Panasonic 100-400 vs Oly 300 on EM1 Mark II

[rmazzi]

I want to add a longer telephoto to my Olympus kit.  I use a Olympus EM1 Mk II and already have the teleconverter.  I tend to use the telephoto at the maximum focal length.  Panasonic has a 100-400 f4-6.3.  Olympus has a 300 f4. 

If I use the Olympus with the teleconverter I think i wind up with a 420 mm, f6.3 (or so).  In body plus lens stabilization is presumably around 6.5 stops.  I have seen and held this lens and subjectively love the build size and weight.

If I use the Panasonic, I get the zoom benefit and essentially the same maximum reach and aperture at the long end.  However, I would turn off the in body stabilization of the EM1 and rely on the lens stabilization only.  I haven't found any discussion on how effective (estimated stops?) the lens only stabilization is on the lens.  I also don't know if the mixed vendors effects things like focus tracking.  I have not held this lens.  My closest camera shop is 75 miles away and they just picked up the Panasonic line.  I am waiting for a chance to get out there.

I tend to use my telephotos at the longest end more than other lengths.  I also have the Oly 40-150 Pro (and the aforementioned teleconverter). 

I am a hobbyist and intend to try my hand at wildlife, close abstracts, and anything else that the the lens can provide as a creative outlet.

Am I thinking this through correctly?  Are there other factors to consider?  Does anyone have practical experience with the Pana lens/Olympus body combo that can offer a perspective?

[stever]

another factor to consider would be Panasonic's lens repair performance (or lack of same) see Lloyd Chambers Diglloyd.com of a few days ago.

[Telecaster]

I have the Panasonic 100–400mm but have never used it on an Olympus body. I like the lens a lot. Image quality is very good throughout the zoom range, though I imagine the Oly 300mm + TC will have some advantage there in addition to the small amount of extra reach and speed. Re. stabilization: on Panasonic bodies the in-camera and lens systems can work together. No idea what the claimed figures are, but in actual use (on a GX8) I'm often at 1/200th sec. at 400mm with consistently crisp results and have gone as low as 1/50th sec.

If I were in your place my choice would come down to best image quality (and likely best system compatibility) vs. most versatile.

-Dave-

[bassman51]

I used the 100-400 extensively on the E-M1.2 in Africa last year with great results.  I had auto ISO set to keep the shutter speed above 1/250 and was very satisfied with the OiS (I turned IBIS off with this lens).  All of the game shots were handheld or with a beanbag. 

[rmazzi]

Thank you for your input.  I will continue to ponder my options.  Maybe Olympus will announce their own version of a 100-400, which would make this pretty straight forward.  But i would probably have to wait at least a year after an announcement to get one. 

[David S]

I use the 100-400 for bird photography so the zoom aspect is important. Picture quality is more than adequate. I use it with both the GX8 and the G9 and find it easy to carry while hiking thru the woods looking for birds.

[vulture]

Optical performance of the Panasonic 100-400 is quite good, although mechanical design flaw:you can turn the lens barrel vertically only 90 degrees counter-clockwise.
But awful experience with Panasonic repair service. See my post in thread "Mirrorless cameras and lens mount breakage? Any experience?"