Panasonic Lumix 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 is here

A couple of days ago, I ordered the Panasonic 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 OIS macro lens.  At US$300 off US$1099.99, it was a decent deal and 10% from that made it a better deal.  It's native and weather-sealed and with the small aperture, it's lightweight and will do just fine for photographing at a distance.

 It should be better made than my micro Four-Thirds Olympus 40-150mm (80-300mm equivalent) f/4.0-5.6 but the actual exposure won't be much different and that lens isn't weather-sealed.  That was surprisingly good for a refurbished lens at US$99.  The 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 had better be really good since it's new.

Do you see much of a difference?

 

I wouldn't mind a travel zoom, but the only one that is weather-sealed and will work is a Canon EF-mount L-series lens for about US$1500.  The Panasonic 28-200mm f/4.0-7.1 has a fair number of "it's okay", which says that I won't like it.

I've been fighting with a Viltrox L-mount to EF-mount adapter and a Tamron 180mm f/3.5 macro lens.  It could be as new as 2014 or as old as 2004.  The combination does not seem to focus to infinity and I'm not sure what is the problem.  It seems quite reasonable otherwise.  As a lens from that time, with an 82mm filter size, it focuses reasonably well, but about as quickly as any macro lens I've used.  When trying to photograph the moon, it will focus the whole distance, much like most PDAF-oriented lenses on CDAF.

I took the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 out for a while.  It's not that heavy for what it is.  Coming from micro Four-Thirds, it's heavy.  My Four-Thirds equipment was about the same.  This lens has a 77mm filter size, which is still compact for 135 Format, where 102mm or 105mm filter size is not that surprising.

It seemed to focus quickly, although when photographing a flower that was close, I was not certain about the focus, so I tried a second time.  It could have been my eye sight.  It has Optical Image Stabilization and it's compatible with Dual I.S., which should make it seem super steady.

 

 Everything turned out very well.  I only changed the photos for size and to export them as JPEG files.  The starry sky photos are a bit difficult to see the detail, but they were photographed handheld, with the Dual I.S. able to handle the shake.  Obviously, the water tower was photographed from two different locations about 300 feet apart and at different focal lengths, but they worked out very well.  I was thinking about my Olympus ZD HG 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 where I photographed the mechanism of a wind turbine and the part numbers are legible.  That had a maximum equivalent focal length of 400mm.  Trying to find something weather-sealed isn't available at this time for L-mount, unfortunately.

Generally, if you buy the "regular" lenses, you can't expect much.  This "regular" zoom lens wasn't inexpensive, unless you're gauging the cost by Leica standards.  (I really wish that I could buy that 90-280mm f/2.8-4.0 but that's used car territory.) This lens has a good range and you'll need that deeper Depth of Field for photographing at long distances.

 Its macro abilities are okay, but there is no close range switch for the auto focus, just the full range and 3 metres to infinity. I would prefer the 3 settings switch.  I may still fight with that adapted Tamron 180mm f/3.5 macro lens on occasion but for everything else, the 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 is a winner.

I was looking at a few video reviews from four years ago when the lens was being released.  The one thing that hit hard was the sharpness differences from 70mm and 300mm.  My experience on micro Four-Thirds Panasonic lenses was that they all seem to suffer a bit on the long end.  This one has been good for me, but I'm sure that it is technically a bit weak at 300mm.  Does it matter if I get the shots I want?  No, it doesn't.

Update 2025.05.11: I'm still not impressed with the auto focus.  Whether it's the S5 Mk II or the 70-300mm lens, the combination isn't as good as it should be.  I reviewed the lens on Panasonic's store site, where I bought it, and maybe that review will cause them to look at how it works and how to improve it.  I just don't feel as confident with this lens as I do the 20-60mm f/3.5-5.6 or 50mm f/1.8.  AF is almost instantaneous on those.

 

Update 2025.05.13: Last night, I went out to photograph the moon.  There were a few difficulties where the lens went through the entire focus range a couple of times.  Can't imagine why the PDAF did not grab focus. Switched to manual focus at one point.  Dual I.S. worked well, though, when I tried to photograph a moving (the still ones don't stay there) plane, it couldn't compensate.

 

Update 2025.06.29: Went out because someone had been smashing windows and wanted to get some video of that person.  Didn't find him, but I did get a couple shots of the moon. 

 

Update 2025.12.14: There was a supermoon a few days ago.  I went outside without a tripod, Looked up from the front yard and there it was.  Auto Focus worked surprisingly quickly.  I took four shots and they were all fine.  I was surprised, especially since it worked at almost 300mm.  How it was 298mm or whatever, I'm not sure.

Panasonic S5 Mk II with Tamron SP 180mm f/3.5 macro for Canon + adapter

 I've been wanting a telephoto lens of some sort.  Spending another US$1000 or more wasn't happening.  I have too many questions about what will suit me.  On Four-Thirds and micro Four-Thirds, I had a good selection of telephoto zoom lenses, including one that was exceptional for any format I've ever used.  The Olympus ZD SHG 35-100mm f/2.0 is an amazing lens.  Comparing every 70-200mm f/2.8 lens to it makes me think that I'm just not going to get what I want.

 

Switching to 135 Format, I don't have any telephoto lenses, not even from my old film days.  I took a chance on a Tamron SP 180mm f/3.5 macro lens.  The lens was introduced in 2003 and I'm not sure how old this one is.  Considering how clean it is, without weather-sealing, it's probably quite new.  To use it properly, I bought a Viltrox EF-mount to L-mount Pro adapter, the one that has the electronic connections for AF, IS, and aperture control.  The lens doesn't have any image stabilization, but it does have auto focus, with a clutch on the lens that you pull toward the body to enable manual focus.  Manual focus sounds a little grindy.  I seem to remember reviews complaining about all focusing making some noise.

 

It didn't arrive with the lens, so I bought a K&F Concept manual adapter in the meantime.  The lens and the camera fit together, and I can focus and shoot, but because there is no aperture ring, it's stuck at the default aperture, and there isn't much else.  It worked but defaulted to ISO 6400, which probably wasn't that bad.  The adapter seems sturdy enough and I was interested in their quality for an inexpensive circular polarizing filter, as well.

The Viltrox adapter arrived today, after Adorama sent a second one since the first one was lost at the UPS facility.  Getting it about a week late is no joke.  2nd Day Air usually works better.  I appreciate that Adorama went out of its way for me.  I'm just glad I wasn't counting on the mount adapter for a job, like in the old days.

 The adapter has electronic connections, a switch on the side to indicate to the camera to notice the combination of lens and adapter as a native lens or to let the adapter be seen by itself.  Unfortunately, the switch is hidden by the handgrip and it's safer to remove the lens, set the switch, and reattach the adapter.

The Viltrox adapter also has a USB type-C port for software updates.  I took a look at the website and it mentioned lens updates and strangely, didn't even mention this adapter.  It was surprising that they had an electronic adapter.  They've been selling lenses lately, but not for L-mount.  They had some adapters for micro Four-Thirds and probably wanted to show Panasonic that they were still out there.

What's pretty amazing about this mount adapter is that it has an extra collar to tighten the lens to the mount.  It's a little tricky to get everything right, but you don't want an expensive lens jiggling and losing contact just when that perfect photo is about to be captured.

It's raining outside (neither are weather-sealed) but the little bit of testing I did with the Viltrox adapter shows it to be good.  The AF of the lens was never incredibly fast, so I think it's as good as it would be on a Canon dSLR body.  Maybe, it's even better because there probably isn't a calibration problem, as we used to have where the lens was just a bit too close or too far for focus to be exact.

 Now, if Viltrox will put out their new 135mm f/1.8 LAB lens for L-Mount, I'll be set.  I'm fairly certain that Samyang's 35-150mm f/2.0-2.8 would be a better choice, though.

Update 2024.12.15: It's a bit less rainy today and I noticed that the local park has an added duck pond.  After shopping, I went there to take a few photos.  I need to adjust for the weight, as the IBIS isn't good for long distances.

The photo of the tree seems to be more in focus.  The water and ducks seem just out of focus, but on the edge.  I probably should have chosen more carefully but it was below 50 degrees F and I don't handle cooler temperatures all that well after having frostbite years ago.  I just exported a JPEG version of the raw files to add here.  Color is good.  At one point, the auto focus went the whole range to figure out where it needed to be.  Macro lenses have the oddest AF.

For a fixed focal length of 180, it feels heavy enough to be a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens.  Maybe, I'm just out of practice.

 

Update 2025.01.03: The moon and one planet were out and it was so clear last night as I was walking to the store.  I hesitated but kept going.  Tonight, it's a bit hazy, unforunately, but I tried.  I had to give up on AF because it just wouldn't lock onto anything.  Manual focus makes a lot of noise, as if there is something wrong, but I seem to remember these lenses doing that even when they were new.

 

Update 2025.03.14: Blood moon tonight.  Not sure this is ready.  I got something early but when I went out at midnight, I could not see anything.