have save a bit first. Thanks again!!

[@tearitloosetearitloose4670]

Do you think the olympus is better than the panasonic?

[@jayyocis8643]

I bought the Pana 100-400mm and rarely used it (one of the first ones out). It was soft. Focus ring was wrong. Bought the Olympus 100-400mm this past weekend (traded the Pana). Have 1.4x converter. I'm real happy now. This review helps me justify the expense. It's sharp. IS has made it perfect. Your review was spot on on every point. Can't wait to carry on the trails and shoot macro shots from 15 feet away, ha ha. Enjoyed your post, need to caught up on them soon. I've started using Topaz denoise, sharpen and Giga AI, amazing. Has given my gear a new life.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the comment! Glad to help 🤙

[@davidcroxford6285]

Thanks for the review. Great seeing this. I came from Canon 1dx's into G9's and then over to EM-1x's and could not be happier. I love having gear that gives images easily good enough for magazine pages but doesn't kill your back on the way to the shoot. Some of my shooting involves surfing on O'ahu and so I'm always looking at the longer glass. I have the 300/4 pro and love it with both TC's but I'm anxious to get my hands on the 150-400. The Water Buffalo looked really sharp which just adds to the anticipation of that pro lens being available soon. thanks for your work!

[@RobKnight]

I feel the same way, David. This excellent lens made me even more excited for the upcoming 150-400 f4.5 pro

[@karsonjoshua828]

I guess Im asking the wrong place but does anybody know a way to get back into an instagram account?? I somehow lost my password. I appreciate any help you can give me!

[@reginaldadonis3525]

@Karson Joshua Instablaster :)

[@karsonjoshua828]

@Reginald Adonis Thanks so much for your reply. I found the site through google and I'm in the hacking process atm. Takes a while so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.

[@karsonjoshua828]

@Reginald Adonis it did the trick and I now got access to my account again. I am so happy:D Thank you so much, you saved my account !

[@GranthamAtHome]

Hi Rob. I recently learned about an easy hack that allows you to use a TC 1.4 or 2.0 on the Lumix/Leica 100-400. I have both so I gave it a try and it works! It's very easy. Simply remove the small plastic collar on the back of the lens which is held in with two small screws. It seems to work fine; just don't lose the two small screws!

[@poorsjm]

Thank you so much for this post. I found it very helpful in encouraging me to purchase this lens. Do you think it will balance well with my EM5 mark II as well?

[@heinz4841]

Hello Rob. First of all, great vid, great comparison. I am so much in doubt, cannot decide. I own the OM System OM-5 camera, a light weight champion. Is any of both lenses, escpecially the heavier Oly , "workable" with my camera?

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the kind words. You would probably want an extended grip to use a telephoto lens on that small body.

[@michael2704]

Hi Rob, thank you so much for this Review. In 2016 I switched from a Canon 6D to MFT because of the PanaLeica 100-400. With that lens I always had some very mixed feelings. On the one hand I loved how small and light the lens was, on the other hand - just like you - I often felt like the sharpness wasn't perfect. Although I took some great shots with the PanaLeica (at least in my opinion 😇) I am now really tempted to get the Olympus 100-400. Since I also own the 60mm 2.8 macro lens but I rarely use it, the Olympus might maybe not only replace the PanaLeica but also the 60mm f2.8 macro. One again: thanks a lot, Rob, take care.

[@RobKnight]

My pleasure! Glad to help

[@TheAccountingProfessor]

I kept thinking about purchasing the 300 Pro and I was also waiting for reviews of the 150-400 Pro when it comes out. But this 100-400 that is dust, splash and freeze proof at this price point just jumped to the top of my list. Thanks for the excellent review, Rob.

[@RobKnight]

Glad to help!

[@garybrown9719]

Mine too em1 markiii will have to wait

[@anthonygarbo8114]

My lens is on order (preorder) . . . can't wait for it to come. Amazing wildlife here in Arizona. Great review. . . . thanks for the info.

[@RobKnight]

My pleasure, thanks! I’ll (hopefully) be in Arizona in October

[@rossthefiddler5890]

Thanks Rob. That was all good to hear. I haven't spent on the 300 f4 lens as it was just a bit more that my better half was comfortable with me spending for a hobby, however, I do have the 40-150 & both MC14 & MC20 TC's (I'll be continuing to use my E-M1 II as well with or without the battery grip). My question would be, will this 100-400 do as good or better than the 40-150 plus MC20 at 300mm? I know there is that further advantage with the 100-400 plus MC14, so I guess I will be buying that lens at some point in time. I mostly want it for getting closer bird photos in my bushy backyard.

[@RobKnight]

Hi Ross, I’m going to post some comparison shots between this lens and the Olympus pro telephoto lenses this week. Stay tuned! 😃

[@rossthefiddler5890]

@@RobKnight That's great. Thanks.

[@muljadisuganda3688]

⁠@@RobKnightHi Rob, I wonder if you have posted the video which compare the 40-150/2.8 pro with 2x mc20 vs 100-400 at 300 ? Look forward for your great post (review) for both lenses. Thank you! 🙏🏼

[@kaczuchasly5174]

Hi. You think Oly 100-400 will have as well sharper images with panasonic GH-5, like Leica 100-400? Thank you.

[@awssjs54]

Many thanks for your great review. I am thinking of buying this lens for Wildlife photography to use on my Olympus E-M5iii. Any thoughts on suitability for this camera please?

[@RobKnight]

Glad it was helpful! This would be the largest lens I would use on the EM5III. The small grip might make handling a challenge, but I think it would be OK. A 3rd party grip extension would probably be good if you can find one

[@1955mlynch]

I have owned both lenses, both are very nice. But, I miss the Panasonic and wish I had it back. You fail to mention on the Oly lens that the zoom lock only works at 100mm, the Leica lock worked regardless where the zoom is set. The other plus on the Leica lens is the fact that lens control switches rotate with lens. I find Oly is much heavier. And, I have never had a soft image on the Leica. I think the micro contrast of the Leica is a little better than the Oly. Also the ability to use a TC on the Oly lens is really only a plus in moderate weather conditions where there is no heat effect issues which no lens can correct. Comparisons from Matti Sulanto and and Peter Forsgard between for those interested in comparing the two 100-400 mm offerings from Oly and Panasonic (Leica) are good for those interested in that zoom range.

[@drdehaan]

Totally agree. I owned both and for me the Leica is a keeper for the reasons you mentioned.

[@G8GTJav]

Does the Pana Leica work well with Olympus too? Do you lose lens stabilization?

[@Planedude60]

I just bought the Olympus 100-400 f/5-6.3 lens, and the final decision I made was after reviewing your video. I have th 300 f/4, but if the 100-400 is likeable to me, I'll sell my 300 f/4/. Thanks!

[@RobKnight]

Awesome! Thanks for the kind words

[@johnwyatt8844]

I have this lens with my mkiii and love it. It's a great camera for all types of wildlife photos. Also some long distance landscape.

[@glennjohnson8375]

Great review Rob. I bought this lens a week ago and have not been disappointed when shooting Kitesurfing here in Perth.

[@RobKnight]

Awesome! Thanks for the comment

[@nadinerichings4259]

Thanks for this review Rob. I have an Olympus OMD EM5 MII and want a better lens for willdife photography. This seems like the best option with the x1.4 teleconverter. Robin Wong gives it a great review, as you have. Almost everyone gives it a great view, and with the option for the TC, it seems an obviour choice. PC Mag gave it 3/5 stars and stated it was not sharp at 400mm, which is what the lens is designed for. However, you and Robin Wong have demonstarted with your images that it is brilliant at 400mm. so I really valued your review - about to watch you updated video of this lens. Cheers.

[@robfj3414]

Definitely on my radar. Also nice to find another 4/3 pro to learn from.

[@RobKnight]

Right on! Thanks Rob

[@madeleinegallagher6118]

Very helpful review! I specifically wanted a comparison between the Oly and Leica lenses. Yes, this is on my purchasing list!!

[@RobKnight]

Cool! Glad to help

[@badafusco]

Thx man. Heading to ebay now. Been hung up between this & the 300pro. Time to decide.

[@joostverplancke8249]

Just bought this lense second hand to do some occasional wildlife photography, and hopefully an upcoming safari. Glad to hear it is sharp. I have the 75-300, which I find difficult to hold still, as it weighs next to nothing, and the 40-150 F2.8, which I use for sport venues and which is tack sharp.

[@RobKnight]

The 100-400 should be much easier to use and get great results than the 75-300 👍

[@chrisearle5323]

Excellent review. I've been using the Pana-Leica lens for a couple of years now and have had a good time with it, but it does have problems locking in sharp - so much that I often shoot manual focus. And with the 150-400 pro forecast at about $4500 (yikes!), it looks like one of these 100-400's may be in my future.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks a lot, Chris!

[@alandimery3379]

Hello Rob. Great review, thanks. I have the Panasonic G9 with the Panasonic 100 - 400. I do a lot of wildlife and BIF photography. I am not happy with my low hit rate and when I heard of the Oly 100 400, that also takes converters, I have also thought of changing my camera/lens as well. Do you think that the OMD M1 mkIII is as good as the M1X for fast moving wildlife? It is a few £'s cheaper.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks, Alan. The performance is very similar, but the mkIII doesn’t have bird detection AF. It comes in handy, but I haven’t found it to be indispensable at this point.

[@alandimery3379]

@@RobKnight thanks. Another question please. The Oly 100 400 is on short supply at the moment and so I would have to wait for it. For bird focussing, do you think the Panasonic 100 400 tele lens would be better with the Oly M1 mkiii than the Panasonic G9?

[@RobKnight]

I would imagine you would get similar results on both cameras. The Lumix cameras don’t have phase-detect AF, so the Lumix lenses won’t take advantage of the phase-detect in the Oly bodies.

[@tseven]

Hey there Rob, I just got this lens a few days ago and I noticed there was a little bit of "play" when mounted on my OMD EM1 MKII when twisting the lens. It's on the body, locked in, but it rotates a little. My other lens have the same slack/play. Wondering if you or others here have noticed the same thing with their cameras.

[@RobKnight]

I haven’t noticed that, but I don’t think I have mounted the 100-400 on my mkII. I don’t have any play on the mkIII or the 1X

[@vermis8344]

"The worst thing about this lens is you'll have too many keepers to choose from." You sell it very well. 😂 I was eyeing the Lumix 100-400 for a few years, but now, a few weeks after buying an E-M1X, I hear it's being discontinued. (And it couldn't use teleconverters anyway!) Plenty of reasons to switch my attention to the Olympus version, but I think this video tipped me over the edge.

[@skipsaunders5974]

At the moment, I'm still waiting for the 150-400. I have the 300 f4, my wife uses the lumix 100-400..... we note that the lumix is a bit soft (as you noted)....but we would like to see image to image comparisons...

[@RobKnight]

Yes! I’m excited about the 150-400 f4.5pro as well. Maybe I’ll see if I can borrow a Lumix 100-400 to compare...

[@Chris-Brown-]

I've been using the 75-300 at 300 about 90% of the time. My new 100-400 with mc14 is arriving tomorrow

[@erinwilson3915]

Thanks for the review! I had a deposit on the 150-400mm f4.5 Pro lens before it came out. But I just couldn't take the plunge at the price point. Is the price point reasonable for the f4.5 150-400mm Pro lens especially compared to the competition? Yes, I think so. But it is too rich for my needs. And the heft of that lens is too big for me to control. So....I've looked at the OM-D 100-400mm lens several times. And almost took the plunge on it. Your video is excellent and I think I will purchase the 100-400mm lens. So, I'm very excited to be able to add reach without a lot of weight.

[@skipsaunders5974]

do you not have the lumix 100-400 anymore?... (I was surprised that you didn't do a side by side comparison) You wouldn't happen to have any images from each lens that could be compared?....thanks for the great review - good info

[@RobKnight]

Thanks Skip. I don’t have a Lumix 100-400 anymore. I shot that lens for years, but I wouldn’t be able to do a side-by-side comparison

[@gavinedmondstone316]

Thanks for the informative review. I have the 300 and could not be more pleased with it so I don't have a need for this one. The zoom would be very interesting if I were shooting large mammals a lot but I am mostly a bird guy.

[@RobKnight]

I still mostly use the 300mm f4pro

[@tizio54]

Excellent review. I'm glad to hear that the Olympus is the superior lens, because at first I thought "why does Olympus develop a lens that already exist in the form of the Panasonic-Leica 100-400mm, and make it larger, heavier and less fast (F5 vs F4)". I once had the Panasonic 100-400 and my experience was similar: not so many keepers, stiff zoom and fairly soft beyond 300mm. So I sold it. Now I have the 40-150 F2.8 pro and the 300mm F4 Pro, plus the MC-14 and MC-20. I wonder if it would make sense to add this Olympus 100-400mm to my kit, or even replace my 300mm. The 300mm is significantly faster and sharper, and better stabilised, but the narrow fixed angle of view can be quite restrictive, so the zooming feature is a big plus for the 100-400mm. I wonder how sharp it is with the MC-14.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the comment. If you already have the Olympus pro telephoto lenses you are good to go. Now, when the 150-400mm f4.5 pro comes out this winter I might have a different answer ;)

[@jeffslade1892]

Did you have the PL100-400 on an Olympus back? Then it might make sense to get the Olympus 100-400, The Olympus Pro 150-400 will Synch-IS, but only if you can afford £6,500 quid. The Dual2 stabilisation on the G9 with the PL100-400 is other-worldly, not only hand-held but you can wave it about. It's a bit soft at the long end? Maybe but all extra-long lenses are - stop it down a notch more. MFT lenses should be completely compatible - but they're not. Which is a shame and disgrace on both companies but mainly Olympus for not fully integrating the Lumix OIS, which they can do but choose not to. There is a badly documented Olympus Patent-Pending function that improves handling of Lumix OIS lenses that have a switch. Turn the lens OIS switch ON. In the camera menu turn "Use Lens IS" OFF. This then uses part and part body and lens IS. The two do not talk to each other, it is not Synch-IS and certainly not Dual-IS but is there, certainly from E-M5ii onwards.

[@robertgonzales8258]

I am glad to see this Olympus 100-400. I bought the Pana 100-400 for a trip to Botswana a few years ago. I also found it a bit softer (but still ok) at the long end than my Oly 40-150 pro. However, what really bothered me was that I had to get the autofocus repaired twice and it wasn't a quick turnaround from Pana. I sold it last year and was debating whether to buy the Oly 300 or not. Glad I waited.

[@RobKnight]

Sorry to hear about your bad experience with service, but I think you’ll like the Oly 100-400 better anyway 👍

[@corrbox2]

Thanks Rob, excellent review. I think I am going to try renting this 100-400 lens for my upcoming trip to S. Africa. 🇿🇦 I also have the Lumix Leica 100-400, my experienecs are the same as you said in your review. Too many soft shots. I was never confident I was getting the most out oof that 100-400 lens. I cannot get the rental of the "super duper" 150-400 f4.5 lens in time for this trip. There are too few in the country and OM Systems is just not shipping the lenses that quickly. I'll settle for the 100-400 f5-6.3 lens. I'm hoping for great results with the new OM-1 and this 100-400 lens. I do not think I will use the 1.4 tele-converter, but just in case, I will bring it along. There's no dount that the 300 f4 pro lens is a terrific lens. I used it on my Lumix G9, and did get terrific results on a safari in 2019. However; you are right, sometimes you just do not need the 600mm of that lens, and a zoom is better to limit the focal length for the right shot. I apprecate your detailed review. 👍⭐⭐👍⭐😎📷👌📸

[@MaidenBklyn]

I am using the Panasonic G9, with 100-300mm panasonic lens. As a newbie bird photographer, i have had fun using this set up, but find auto focus is very fiddly and many photos are not tack sharp. Would you recommend changing my camera body to Olympus to be able to use the Olympus 100-400? cheers, Marisa

[@RobKnight]

Hi Marissa, the Lumix 100-400 or the Olympus 100-400 would be a step up from the Lumix 100-300. The Olympus 300mmf4 pro is another big jump in image quality from either of those. I found the autofocus in the Olympus bodies to be superior to the Lumix bodies, and the Olympus lenses are designed to work with the Phase detect AF in the Olympus bodies. In my experience, the Lumix AF won’t match the Olympus until they decide to abandon their contrast-based AF

[@henriliu9851]

informative review, tks. and I am interested in your assessment about this lens used in video shooting, coz I am about to put together some gadgets for motorcade shooting "above the horizon " style

[@SN-kk1hd]

I would stick to my 300f4 pro for bird photography. 300f4 pro focuses faster, crisper and sharper images, performs way better at low light (even though it differs by about 1.5 stop aperture), and is much more usable with teleconverters than 100-400. 100-400 is only good for bright conditions, which is rare if you are shooting under the canopy of rainforest. The 100mm less in focal length does not mean much as the cropped photo from 300 f4 pro is still sharper than the 100-400, and if needed, MC14 can give almost equal reach at a slightly faster aperture. Zooming out was rarely an issue since the birds are small, and rarely get too close to fit the frame. Even if the birds get too close, I'll just get the close-up headshot, which is still amazing to look at.

[@cwl1354]

You gave me a clearer picture whether to wait for the 150-400 pro or to get this lens right away. My initiate concern is that the lens don't sync with oly cam. But I think since I am not shooting video, it shouldn't be a great issue. Thanks for sharing your view.

[@RobKnight]

My pleasure. Thanks for watching

[@tim1398]

Olympus may have sent you a cherry-picked copy, my Oly 100-400 is definitely inferior to the sharpness of my PL100-400. And with a 1.4TC its too poor to bother with.

[@ArnaudSiemons]

KZbin reviews can sometimes be very confusing for an aspirant camera/lens buyer. Terry Lane did an excellent job on the Pana Leica 100-400mm and did not deliver a sales pitch...

[@stehlealexander]

Great thanks! QUESTION is: 300mmf4 (& mc1.4) vs 100-400 ?..???? TO BUY??

[@RobKnight]

If I had to pick just one I would say the 100-400 for the versatility. I would take the 140-400mm f4.5pro over both, but that’s not a lens that most folks (including me) can afford

[@stehlealexander]

@@RobKnight thank you so much for the honest answer! 🙏🏻

[@Karzka]

Thank you for this video! All the reviews cover the specs, the marketing and the lens in action. But you really nailed it with practical info, comparing it to logical alternatives. Really liked the part about teleconverters, as I was seriously considering either the MC-14 or the MC-20. Looks like I'll need to set some money apart for this beauty :)

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the comment! I’m glad to help

[@Capius1272]

Where was the "comparison"? He shared opinions. I listened. I saw no comparisons.

[@PaulSafford]

Excellent review and great talking points - thank you for this. You probably saved me from first getting the Panasonic as it's available used for much less but I didn't know the teleconverters wouldn't work with it.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks Paul, glad to help! 👍

[@erwinmayer5033]

Hi Rob, great review! Do I understand correctly that you have used both the Lumix and the Olympus lens both on the Olympus Body? You also mentioned that the OLY lens is compatible with teleconverters, the Lumix isn't. Does it have to do with the lens or the Body?

[@RobKnight]

Thanks Erwin! I’ve used both lenses, but I haven’t used the Lumix lens on an Olympus body. You would give up PDAF and compatible lens/body IS if you use the Lumix on an Oly body. The Olympus teleconverters don’t fit on the Lumix lens because the teleconverter has to fit into the back of the lens.

[@erwinmayer5033]

@@RobKnight thank you so much for the quick reply!!

[@nabihamine6188]

Thank you for the great information I want to get one MC either 14-or 20 and since 20 will have more reach I was going toward it until I saw ur video what do I think if you would get one MC only the 20 I guess would be good for moon shoots only as it’s stable and not moving the 14 at F9 would be attractive even with less reach or should I get both please let me know ur opinion

[@RobKnight]

Hi Nabih, and thanks. I wouldn’t recommend using the 100-400 with the TC-20 because the minimum aperture with them at combo is f13, and diffraction will most likely prevent you from getting a tack sharp image at those higher f-stops. The TC-14 works great with the 100-400, and you will be able to get great moon shots. You just might need to crop a bit 👍

[@cecilthornhill4999]

Rob - Thanks for this video and I look forward to your next tests on BIF and Pro Capture in general. I also have the Pan-Leica 100-400mm and have just started using it on my Olympus OMD M1ii. Focus is so much better on the Olympus body, but the lens is about the same (to me) in terms of sharpness. I do think the Panasonic is a good lens, but it just does not appear to give me quite the same results as my other Olympus Pro lenses (like the 40-150mm). I was waiting to see what Olympus did on the 150-400mm, or if I can "give up a zoom" and move to the Olympus 300mm. This is another option to consider now. As you say, it is not that you can't get sharp results with the Panasonic, but yeah, the percentage of keepers is not where I would like it to be. I guess I am going to just have to try the Olympus 100-400mm or keep saving and waiting for the 150-400mm Pro. Ah, my poor bank account!

[@RobKnight]

Hi Cecil, thanks for your comment! I’ve heard from a LoT of photographers who share our experience with the Leica 100-400. Its capable, but inconsistent, and nowhere near the quality of the Oly lenses on an Oly body. Maybe the PDAF? Either way, I think the Olympus 100-400 is worth a try

[@cecilthornhill4999]

Rob Knight 🙂 I fear a purchase is in my future!

[@RobKnight]

Don’t be scared! 😆

[@jamesmorgan7346]

I’m waiting for the pro lens because it unlocks some of the features of the M1X I appreciate. But price may drive me to this lens. Thanks for the review.

[@gregm6894]

This lens with the M1X is pure magic. I have quit carrying a tripod unless lighting is extremely low. The combination balance extremely well. Obviously, if you can afford the 150-400 Pro that would be better yet.

[@k6usy]

I’ll wait for this new lens to go on sale before I consider getting one.

[@tobiasdavid3096]

I was rather sure that I‘d keep the PanaLeica 100-400. But I have the same issues with it as you. Now that you‘re so impressed by the focus of the Olympus... I‘m really considering buying it. The 150-400 Pro will be too expensive for me. Nice video. Happy I found you.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks Tobias! I think you will appreciate the difference

[@petedraper5185]

Thank you for your assessment. I currently own a PL 100 - 400mm, which I use with my EM1X and a PL 200mm f2.8 + TC14, which I use with my EM1 mark III. I have been debating whether or not to part exchange my PL 100 - 400mm for the new Olympus version; and this video is pushing me towards doing so. I agree with your point about keepers with the PL 100 - 400 - it certainly isn't in the same league as the PL 200mm f2.8. I look forward to the release of the 150 - 400mm f4.5, but the weight may be prohibitive for me.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the comment, Pete

[@danieldougan269]

I've been using the 40-150mm f2.8 PRO with the MC-20, and I haven't been all that impressed with the results I have been getting for birds. Should I get this or the 300mm f4? I love the 40-150, but I'm not sure I love it with the MC-20.

[@UnluckyNewbie]

You cant zoom in or out with f4 pro. If you shoot birds mostly in sunny days - get 100-400 with 1,4x mc-14. 300 f4 pro is superb lens, but it lacks zoom capability. Im already ordered 100-400 to my m1-3. Im already have 40-150 2,8 with 1,4 mc-14 tc. Im really exited to try 100-400 with tc on . One problem - it's now -23 Celsius degree in Moscow... Im afraid to shoot at temps like that :(

[@danieldougan269]

@@UnluckyNewbie Thank you. Honestly, my main problem is that the birds are still too far away even from the long end of my lens, and when I crop in, I can't get enough detail. I am not concerned about the ability to zoom out because I almost never do that when I'm looking for birds. For other kinds of photography, sure, but that's what the 40-150mm should be used for without a teleconverter. Just the other day, I was trying to capture an eagle soaring above me, and I got some solid shots, but even a huge bird like a bald eagle was still too small in the frame, so I had to crop in. When I did, I found there just wasn't enough detail in the image to be usable. I can't exactly get closer to the bird in that situation. I think the 40-150 is a fantastic lens, but it was never really meant to be used with a 2X teleconverter. It works, but it just can't resolve all the detail in the shot. So, I either need a longer lens like this or a sharper lens like the 300mm f4, and that lens seems to work just fine with the MC-14 and MC-20 teleconverters...I own both.

[@formermpc10]

Thanks Rob. I've preordered this lens based on your review. Did you say the hood is reversible? I was thinking I'd buy the Pro version if the quality of this one was just decent. But it sounds like it's more than that.

[@RobKnight]

Congratulations! I think you’ll really be impressed. Yes, the lens hood is reversible for storage

[@Jason45G]

Have you done any side by side image comparisons with the 40-150 with the mc-20? I own the 40-150 pro and am on the fence on getting the 2x or just getting the 100-400

[@RobKnight]

I have not done any side-by-side tests, but I would bet on the 40-150, even with the 2X converter

[@jolandadenbakker9280]

Hi Rob, thank you for your niet review, I just bought the panasonici 100-400, and use it on the OMD 1 mark ii, thought I have to practis more to get sharp images, which is probably truth .. but it is "nice" to hear I am not the only one strugling with that. Aftershave your review I am seriously thinking of trade in for this 100-400 olympus lens, also the possibility to use the olympus converters is very exciting. Am afraid this is ging to cost me soms money

[@RobKnight]

I think you would appreciate the difference on your Olympus body, and if you need teleconverters it’s a no-brainer :)

[@kb1qzh]

I think I'm going to get this lens. Somewhat disappointed that it doesn't do Sync I.S. but I guess that's a pro feature. On side topic, do you have any videos for how to hold a camera with a relatively long lens? When I go out with the M1 MkII and 40-150 Pro + 2xTC, I notice I sway a lot when standing.

[@RobKnight]

I think you’ll enjoy the lens! And a video of hand-holding techniques for long lenses is a great idea 👍

[@edwardlin2941]

I think Robin Wong explained how to best take advantage of the non-Sync I.S.

[@RobKnight]

Robin is great about getting into all of the details! I just used the lens as I would use any other lens and posted my opinion. I’ve been trying the lens with the lens IS on, and then turning it off to only use the IBIS. In my real-world shooting I can’t tell much of a difference. I haven’t had the need to shoot extremely slow shutter speeds with the lens, and that’s where a small advantage one way or the other can make a big difference.

[@brucegraner5901]

Interesting review and that's coming from a G9 shooter with the 100-400mm zoom.

[@edwardlin2941]

Was considering between PL 100-400 or Pan 100-300 and decided on the latter. Due an address typo, 100-300 was canceled and sent back to retailer. So glad that happened! Appreciate the real user experience break down of the benefits of using Oly 100-400 and MC-14, seems to be best option in terms if cost and IQ. Think this would be a great addition to the 12-100 I just got for my E-M1ii. Going to be a big dent in my wallet's though... Thanks!

[@RobKnight]

That’s a lucky break for sure! The combo with the 12-100 will allow you to shoot just about anything with only 2 lenses 🤘

[@WMedl]

Did you switch off the IBIS on the Olympus camera when shooting wirh the Panasonic 100-400 and OIS on? Unfortunately the stabilizers of Olympus and Panasonic do not work together and it is said that the IBIS would interfere badly with the OIS. It is also adviced to switch off IBIS on the camera when shooting on a tripod. By the way the MTF measurements done by ephotozine are much better for the Pansonic Leica 100-400 than for the Olympus 100-400.

[@RobKnight]

The oly cameras won’t use the IBIS and the Panasonic lens IS at the same time. You don’t need to turn it off. They do not interfere with each other. Modern cameras also do not require you to turn off the iS when using a tripod. That was common practice with early IS lenses, but I haven’t found a need to turn that off on a tripod in years. My opinions are based on my experience using the lenses in the field, which is profoundly more important to me than MTF charts

[@ammadoux]

the only review that convened me that i should consider it. i have the 300 mm pro. i really need something fast for 200 mm. i find the Leica 200 prime very expensive. wonder if olympus will make a m4/3 equivalent to there lovely 90-250 mm f2.8 that was for there old dslr cameras

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the comment! The 40-150mm f2.8 pro works beautifully with the MC-14 and MC-20 teleconverters. That might be something a bit faster for you to check out

[@ridealongwithrandy]

I just fitted the dress ring from my 300mm f4 pro (when not using tripod ring) onto my 100-400 Olympus lens. Nice! I was trying to find the dress ring for the 100-400, but it does not exist.

[@RobKnight]

Yeah, I scratched the tripod mount on a borrowed 100-400 and I replaced it with the one from my personal 300mm f4 😆

[@rudolfabelin383]

Thanks for a good review. I am a Lumix GH5 shooter and have been thinking about the Leica 100-400mm. Read many reviews. Many mention that it a bit soft from 300mm and the zoom seems to be very stiff. So on the copy I tried in a shop. I also do video. Unfortunately the teleconverters does not work with Lumix. End line is that I am tempted by this lens. PS Thanks for not being one of these reviewers that go to a Zoo.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks Rudolf. The zoom ring on the Lumix 100-400 is notoriously stiff, and if you want to use teleconverters there is only one choice. Thanks for the good feedback about not going to the zoo. Lol. I am lucky to have a herd of water buffalo nearby 😆

[@klackon1]

Rudolf Abelin. B used to own 2 x EM1 bodies and attached an Olympus 300mm f4 to one and a PL 100 - 400mm on the other and used them side by side. The PL was not as sharp when compared to the 300mm, but when viewed in isolation I could not really fault it. I don't consider it to be soft, other than at f6.3, perhaps. I still own a PL 100 - 400mm (not the original one) and consider it to be a great lens, though the zoom is very stiff. Will I swap it for the new Olympus 100 - 400mm? Probably not, though it is tempting.

[@rudolfabelin383]

@@klackon1 Question. What do yo mean by "not the original one". Thanks in advance.

[@klackon1]

@@rudolfabelin383. I sold both EM1 bodies and purchased an EM1 mark II and a Nikon D500. I sold the PL 100 - 400mm and kept my 300mm f4 + MC14. I have now gone back to a full M43 system so purchased another PL 100 - 400mm. I needed a really good, lightweight lens with a long reach. The PL suits my purpose. Check out some of the images on the Olympus Wildlife FB site - several members use a PL 100 - 400mm.

[@rudolfabelin383]

@@klackon1 Thanks!!!

[@drdehaan]

The PanaLeica 100-400 is also dust and splashproof. Very sharp and better buildquality than the Olympus 100-400. I owned both and kept the Leica. Never had a soft or not sharp image with both lenses but the PanaLeica is the winner for me.

[@tacul9333]

This lens with the Synch IS feature would be just about perfect.

[@koolkutz7]

Looks a tidy set-up Rob combined with the EM1-X. Interesting times as Canon now have their 600mm & 800mm F11 lenses for full frame mirrorless; and they are both cheaper than this Olympus lens but at the cost of about 2.5 stops of light.

[@RobKnight]

Yeah, I’m curious about those new Canon lenses. They’re still pretty BIG, and the fixed (slow) aperture is an interesting choice. People talk about “equivalent” aperture, but that’s more to do with depth of field than exposure. 2.5 stops is A LOT!

[@koolkutz7]

@@RobKnight Yes it's quite a lot of light really. It makes the Olympus system level up to the FF counterparts very well.

[@ar43r]

I had the same issue with oly/penny combo. However there is is no such Problem with g9. I heard from the camera conspiracy that olympuses phase detection does not work with Panny lenses

[@RobKnight]

It's no conspiracy... Lumix cameras don't have phase detection AF. Not even the full-frame ones!

[@letni9506]

I know you can use this lens on panasonic camera's but can you also use the 1.4 tc with the lens.

[@RobKnight]

I believe so

[@WarrenCapps8]

One other thing worth mentioning is how well this lens will match up with the 12-100mm lens. Just think, with two lenses, you have an effective focal length of 24-800 with the chance to stretch even more with the teleconverters.

[@RobKnight]

Absolutely! Two lenses and a teleconverter and you’d be able to cover just about anything

[@mediamannaman]

I'm sick. I'm invested in the Panasonic gear (GH4, G9) and looking to upgrade my recently-purchased Panasonic 100-300 to the Panny 100-400. I'm just getting started in doing bird/wildlife photography as a hobby (I use the G9 for real estate photography professionally). I've read and watched videos really praising the Panasonic 100-400. Now I see you, a photographer who has shot 20,000+ images with the P100-400 on a Panasonic G9 (just like me) saying it doesn't hold a candle to the Olympus counterparts (at, what, $2,400 for the EM1X and $1,500 for the lens), in terms of the AF getting images sharp. What to do... No, I just can't justify laying out $3,900 for a hobby versus upgrading to the Panny lens for only $800 more. Nevertheless, thanks so much for sharing your experience!

[@RobKnight]

Don’t worry, man, you can do fine with your Lumix kit. If you find yourself shooting more and more wildlife you may want to try the competition 😉

[@ar43r]

I had the same issue as Rob with Em1ii/panny combo. But it works like a charm with g9. See my images at Instagram: ivandmarja. I love g9 with panny.

[@davehollander6543]

Nice review! I bought a used copy last week before I saw this. I've had a tough time with the 300/4 --it's just not delivering the IQ for me. The 100-400 is much better PLUS you're right--a zoom gives you a huge targeting advantage. I'll consider the 100-400 PRO if & when it ever becomes available.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks! That’s not my experience with the 300mm f4, but I’m glad you like your 100-400!

[@davehollander6543]

@@RobKnight I know! I really don't understand why I couldn't get better results with the 300/4 but just had to put it behind me.

[@ThePaleBlueDot94]

Hi Rob. I've been waiting for a review like this. Like many I had the Panaleica 100-400 and like you i got some awesome telephoto landscapes with it...but i found not all the images were focus sharp. I had some throw away images and I've been waiting for Olympus to bring one out because they always super reliable to bring out a great lens. Anyway I digress. The point of my comment is to ask you about your experience with the tele converters. I've had mixed reviews in terms of risk v benefit with the converter. I'm interested to hear your opinion. Thanks for the great review...100-400 with 1.4 converter is a compelling combo.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks Peter, I think the TC14 is very usable on the 100-400, but I haven’t had good results the TC20

[@ThePaleBlueDot94]

@@RobKnight one last question and I don't know if you do this kind of thing but have you done (or thinking of doing) a comparison of the 40-150 with 2x converter and the new 100-400?

[@Rednoise9999]

What is better: using the stabilization on the OMD 1 M2 or on the 100-400? The sync does not work together. Thanks, Hans Dekker.

[@RobKnight]

Hi Hans, The IS does works in conjunction with the IBIS with that body&lens combo, so I would leave them both on. It is not as effective as the “Sync IS” in the 300pro, 12-100pro, and the new 150-400pro, but it still works well together.

[@Rednoise9999]

@@RobKnight Thank you Rob. I noticed that it is hard to get crisp sharp images with the lens on 400 mm of birds who are 20 m and further away. A disapointment...

[@RobKnight]

@@Rednoise9999 sorry to hear that. I haven’t had that issue

[@Rednoise9999]

@@RobKnight Problem solved. The Kenko protection filter was the reason of the lack of sharpness. The results now - without filter- are very good. Do you use a protection filter?

[@RobKnight]

@@Rednoise9999 ah! That makes sense. I don’t use protective filters. I just use the lens shade

[@ryantang8146]

I own both lenses and to be honest, the image quality of the 100-400 with the Mc14 isn’t as good as the 300 f4 pro with the MC 2.0. When the light is good, it is ok but because the image stabilization isn’t nearly as good as the f4 pro so you tend to shoot higher iso too so I guess that’s the trade of with a zoom.

[@RobKnight]

If you need IQ closer to the 300mm f4 pro you have to step up to the 150-400mm f4.5 pro. There is definitely a difference between the Olympus pro lenses and the rest of the line.

[@TXTundra-ex8bw]

I placed my order last month but still waiting there’s no way I can afford the $7500 pro version so easy decision for me your review will make me sleep better purchasing this lens thx so much. Sub

[@RobKnight]

Enjoy your new lens!

[@cdusza1]

Have you since upgraded your firmware to the 2.5 and re -shot the lecia 100-400?

[@stevebodiford2701]

Doesn't this give you dual IBIS vs. just in camera stabilization using the Pana-Leica? Maybe that could be the improvement?

[@RobKnight]

I used the Lumix 100-400 on a G9, and that Combo uses dual IS. The Olympus 100-400 on an Olympus camera yields much better results. I believe the PDAF has something to do with it for sure. The Olympus AF is just more reliable in my experience.

[@orphanuprising]

Do you still have your G9? Would you be willing to swap the two lenses across the two bodies and share your results? I have a G9 and wondering which of these two will be more cost effective.

[@RobKnight]

I’m afraid I don’t have a G9. The Olympus 100-400 will be the only option if you want to use teleconverters, and the Lumix/Leica has IS that will work with your IBIS. I think it depends on what your needs are

[@orphanuprising]

@@RobKnight The IBIS and lens IS combo is a strong consideration for sure. Did you ever try the Oly on the G9 when you had it? Just curious if that image quality translates on the G9 the way it does on the Olympus body

[@RobKnight]

No, I never tried any of the current Oly telephoto lenses on a Lumix body. The new Olympus 100-400 is sharper than the Lumix in my experience, but I would image that the PDAF in the Oly bodies helps with that some too

[@stephantsan4462]

Thanks. Would you please test it on Lumix G9 (especially if the Dual IS works)?

[@RobKnight]

Hi, I don’t have a G9 to test, but dual IS only works on Olympus bodies, just as Lumix dual IS only works on Lumix bodies.

[@EdKrisiak]

Current Olympus lenses with IS will not synch with a Panasonic body. I doubt this lens will have synch IS with a Panasonic body.

[@ryantang8146]

I don’t think this combination in terms of IS would be better than the Lumix Leica 100-400 with dual Is and that’s 6.5 stop of Is . This lens only offer 3 stops alone and it does not work with the body. Why even put IS there ? 3 stops is rubbish. The body of EM1x and EM1iii body alone already has 7 stop IS

[@RobKnight]

You can always turn the lens IS off and just use the IBIS. In my experience it works well either way.

[@dkirk335]

@@ryantang8146 -I think you miss the point about what axis the IS is controlling, they work in tandem to get the best of what each can do.

[@perandersdahlstrom2846]

The image stabilisation is not Sync IS as the 300 F4. You get about 3 stops with the lens IS or turn it off and use camera IBIS .

[@RobKnight]

Correct

[@dmsphoto17]

Thanks for the review. You definitely bring up some valuable points that others have not mentioned. I didn’t realize this lens was coming and I ordered the 40-150 pro with both the 1.4 and 2x converters. But that said, I don’t see it as a this or that decision and both have their place. What it does suggest is that rather than the 300, this could be a nice alternative especially as this lens focuses so close and it’s smaller and lighter. My understanding is that as it’s not a pro lens it doesn’t have sync IS so the IS on the lens and body do not communicate - they work independently of one another and in some situations may interfere with each other. This may be why you felt it was more solid with the 300 which does have sync IS. Just a guess. Not sure though. I’m sure the 150-400 4.5 will be great. I’m also guessing it will be quite a bit larger than the 100-400 and cost more than the 300. I am curious if it will be an internal zoom. That would be a nice touch. Cheers and thanks again! Be well.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the comment, David. “Sync IS” is a brand name of sorts for the pro-level dual Olympus IS. This lens DOES work in tandem with the IBIS, but only in 3-axis, not 5-axis. I have tried the 100-400 with the lens IS on and off, and I get similar results both ways. It’s still very effective, but not as solid as the 300mm f4. There was a camera firmware update released with the new lens for the IS compatibility, and from what I understand, at least one reviewer tried the lens without this update in their camera. I believe this may account for the IS interference you mentioned. I’m sure the 150-400mm f4.5 pro will be more expensive, but I don’t know how much. The 100-400 is so good that I’m REALLY excited for the (assumed) even better quality of the 150-400! That said, I think I could live happily ever after with the 100-400 too

[@dmsphoto17]

Rob Knight Hey Rob. Thanks for the IS clarification. I was going by other reviewers comments - my apologies. Good to hear that a firmware update helps. So far the only somewhat negative review I have seen thus far is on DPReview. But they limited testing to only use 200 iso and then commented that it would require lower SS so thus be problematic for stopping action. From what I have seen, I’m not sure what wildlife photographer only uses ISO 200. Anyways... Just ordered the EM1 iii so look forward to just taking some photos soon! Cheers.

[@RobKnight]

Lol. I saw that. I shoot wildlife at ISO800 in broad daylight! I’m usually closer to ISO1600-3200. While I understand why he was trying to keep the ISO low, I thought it was odd that they didn’t include ANY photos that were more representative of real-world wildlife photography settings.

[@jeffslade1892]

@@RobKnight This it the Olympus Patent-Pending "Olympus Dual Stabilisation" feature. It is so not Synch-IS or Lumix Dual-IS. I have noticed it reduces some of the axes but you do have both lens and body IS. And it does work with Lumix lenses. Which tells us Olympus do know how to integrate Lumix OIS lenses but choose not to. Which is a disservice to MFT photographers.

[@jeffslade1892]

@@RobKnight On the G9 ISO 12800 is probably as good as ISO 6400. It's in the much improved sensor read noise. Consequently there is little more to be gained at ISO 800 than at ISO 3200. Now some low ISO settings are a little noisier than higher ones, what we do see is a trade-off for dynamic range. There are steps in the noise vs ISO graph. The PEN-F seems to exhibit the same, I suspect they use the same sensor. It's not just Panasonic. The LMOS sensors are still designed by Panasonic, made by Sony. As the ISO goes up, less dynamic range - but we can fiddle with the gain curve. There again if you have enough light to use ISO 800, use ISO 400. Base may be ISO 200 but optimum seems to be ISO 400.

[@davidblack2632]

I went to my local camera store today and pre-ordered this lens. I might still get the 150-400/4.5 if it ever gets released.

[@RobKnight]

That’s great! I hope you will enjoy it. The 150-400 f4.5pro is coming out this winter. I’m told before the end of the year

[@davidblack2632]

@@RobKnight I will mist likely get the 150-400/4.5 when it gets released. It has been a long wait for this Pro lens. I figure a lens in hand is worth more than a promise of a better lens in the future. I can see use for both. The 100-400 to pair up with the 12-100 for more casual outings and the 150-400 to pair up with the 40-150 for more serious wildlife outings.

[@RobKnight]

That sounds exactly right to me!

[@A.H.59]

I've owned the Panasonic Leica 100-400 on a GX85 body for about a year now. I shoot a lot of birds & am generally happy with the results as I'm getting a lot of sharp usable images. I also like the fact that it's a little lighter & smaller than the Olympus & faster at the wide end. On the downside the zoom is stiff as many have noted & it won't accept teleconverters which is a big plus for the Olympus.

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the comment, Adam. I’m glad to hear that you’re happy with the gear you’re using. That’s all that matters!

[@MatthiasBouillon]

How is the handling with such a big lens and the small body of the GX85? I'm between the Leica 100-400 and the lumix 100-300 and thought the Leica might be too heavy for the GX

[@RobKnight]

Matthias Bouillon the 100-400 would be unwieldy on the GX body in my opinion, unless you’re using it on a tripod. I suppose it depends on how long you’re using it in a day. I tend to be out all day when I’m shooting wildlife, so I would want something with a more substantial grip

[@MatthiasBouillon]

@@RobKnight agree with you. I think I go with the 100-300, with 500g, it should still be manageable. Maybe in the future, when the G9 comes in financial reach, the leica might be an upgrade 😁

[@A.H.59]

@@MatthiasBouillon I bought the GX85 because of budget restrictions but it actually does everything I want it to do. I admit that the long lens would probably be better matched with a bigger camera body but it's something I've gotten used to & I really don't notice it any more.

[@jasonpalmer2497]

trying to find out if it can handle some croping as the pano lens did not great vid :)

[@mrmoon1482]

Would this lens work ok on my lumix G85? Would it be better than the Panasonic 100-400 on the lumix body?

[@RobKnight]

It will work on any mirco4/3 body. You would have to use it on an Olympus body to take advantage of the Phase detect AF

[@EugeneMaynard]

For me, I shall wait for the 150-400 pro. At present, I satisfy my longer telephoto needs on MFT by adapting a Canon 300mm 2.8L and using their teleconverters for extreme reach. Optically I am totally satisfied but I would like the flexibility of my Oly 40-150 pro and hopefully this new lens will be considerably lighter even though it looks like a beast. The only question is how high they price is because if it is too close to a second hand Canon 200-400mm 4.0L then I would probably reconsider and stick to a Canon. 🙏🏾

[@RobKnight]

I’m glad you’re having good luck with your adapted lenses. Do you get the fast PDAF with adapted EF glass?

[@EugeneMaynard]

You hit the nail on the head Rob! Good question! I originally got into MFT because Canon were not giving me the video features I wanted, so I bought a GH5 with the intention of only using it for video with manual focussing with adapted Canon glass and supplemented that package by immediately buying just two native lenses that could give me manual focussing, so I chose the Oly 7-14 f2.8 and the 40-150 F2.8. I soon realised that MFT with quality glass can actually produce fantastic results for stills and began using it more and more as part of my stills kit along with my Canons. I adapt my Canon glass with a metabones speedbooster and for my needs in stills (only manual focussing for video) the adapted glass is fast enough for concerts and normal event work but would not meet my needs for sport or fast wildlife or birds in flight in terms of tracking! This is why I am actually very keen on seeing how good that new 150-400 f4.5 with built in 1.2 extender will be in terms of both video and stills. If it follows in the same tradition of the present Oly pro lenses, we are in for a treat, admittedly an expensive one, however, great lenses can last a lifetime!🙏🏾

[@RobKnight]

From everything I’m hearing, the 150-400 f4.5pro should be equal to the quality we’re used to from Olympus pro glass. I can’t wait to get my hands on one!!

[@EugeneMaynard]

Looking forward to your review!😃🙏🏾

[@markrhodes5474]

I shoot both the Panasonic Leica 100-400 MM f4-6.3 and Olympus 300 f4 IS Pro on a Panasonic G9 The Leica 100-400mm is just as sharp as the Olympus 300mm you must have a poor copy of the Leica 100-400mm

[@RobKnight]

Thanks for the comment, Mark. I assure you that my copy of the Leica 100-400 was just fine. As I mentioned in the video, I made thousands of images with that lens and got some great shots. I also tried several different Olympus lenses on my Lumix cameras over the years, and I was never blown away by the results. I find my results with Olympus lenses on Olympus bodies to be much more consistent that what I was used to with my Lumix cameras. I would imagine is has something to do the the PDAF in the Oly bodies vs the DFD AF in the Lumix bodies, but I’m not sure. Either way, once I tried the Olympus lenses, telephoto especially, on the Olympus bodies I decided to change systems

[@wilbuzllf5057]

@@RobKnight My experience is actually completely different, oddly enough. After switching from shooting Olympus OM-D from 2012-2019 (high end OM-D's like you) with their Pro glass, 12-40, 40-150 and 300 among others to shooting the Panasonic G9 instead, my keep rate went WAY up. The G9, even with Olympus lenses is just so much more accurate to me. As far as the Panasonic 100-400, there have been mixed reviews with it and I believe @Mark Rhodes can be right about lens samples. There are people on some different forums who again and again produce images almost as sharp as the 300 F4, and then there are others who got rid of the lens because it failed to produce much sharp images at all. Very nice review btw, your calm and easy to listen to, nice comparisons as well. Oh and PS. The lens doesn't support 5-axis sync IS (keeping costs down?) as far as I've understood which is why you experience the 300F4 IS the be a bit better.

[@RobKnight]

Rasmus Mattsson thanks for the comment. I’m glad you had better luck with the G9/Lumix 100-400 than I did. I wrestled with that combo for years with totally mixed results. I got great shots with the combo, but they were few and far between. The 100-400 Olympus doesn’t have “Sync IS” (5-axis dual stabilization like the 300mm f4 pro), but the lens IS DOES work with the IBIS for 3-axis dual IS.

[@wilbuzllf5057]

@@RobKnight ahaaa ok! Thanks, for clearing that up. So it's still sync is which is great. To be honest, no matter what, the Olympus lens is around 600 bucks cheaper which means a whole lot as well. Specially if the lenses are close in performance.

[@stephenyoung2616]

I can vouch for the copy variation with the Leica lens. Mine is consistently sharp at all focal lengths. A fellow birder had a 'softer' version and despite mirroring my camera settings when using an identical body and taking the same shots next to each other, his results were noticably inferior. We even switched over camera bodies and it made no difference. His lens was not damaged in any way and focused properly. It was just not as sharp as mine

[@ubarhd1]

Very informative video thanks

[@RobKnight]

My pleasure

[@keithholland4322]

How would you compare the sharpness of this lens to that of the 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro with the MC-20? And is this lens as sharp with the MC-14 as the 300mm f/4 is with the MC-20?

[@RobKnight]

It’s hard to beat the pro lenses, with or without the teleconverters. I think the 300 f4pro with the TC-20 would edge out the 100-400mm with the TC-14 if you shoot them side. BUT, the 100-400/TC-14 combo is sharp, cheaper, and arguably more versatile since it is a zoom lens. If I had to pick one setup or the other for general use I’d probably choose the zoom for the flexibility.

[@keithholland4322]

@@RobKnight That's very interesting. I am currently using my 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro with an MC-20 for wildlife photography. I am very satisfied with the sharpness of that combination and I've been thinking I might get the 300 f/4 eventually to get a little extra reach, but since you say this lens is sharp, I might go that route instead. Do you think this lens without a teleconverter would be sharper than my current setup? If so, that would definitely make it a better option than the 300 f/4 since I would only need to carry around one lens instead of two.

[@RobKnight]

That would be a tough call since you already have the 40-150 f2.8 pro and the TC-20. That combo is a bit sharper than the 100-400/TC-14 because of diffraction at f9.

[@keithholland4322]

@@RobKnight Right, but since the 100-400 has more reach than the 40-150 with a 2x teleconverter, I'm curious as to whether the 100-400 without a converter is sharper than my 40-150 with a 2x converter. Prior to watching this video, I would have assumed that the pro lens would be sharper, even with the MC-20, but now I'm starting to rethink that! By the way, the TC-14 and TC-20 are for the old Olympus 4/3 mount for DSLRs and the MC-14 and MC-20 are for micro four thirds. As far as I know, the TC teleconverters don't work on micro four thirds cameras.

[@PMS1950]

I don't think photography is all about how sharp and how fast and will it impress my chums. Surely, there's an element of skill and artistic ability required? I've seen thousands of utterly mundane and boring super sharp pics from utterly boring and unimaginative snappers!!

[@zachjacob-1]

Great review, enjoyed the insight.

[@RobKnight]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@vladepast4936]

Nice video! Are you on Flickr?

[@RobKnight]

Thanks! I’m afraid not. I actually tried to look up my old profile a couple of months ago, but it’s long gone

[@tonigenes5816]

100-400mm can't match the IQ and the speed of 300mm F/4.0, but it is cheaper and more versatile. So any lens has its advantages. If I would not have already 300mm, 100-400mm would be an option. But I have 300mm, it is an amazing lens.

[@JezdziecBezNicka]

I already have the 40-150/2.8 with the 2x TC, but I'm not as happy with it as I'd imagined. My plan is to sell the 2x, save up some money and get 300/4 with 1.4 TC. My biggest fear with this 100-400 lens is that if the lighting conditions are less than ideal, it's going to struggle. This is somewhat my fault, I admit, because I'm a shutter speed junkie.

[@RobKnight]

The Olympus pro lenses are sharper than either of these 100-400mm lenses

[@JezdziecBezNicka]

@@RobKnight Yep, I’ve had the 300mm for half a year now, it is the best lens I have ever used :)

[@tuuchen2990]

@@JezdziecBezNicka Have you done comparison between the 300mm and Oly 100-400mm?

[@JezdziecBezNicka]

@@tuuchen2990 I haven’t had a chance to compare them side by side. I know 100-400 is less sharp, but I also know several photographers that are consistently taking wonderful pictures with it.

[@skoidat]

There is a TC for the PL 100-400. Its weird that you said there wasn't. Also whats up with these divorced dads always simping for the system they already own. Yes- your Olympus™ lens works better with your Olympus™ camera.

[@natureflixs1]

Anyone used this lens with the GH5? How did it perform?