Panasonic 70-300 on a Leica CL

[mktgdoc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I wanted a longer zoom lens with IS than my 55-135 Leica lens.  I shoot a lot of concerts with my Canon R6 coupled to my L 70-200 or 100-400.  I wanted a lighter rig so I thought either the Sigma or Panasonic on my CL would give me what I want.  The equivalent Leica zoom, even used, is out of my price range.  After doing some research, I decided to buy the Panasonic 70-300.  Immediately I saw this combo was unbalanced and unstable especially when shooting verticals.  I have both the body and thumb grips on the CL.  The lens' IS did help to compensate the camera's balance and stability to a degree.  I set the CL controls to match the R6.  The Panasonic produced acceptable images judging by 1950's~1980's standards, but not by today's. and certainly not by the R6 images.  I'm keeping the Panasonic for now and will experiment with different camera settings.  Has anyone had similar experiences or may have suggestions to improve the results? 

[frame-it]

post a few pics so people can see the results?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, mktgdoc said:

or may have suggestions to improve the results?

Yes - the Sigma 100-400 DG DN Contemporary is clearly a better lens.

[Virob]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Yes - the Sigma 100-400 DG DN Contemporary is clearly a better lens.

Is it really? I’ve seen relatively good and bad results posted from both lenses. Seems to me that both suffer QA issues (decentering), and if you find a good copy of either, they are comparable. 

[Boojay]

5 hours ago, Virob said:

Is it really? I’ve seen relatively good and bad results posted from both lenses. Seems to me that both suffer QA issues (decentering), and if you find a good copy of either, they are comparable. 

Yes, I would agree, not sure about decentering, in good light both lenses are capable of excellent images, obviously the Sigma has the advantage of the extra 100mm but it's there I usually found my copy at it's weakest, whereas the Pan 70-300 performs better at the long end. 

I don't know what version of the Canon glass you are using, but your R6 and the RF 70-200 F/4 will be a very similar weight and most definitely give better IQ than either lens on the CL.   I still use the Panasonic on the CL because I find it the easiest to handle on the CL, and when shooting anything long, or needing faster I go to Canon equipment.  

 

 

 

[jaapv]

7 hours ago, Virob said:

Is it really? I’ve seen relatively good and bad results posted from both lenses. Seems to me that both suffer QA issues (decentering), and if you find a good copy of either, they are comparable. 

I never had a problem with this lens. I took it on a couple of safaris and found the image quality excellent. I never used the Panasonic but I was comparing to the Leica  105-280 R As for results on the internet, take into account that many people have not the vaguest notion how to handle longer lenses. When there is a  heavier lens on a light camera the trick is NOT to attempt to hold the rig with the right hand. It should be supported under the lens at the balance point. The right hand is only used to steer the the camera and press the shutter. The other stabilizing point is your face where pressed against the viewfinder. On the Sigma this works wonders. as the optional tripod collar is positioned perfectly. Combined with the excellent OIS I could easily handhold it down to  1/60th. At 400 mm with the CL.

Another thing that Internet posters seem to ignore is that long lenses need electronic shutter on light cameras otherwise the images will be soft. I would suggest that over 90% of the “decentering” you found is poor technique. 
Or, when used on a tripod forgetting to turn off OIS and -again - using mechanical shutter. Decentering is extremely rare on lenses in this class. 

[mktgdoc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for all the info. I'll be putting together some pix I've shot with the Canon T2i/6D/R6/M5 and Leica CL for posting.  On the Canon's I have the 70-200 f4.0 and the 100-400 both L's and EOS mount NOT R mount.  I saw no reason to trade my existing Canon glass, six L series lenses, for the new R mount versions.  The ff Canons, I always shot with the respective battery grip.

With long lenses in low light I hold the body in my right hand and after zooming I rest my left hand on my right shoulder with the lens barrel resting on my bent left elbow; left foot slightly forward thereby giving me maximum bracing and support.  I learned to shoot in this fashion when I had a Hasselblad 1600/1000f coupled to a Zeiss 180/2.8 back in the early 1960's.

Prior to buying the Panasonic over the Sigma, the former got more favorable critical review than the latter.  If money were no obstacle, I'd own the Leica zoom.

[mktgdoc]

On 2/2/2023 at 6:24 PM, mktgdoc said:

I wanted a longer zoom lens with IS than my 55-135 Leica lens.  I shoot a lot of concerts with my Canon R6 coupled to my L 70-200 or 100-400.  I wanted a lighter rig so I thought either the Sigma or Panasonic on my CL would give me what I want.  The equivalent Leica zoom, even used, is out of my price range.  After doing some research, I decided to buy the Panasonic 70-300.  Immediately I saw this combo was unbalanced and unstable especially when shooting verticals.  I have both the body and thumb grips on the CL.  The lens' IS did help to compensate the camera's balance and stability to a degree.  I set the CL controls to match the R6.  The Panasonic produced acceptable images judging by 1950's~1980's standards, but not by today's. and certainly not by the R6 images.  I'm keeping the Panasonic for now and will experiment with different camera settings.  Has anyone had similar experiences or may have suggestions to improve the results? 

Here is a  picture with the Leica CL w/ 70-300 Panasonic.  

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Virob]

That looks very soft. I get much better results with my 70-300 on the SL2, but then I have not used it under those conditions. Do you get the same results in daylight at base iso?  Is this using the mechanical or electronic shutter? Could you be experiencing shutter shock?

Here is a shot taken handheld at 300mm f5.6 at 1/60. 300/5.6 is the “worst” setting for this lens, so this is as bad as it gets. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jaapv]

Not surprising, as there is considerable motion blur, possibly shutter slap too. It is sharp enough, though, to show that the young lady has not brushed her teeth for years... (sorry, professional deformation  )  

[Boojay]

Not sure what is going on with your copy of the 70-300 but as I said above I have always been happy with results on the CL, a few images - just because it feels wrong that anyone should judge the lens and camera combo from above samples.   If you click through to Flickr they are better.  I find the lens good for landscape, semi-macro, wildlife if you can get close enough, pretty much anything really.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

 

 

 

 

[mktgdoc]

Thanks for all the info.  My pix of the young lady was shot at ISO 12,500, which accounts for most of the softness; the CL was set on mechanical shutter (I'll switch to electronic at the next concert); the exposure was 1/160th wide open and both IS's were working. I've reset the ISO limit to 6400 and to auto, like my Canon R6.  I do like the lens for it's capability; it feels well made and I hope with the resets I'll get better results.  I find it frustrating the max file size is 2.44mb's.

[huwm]

I was really happy with the 70-300 and CL combo but unfortunately they ended up in the river Wye

I replaced the CL with an S5 and now SL2 but stayed with the 70 -300 as my long lens

 

[Don Morley]

On 2/3/2023 at 1:12 AM, jaapv said:

Yes - the Sigma 100-400 DG DN Contemporary is clearly a better lens.

I agree 100%. Don Morley

[Archiver]

I'm finding this topic very intriguing because I'm considering the Panasonic 70-300 and Sigma 100-400 for daytime outdoor sports. I want to be able to shoot football and cricket in winter and summer, respectively. Autofocus speed and accuracy will be important, as will image quality at the long end. I've been struggling with the Canon 70-200 f3 IS II adapted to the S5 with the Sigma adapter, and the AF is so aggravatingly slow. When it nails it, the images are lovely, but the hit rate is terrible.

[Boojay]

3 hours ago, Archiver said:

I'm finding this topic very intriguing because I'm considering the Panasonic 70-300 and Sigma 100-400 for daytime outdoor sports. I want to be able to shoot football and cricket in winter and summer, respectively. Autofocus speed and accuracy will be important, as will image quality at the long end. I've been struggling with the Canon 70-200 f3 IS II adapted to the S5 with the Sigma adapter, and the AF is so aggravatingly slow. When it nails it, the images are lovely, but the hit rate is terrible.

Either lens will be a big improvement as you will benefit from AFC with a native lens.  Can you possibly source a used copy of either from a local dealer with a reasonable return policy and test?  The Panasonic S5II with MC-21, and adapted EF mount lenses now the Lumix has phase detect, is a whole different ball game and you may find your Canon lens does the job.

Edited March 9, 2023 by Boojay

[ynp]

How much the 70-300 ois will affect the battery life on my CL? Will I need to buy a third battery for an one day shooting with the Panasonic?

thanks

yevgeny

Edited March 19, 2023 by ynp