Skip to content


  1. Ziggy
    April 24, 2017 @ 19:52

    Re long tele, there’s the Panasonic 100 – 400 zoom. Quality can be good if the light is good.


  2. Jan Steinman
    April 24, 2017 @ 20:36

    Thanks for your review, Tesni!

    For “long reach,” have you considered adapted lenses?

    I use “focus peaking” extensively with adapted lenses. You become (in effect) a very slow servo motor in an auto-focus system. I’ve stopped critically evaluating focus; I just put the red outline where I want it! I’m able to get frame-filling, in-focus eagles at a hundred metres with the Olympus OM Zuiko 600/6.5 lens. And of course, there are lots of full-frame lenses of this length out there.

    I realize that probably doesn’t satisfy your need to shoot action at a distance, though.


  3. Gov
    April 25, 2017 @ 07:54

    Right..well I have the EM1.2 and the GH4 so this is pretty close if not identical as going from Em1.1 to EM1.2. ISO400 becomes ISO3200? 3 stops gain…Ah common: not even close. It is not even 1 stop. And it is good, and DR is also better but bot are under a stop. I have the 100-400 F4 f6.3 which is very good but suffers a little beyodnd 350 mm so might not be good enough. 300mm x 1,4 may be what she is looking for.
    Nice shots but good photographers regularly make for, well…not so good reviewers with in this case bizarre claims.


    • Jan Steinman
      April 26, 2017 @ 18:24

      not so good reviewers with in this case bizarre claims

      I find your writing this a rather “bizarre claim.”

      Tesni did not claim that the Mark II ISO 3200 was the same as the Mark I ISO 400; she said she was “comfortable” viewing those as limits she would consider when shooting either body.

      It seems much of your disagreement is that you are a landscape photographer, and Tesni is a wildlife photographer. That does not justify calling her a “not so good reviewer.” Rather, I’d say it justifies saying you are “not so good” at understanding the context of the review.


      • Gov
        April 26, 2017 @ 20:09

        Uncomfortanle with beyond ISO400 and comfortable with ISO3200 now but that of course does not mean it is the same. Well…here is another one then or you. I wrote that good photographers regularly make for not so good reviewers. But I did not mean of course that she is not a good reviewer, I just meant that here claims (better: claim) are bizarre off course. Clearly I did not imply she was somehow a bad reviewer, where did you get that? Etc.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 96 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here