Announcement

**Keith-369** · 16 December 2023, 03:37 PM

For me, the 100-400 is the best compromise and is a really nice lens.
Yes, the 300 is no doubt the better lens but as you say, it is a prime and lacks the versatility of the zoom.
I'm really happy with mine.

**blackfox** · 16 December 2023, 03:37 PM

As I have just replied to mk1 .the 300 is more expensive ,heavier etc and marginally sharper than the 100-400: but in the real world can you tell the difference .. there are literally hundreds of sample images from both lenses on various bodies on my Flickr stream ..
and you can if required use the 1.4 tc on both lenses .. as a point of interest I have bought and used lots of Olympus lenses over the years and have honestly yet to find one that’s not sharp out of the box

**Camera Gent** · 16 December 2023, 03:46 PM

Thanks for helpful replies BlackFox and Keith-369
I am arranging to meet up with an avid OM user locally and be talked through his kit and what he uses for wildlife photos.
I think/hope that it'll be a good upgrade from the very capable SONY bridge camera.

**Mazdaman** · 16 December 2023, 04:29 PM

The 100-400 as pointed out is a very good compromise I would add in winter light in general most F6.3 lenses struggle however the OM1 handles noise much better than my EM1X did therefore shooting at higher iso helps balance the lack of light and shooting at a higher iso potentially

Also the denoise function in Lightroom can deal with noise very well I am impressed enough with the OM1 to probaly buy another 100-400 as an alternative to taking the big white out for some of the locations I visit

As a plus when light conditions are better the 1.4 tc adds additional reach

As an example below shot at iso 8000 on the big white Lightroom denoise used at 75%

**blackfox** · 16 December 2023, 05:11 PM

here's a few mixed shots all with the 1-mkiii body and 100-400 lens and please take into consideration there all hand held and im getting on for 80 with a dodgy ticker ..make of it what you will

Attached Files

**Wreckdiver** · 16 December 2023, 05:24 PM

Some great images here. I like the one of the Robin Mazdaman. You mention that the "OM1 handles noise much better than my EM1X", I would be very interested in seeing high ISO image comparisons of the two cameras. I have the 1X and have had my eye on an OM1 for a while. I also have the 300mm and 100-400mm lenses. I know that Jeff has had both of these cameras and both of the lenses. Comments and samples very welcome 😊

**BDennis** · 16 December 2023, 05:27 PM

I had some good results with the 100-400mm but also have the 300mm which I've probably used more mostly with the MC-14 TC. Like Jeff said, the 300mm f4 has the edge and works well with the 1.4x TC at f5.6 rather than f6.3 of the other lens.

The 300mm has the synch IS which I think helps - the only disadvantage being you have to walk backwards sometimes!

In practice, probably nearly all my 100-400 shots are at 400mm and the 300 + MC-14 gives you 420mm. It is a tricky decision, the weight difference has never bothered me.

I've tended to use the 100-400mm more in summer with the better light for the zoom option or where I don't want to chance leaving the 300 in a pub or something.

Also the 100-400mm is a bit more compact to keep in a bag on the off-chance you might see some wildlife - I saw this buzzard when I was on a walk with friends and quickly swapped off my wide lens and got a decent shot of it

Buzzard in tree by Bill Dennis, on Flickr

Bill

**antpitta** · 16 December 2023, 06:04 PM

I'd have to agree with most of the comments above!

I started out in m4/3 with the 300mm having bought my complete "starters" kit 2nd hand at a fabulous price from someone who couldn't get on with mirrorless (E-M1 mkII + 300mm f4 + MC-14). I subsequently bought a 100-400mm thinking I might benefit from having the zoom capability even though I rarely remember having to back away from a bird to frame it! Most importantly I'm a birder who tries to record birds that I see and not a photographer - so probably 95%+ of the pictures I take are birds - and for birds pretty much every time it is reach that counts. So bearing in mind how good the stabilisation is in Oly gear I found myself using the 300 + 1.4TC nearly all the time (effectively a 420mm f5.6) which on paper isn't much different from using the 100-400 at the long end (400mm f.3) but in practice the 300+TC combination was so much sharper and faster to AF that I rarely ended up carrying the zoom. Yes, I could get very sharp results with the zoom but it was invariably in limited situations where either the light was excellent or the targets more static. Again, important to remember I'm really only into birds and for lots of users the zoom will be the better, more flexible (and cheaper) tool so it may well come down to your shooting priorities.

By way of example in terms of usage: last year we spent 3 weeks birding in Costa Rica - much of that in dark, enclosed forest. I took both the 300 + TC and 100-400 expecting that I would use the latter often in the forests. In practice I used the zoom on a single occasion - and that more or less as an experiment. Other than that it was mostly the 300 +TC or bare 300 and I can't think of more than a tiny number of situations where I felt the need to physically back-off (and even then it was probably more to help find the bird in the frame!). Net result was I ended up selling on the (barely used!) zoom last year as I just wasn't using it enough to justify keeping. Of course I was in the process of acquiring the fabulous "big white" at the time - so now have a similar quandary as to what to do with the 300mm as it hasn't seen ANY action since the 150-400 arrived (I took both to Colombia last month but the big white was the only one used).

I'm sure you'll be capable of getting excellent shots with either lens - particularly if you get /use the OM-1 which I found a big leap forward as a birders' camera over the E-M1's. There are still a few "quirks" to the AF system but the camera handles higher ISO really well to keep shutter speeds reasonable (I use fixed ISO 3200 almost exclusively) particularly with the current crop of commercial PP software. If you're interested my Flickr album of our Costa Rica trip is here (you may find a few zoom pics but most are 300/300 + TC): https://flic.kr/s/aHBqjA2h6f

Chris

**drmarkf** · 16 December 2023, 06:58 PM

I've use the 300 +/- the MC14 from a few months after it was released, and it's probably my favourite lens.
I've used it progressively with the E-M1ii, !iii and OM-1 (I've currently got one 1iii and one OM-1).

For birding I just take the OM-1 and 300/1.4 and it's very rare that I feel I'm over-lensed, and I rarely miss a zoom. Most european birds are pretty small and far away!
For safari wildlife (plus sports) I take both bodies plus the 300 and 40-150 f2.8 and 2 MC14s. One's sitting in a vehicle all day, and intense sightings with prolonged shooting are not that frequent, so individual and total weight is much less of an issue.

If money was no object I think I'd just add a 150-400: I've borrowed one for a day, and depending what I was doing I reckon there are times when I'd find it too heavy, and I'd enjoy myself more with the 300. I've decided I shouldn't afford one for now, anyway!

As long as the rumoured 50-200 f2.8 gives significant photographic advantages over the 40-150 f2.8 I'll swap, but that won't affect my usage of the 300.

I borrowed a friend's Oly 100-400 and found the acquisition of focus to be noticeably slower than that of the 300 as the light faded towards the end of the day. The in focus images were very good, but that 1/3 stop does affect focusing in the real world.

**Bikie John** · 16 December 2023, 07:24 PM

I have used the 100-400 for rugby for a couple of seasons. In general I find it pretty good, the only problem with it is that when the light gets really bad (as it always does at rugby at this time of year) even the OM-1 struggles. I think several people above have summed it up nicely by describing it as a very good compromise or all-rounder.

John

**Phill D** · 16 December 2023, 08:04 PM

It's really interesting reading everyone's comments. I was looking for a long zoom lens a while ago before the Oly 100-400 came out and went for the Panasonic equivalent. Suffice to say I had a few issues with a couple of the lenses and they went back. In the intervening weeks I then went for an Oly 300mm with the concern that I really wanted a zoom but it was a good second hand price from a forum member and I could use my converters. A few months later Oly brought out the 100-400! so ever since I've been wondering if I should get one thinking I really need the zoom. However, now probably two years on I've really got used to the 300mm and just never seem to feel I miss the zoom. I'm surprised I admit but that's just my experience so far. The other nice thing about the 300mm is it works really well with the x1.4 and the x2 converters. I still wonder sometimes if I should get the zoom but in reality I just can't say I need it anymore.

**Keith-369** · 16 December 2023, 08:22 PM

To add to what I said earlier, I also like the 100-400 for close up work. Like this - (taken with my EM1ii and my Oly 100-400)

**blackfox** · 16 December 2023, 09:38 PM

The only glitch I had with the 100-400 was quite often I had it at full reach of 400mm but when reviewing the shots it had recorded focal length as circa 380. No idea why but it niggled me .at least with the 300+ 1.4 it’s a consistent 420mm