Olympus OM-D E-M5, E-M1, E-M10 - Mk1, Mk2 & Mk3 Owners Thread

bigsmiff said:
Was going to say should have used the 100 - 400 but even after the crop the sparrow on the stick looks as sharp as a tack to me
Click to expand...

Thanks Smudger
 
the black fox said:
Just bought a DR-79 decoration ring for the 100-400 which allows you to dispense with the tripod collar , and gives a smooth grip on the lens barrel . Tripod collar now in my bag, not used a tripod since changing to Olympus another 250grams of weight less to lug around to . A useful accessorie
Click to expand...

I use one of those silicon/ rubber charity bands over the lugs on my 40-150 instead of the decorative band. Works well and is grippy. It might even glow in the dark too [emoji16]
 
back to normality ,collared dove in my front garden yesterday .taken through double glazing
high rise by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
Any thoughts ?
I'm enjoying my 40-150 Pro and the 100-400 I've borrowed from @bigsmiff .
I was intending to buy the 100-400 but as I've already got a zoom, (said 40-150) I'm giving thought to the 300mm f4.
Can't afford either yet, but equally want to do my research and make a decision.

I've ordered the MC-14 in any case.
 
The MC-20 mates to the 40-150 really well Trevor and gives you a nice 160-600mm F5.6 package. Even for a 2x converter I'm pretty amazed how sharp the images are from it on both the 40-150 and the 300mm F4.

Here it is on the 300mm F4

 
Last edited:
Ah but the 100-400 and 1.4 gives you a effective 1120mm reach with no loss of i.q even in poor light .. albeit at F9 ..... gut feeling says something in that last update that helps it achieve this
 
Sootchucker said:
The MC-20 mates to the 40-150 really well Trevor and gives you a nice 160-600mm F5.6 package. Even for a 2x converter I'm pretty amazed how sharp the images are from it on both the 40-150 and the 300mm F4.

Here it is on the 300mm F4

Click to expand...

Thanks Andrew. Certainly looks better than the reviews lead you to believe.
 
the black fox said:
Ah but the 100-400 and 1.4 gives you a effective 1120mm reach with no loss of i.q even in poor light .. albeit at F9 ..... gut feeling says something in that last update that helps it achieve this
Click to expand...

Good point Jeff.
 
Nicely done joe
 
trevorbray said:
Any thoughts ?
I'm enjoying my 40-150 Pro and the 100-400 I've borrowed from @bigsmiff .
I was intending to buy the 100-400 but as I've already got a zoom, (said 40-150) I'm giving thought to the 300mm f4.
Can't afford either yet, but equally want to do my research and make a decision.

I've ordered the MC-14 in any case.
Click to expand...

The 100-400 sample looks to have more detail than your 40-150, is it possible you cropped a bit too much then overdid the NR on the 40-150
 
mikew said:
The 100-400 sample looks to have more detail than your 40-150, is it possible you cropped a bit too much then overdid the NR on the 40-150
Click to expand...

Probably. I use noise reduction before any other PP. The 40-150 shot is way more heavily cropped. Noise reduction pretty much the same for both.
 
Sootchucker said:
The MC-20 mates to the 40-150 really well Trevor and gives you a nice 160-600mm F5.6 package. Even for a 2x converter I'm pretty amazed how sharp the images are from it on both the 40-150 and the 300mm F4.

Here it is on the 300mm F4

Click to expand...
Now you're making me want that 2x converter. I have the 1.4x already. Hmmmm

@trevorbray I have the 40-150 and the 300mm (and the 1.4 extender). I think mostly for wildlife you want the long end anyway, but I do sometimes miss the versatility of a zoom. I'm hanging on to see about this pro zoom that is going to be launched somewhen.
 
Looks like the 150-400 F4.5 Pro will be launched any day now, as quite a few sites (Park Cameras, B&H etc.) now have placeholders for the lens on their website (though with no price or lead times).

As sumptuous as this lens looks, I very much doubt it will be either cheap enough or produced in numbers enough to make it into very many amateurs hands (sadly). If you look at the current Nikon AF-S 180-400mm f4E ED VR lens (yes I know it's not quite the same lens type), but that's nearly £11k, the older 200-400 F4 VR is still £7.5k and the Canon EF 200-400mm f4 L IS USM is £10-11k. I (unfortunately) don't think we'll see the Olympus lens at under £6k then (but hope to be proved wrong), and will most likely be by special order only.
 
Last edited:

I know these are nothing like as good as most on here, and I need to arrange a stick for them to perch on, but I had fun this morning.

They look nice and sharp to me, you are right a natural looking perch will improve the whole image considerably :)
 
another sky replacement shot , as I cant really get out where I want to be due to covid restrictions and lockdown, these are giving me something to do at the moment
i can see you by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
Between Championship Holes 12, 13 and 14?
 
Sootchucker said:
Sheesh.....don't you know that M43 can't do BIF :cool:
Click to expand...
Most definetly not all b.I.f photos must be photoshopped and taken with real cameras LOL
 
Bebop said:
Now you're making me want that 2x converter. I have the 1.4x already. Hmmmm

@trevorbray I have the 40-150 and the 300mm (and the 1.4 extender). I think mostly for wildlife you want the long end anyway, but I do sometimes miss the versatility of a zoom. I'm hanging on to see about this pro zoom that is going to be launched somewhen.
Click to expand...

There's something in the for sale thread that might interest you?
 
trevorbray said:
Any thoughts ?
I'm enjoying my 40-150 Pro and the 100-400 I've borrowed from @bigsmiff .
I was intending to buy the 100-400 but as I've already got a zoom, (said 40-150) I'm giving thought to the 300mm f4.
Can't afford either yet, but equally want to do my research and make a decision.

I've ordered the MC-14 in any case.
Click to expand...

I have just changed systems from Sony to Olympus, and have the EM1iii with 12-40, 40-150 and 300mm lenses and the MC-14. The 300mm is just incredible, though the 100-400 may be more flexible. One of my mates has that lens and is really pleased with it.
I am wanting to do some macro work, I have an ad in the classifieds for the Oly twin head macro flash, but I think they are like rocking horse poo :( What chance of a Black Friday Bargain?
 
@trevorbray The weight, too much for my aging body to carry round the hills! The smaller sony body was lighter than nikons, but the better lenses were just as heavy. Really pleased with the olympus, and I don’t have a problem using topaz denoise on some images. So far I am very pleased.
 
david357 said:
@trevorbray The weight, too much for my aging body to carry round the hills! The smaller sony body was lighter than nikons, but the better lenses were just as heavy. Really pleased with the olympus, and I don’t have a problem using topaz denoise on some images. So far I am very pleased.
Click to expand...

Thanks David. Just being nosey..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top