Reviews and Problems with Panasonic Lumix G VARIO 100-300mm F4.0-5.6 MEGA OIS
Showing 1-10 of 19
Not Very Good
Mike in Wisconsin, B&H Photo
10 October 2014
Excerpt: Bought this to use with an Olympus OM-D EM-5 and was quickly disappointed. Tried it with IBIS off and only the lens stabilization on and then vice versa. Also tested it with a tripod. The lens simply is not sharp at all, and gets worse on the longer end. The bokeh is very funky, bad. Too much chromatic abberation. I'm being generous with the three star rating.
Summary: There are only two choices for long telephoto for the micro 4/3 format. This Panasonic and the Olympus 75 to 300 mm. My copy of the Panasonic was very soft at 300 mm and frequently did not focus properly. A dealbreaker for a wildlife photographer! I returned the Panasonic and just finished testing the Olympus which produced excellent pictures at 300 mm and only rarely missed focus.
Excerpt: Got this as a portable tele lens. It met my expectations in that it is compact and light given the focal range. Also the optical quality is decent.Mechanical quality is ok but not great. AF works very good with my Olympus camera. I do not use the lens stabilization since my camera has IBIS.The lens is a little slow but that is the price you pay for portability.
Excerpt: We bought this lens as a companion to a Lumix GH2 that we purchased from B&H for use as a travel camera. We experienced the same roughness in zooming described by other reviewers. Thinking that we had a defective unit, we returned it under warranty to Panasonic's McAllen Texas repair facility. They returned it promptly with a note that they had "cleaned and lubricated" it but it worked exactly the same.
Summary: I shoot professionally , & bought a comprehensive Lumix kit for travelling , including the 100-300 lens. The lens is front heavy on a GX1/GF1. Would it have killed Panasonic to have built in a tripod collar ? I had to order one from germany. It makes a big difference in overall balance . The zoom operation is the worst I have ever experienced on any lens.
Excerpt: I copied some of another review that I agree with. It is below with a few changes: This lens is to complement the 14-140mm I've already bought from B&H. Everything looks superb: the build, the finish, the glass, the weight, the size, etc. So imagine my disappointment when I found that the zoom ring could not be turned smoothly and quietly. It feels like it has sandy Vaseline for lubrication so it could only be moved in a jerky fashion. I have shot some with the lens.
Excerpt: When I got this lens, I was somewhat taken back by its size. It is smaller than the Olympus four-third format 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5, but still very big when fitted to an E-P3 and it is 1-stop slower. I did crude IQ tests to compare the two lenses, at 200mm. I used an adaptor for the Olympus lens. In both cases, a tripod was used. To my surprise, the center sharpness of this lens is as good as the 50-200mm lens. The edges look not as good, but are acceptable.
Excerpt: I bought it for long range shots and for that, it does fine. It has a good zoom range and is clear and crisp. However, it does have one serious drawback which would have made me think twice, if I had known before I bought it. It has the roughest zoom of any lens I've ever owned which means that, if you want to use the HD video features of the new Lumix cameras, you're not going to be able to zoom while videoing.
Excerpt: This lens is to complement the 14-140mm I've already bought from B&H. Everything looks superb: the build, the finish, the glass, the weight, the size, etc. So imagine my disappointment when I found that the zoom ring could not be turned smoothly and quietly. It feels like it has crunchy peanut butter for lubrication so it could only be moved in a jerky fashion. But I persevered and took it out for a thorough test shoot.
Pros: Beautiful design finish, Great image quality