Advice on telephoto lens

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

My experience is that whilst it’s capable of delivering great results, they are harder to achieve and the keeper rate is lower.
In my opinion, the IBIS struggles with this level of magnification. I think my MC-20 performs better on my Oly 100-400, which has lens stabilisation. AF is also slower with the MC-20, and that applies to both the 40-150 and 100-400.

That reminds me of my experience with Pany Leica 50-200mm f 2.8-4 with 1.4x TC and the IBIS of E-M1 Mark III. On its own, the IBIS seems to reach its performance at 200mm native, once I added the TC it would struggle to keep it stable. I found that the OIS of the lens would do a better job with the TC on (and no I did not try to have both on at the same time, they don't talk well with each other). But what I had the suspicion (I can't confirm because I don't have good enough knowledge to test it properly) is that the lens OIS does not talk very well with the AF-C commands of the camera because I found significantly more blurry images of moving subjects with the OIS on then with IBIS on (not panning but normal movement and behavior).
So, in low light and still subject lens, OIS did better and with moving subject (panning and normal movement) with AF-C the IBIS does better. It's one of the main reasons I sold my Pany Leica 50-200mm f 2.8-4 AND the Pany 1.4x TC even though I loved the size and weight of that lens all the way to the moon and back.

 

[Holoholo55]

On the field I shoot a Nikon D7200 + 70-200/4. The reason is, the zoom ring on the Nikon 70-200/4 is lighter and easier to turn with my fingers. So, MUCH easier to use. I can't finger zoom the 40-150/2.8. I tried, but it did not work nearly as well as the Nikon lens.
The 70-200 on a DX camera and the 40-150 have a similar field of view. And yes I agree, they are a bit short on reach. My usual limit on the field is about 50 yards. Beyond that, I have had to do some deep crops on those far shots, or just not shoot them.

​

You are correct in your assumption. "edit and process a large number of photos quickly"
Especially this past year. With the COVID compressed sport schedule, the 2nd season (March to June) had 29 different teams playing . Often four games in a day, and sometimes more than one game at the same time. I was shooting many times 5 days in a row. I shot so much that, I am still working through my backlog.
The priority was to have at least one game for each sport and the senior game, edited and uploaded before or soon after graduation. That was the "quickly." After that it is working through my backlog, as I can.

So yes, SOOC JPG, with minimal manipulation in post. This is my general workflow.

• On average, with the Nikon I shoot 300 - 500 pic per game, and with the EM1, 1,000 - 2,500 pics per game. Shooting at 18fps really kicks up the number of frames. And in continuous-low, I can't fire off single frames like I can with the Nikon.
• The first edit job is to cull down to about 300 frame, so I don't have to edit too many frames. If I'm lucky I can do this in a single pass, if not 2 or 3 passes.
• Next in the edit sw, I level, crop and adjust for exposure, and do a 2nd cull.
  For speed, I do minimal editing. If the color is really "off" I will try to adjust the white balance. But that is about it.
  This 2nd cull is done when I crop the image, and can see if the subject is in focus or not (some times I miss the subject and focus on the background), and if the cropped image has a decent IQ.
• Then I rename the file, with the players number in front. Example 10-O12A12345.JPG, for player #10.
  This groups all the pics of player #10 together, for the next step.
• Then I "try" to balance the pics. If a player has 50 pics, I normally cull that down to about 10; 20 this year. The reason behind this is, so that there isn't a HUGE difference in number of pics between that player and one with only 2 pics. For me, this happens with basketball more than other sports. This balancing cull takes a lot of time, as often I have to make the decision between several pics that I may like, and I will go back and forth between them.
• The goal is to upload less than 100 pics for the game. This year, I raised it to 200, because of the lesser number of games.
  Some sports only have pictures of ONE game, cuz I could only shoot ONE game.

Wow, you are one busy guy. They’re lucky to have you.

 

[ac12]

Thanks for the feedback, everyone! I shoot a little bit of everything. Right now, I'm using the Oly 12-100mm F4 Pro as a catch all. I plan to add an ultra-wide for landscapes and a fast wide-normal prime for low light. I want to add the Oly 40-150mm F2.8 Pro as a catch all for longer focal lengths with reasonably fast aperture. The base aperture would be solid, and I could see myself using the lens with the teleconverters for even greater reach. I could see myself using this lens for wildlife photography as well as event photography. I hope that gives some context for providing additional feedback.

Warning, IBIS at 300mm is IFY. This is 12x magnification.

In the old days of 35mm film, 300mm was considered by many to be the practical limit of handholding for most people, with many stopping at 200mm. 300mm is 6x magnification, with no IS.​

With my 75-300 at 300mm, even with IBIS, I have to use GOOD long lens technique and high shutter speed.
My wobble is often more than the IBIS can compensate for.
And if there is enough wind to move my body, I often/usually cannot even hold the camera on the subject.
So, when I shoot with my 75-300, at 300, I always look for something SOLID to brace against.

The 75-300 is much lighter than the 40-150/2.8 + TC. The added weight of the 40-150/2.8 makes it easier for me to handhold. But that is also more weight to lug around on LONG shoots, hence my use of the lighter 75-300. Everything is a compromise.

As was mentioned, up at 300mm and beyond, if you handhold, I feel that you need OIS (with more IS travel than IBIS) or dual IBIS+OIS.

The Olympus lens roadmap hints at future 40-150 or 50-250 range lenses, which I am hoping will have OIS. But no one knows.

 

[ac12]

Wow, you are one busy guy. They’re lucky to have you.

With Covid, this year was TOOOOO busy.
I was physically worn out.

Next year the students have to shoot their own pics, I won't be shooting for them.

 

[doady]

Those telephoto lenses on the roadmap, a ~50-200mm (F2.8?) and ~50-230mm (F4.0?), look like they will complement 12-100mm F4 much better than 40-150mm F2.8 would, especially if they have IS. I am in no hurry, so I don't mind waiting, and it might be worth for you to wait and see too, if you can.

I bought 12-100mm F4 as a single-lens solution, but that also means it is harder to find other zooms to pair with it. 40-150mm overlaps a lot with 12-100mm, and without IS it might be kind of a step down.

Another lens maybe to consider instead is the 100-400mm F5-6.3: minimal overlap in focal length and can use the same 72mm filters as 12-100mm F4. No full "Sync IS" but still better than nothing.

 

[Ross the fiddler]

What is your experience with the MC-20 on this lens?

I found it pretty good (although maybe a tad harder to get immediate focus). Look in my Flickr images (linked below where most images can be downloaded at full resolution) as I have used it for birding etc there, although I'm now using the Oly 100-400 f5-6.3 lens mostly now.

 

[Phocal]

My point was, you haven't used them & therefore not fully familiar with how they behave etc. While I agree with your sentiment of focal ranges & using Oly lenses on Oly bodies, the rest of the advice is not from experience, so why the need to comment without that experience? At least the other person linked to David Thorpe with very good review information.

Seriously?

 

[sab110]

Those telephoto lenses on the roadmap, a ~50-200mm (F2.8?) and ~50-230mm (F4.0?), look like they will complement 12-100mm F4 much better than 40-150mm F2.8 would, especially if they have IS. I am in no hurry, so I don't mind waiting, and it might be worth for you to wait and see too, if you can.

I bought 12-100mm F4 as a single-lens solution, but that also means it is harder to find other zooms to pair with it. 40-150mm overlaps a lot with 12-100mm, and without IS it might be kind of a step down.

Another lens maybe to consider instead is the 100-400mm F5-6.3: minimal overlap in focal length and can use the same 72mm filters as 12-100mm F4. No full "Sync IS" but still better than nothing.

I hadn’t even thought about waiting for future lenses. I guess what I’m wondering is what are the chances of those lenses materializing now given the changes with Olympus’s imaging business.

The one issue that I see with the Oly 100-400mm is that it may not be fast enough for indoor events or other low light settings. I don’t know too much about this lens to make that judgment. The other thing I wonder is what if I go straight for the Oly 300mm F4. That might be too long I find especially if it’s the equivalent of a 600mm field of view on full frame.

 

[PakkyT]

While I agree with your sentiment of focal ranges & using Oly lenses on Oly bodies

Which was the full extent of his comments. So you are in agreement.

the rest of the advice is not from experience, so why the need to comment without that experience?

I guess I missed it but what was the rest of his advice?

 

[Holoholo55]

I hadn’t even thought about waiting for future lenses. I guess what I’m wondering is what are the chances of those lenses materializing now given the changes with Olympus’s imaging business.

The one issue that I see with the Oly 100-400mm is that it may not be fast enough for indoor events or other low light settings. I don’t know too much about this lens to make that judgment. The other thing I wonder is what if I go straight for the Oly 300mm F4. That might be too long I find especially if it’s the equivalent of a 600mm field of view on full frame.

I'd agree that the 100-400 is too slow for indoor events. For that the 40-150 f2.8 Pro is ideal. I have both lenses. I use the former exclusively for daylight showing or shooting the moon at night, etc. I don't think the 300 f4 would be usable in indoor events. As you say, it might be too long. The PL 200 f2.8 might be an interesting choice.

 

[doady]

I hadn’t even thought about waiting for future lenses. I guess what I’m wondering is what are the chances of those lenses materializing now given the changes with Olympus’s imaging business.

The one issue that I see with the Oly 100-400mm is that it may not be fast enough for indoor events or other low light settings. I don’t know too much about this lens to make that judgment. The other thing I wonder is what if I go straight for the Oly 300mm F4. That might be too long I find especially if it’s the equivalent of a 600mm field of view on full frame.

Oh right, I missed that you said you needed a lens for photographing events. I assume the 100-400mm F5-6.3 is suited mostly for more static subjects in bright conditions, so maybe it doesn't really fit your needs.

And I agree, it is probably not a good idea to wait for lenses that haven't been announced yet, from a company whose future is not certain. Super telephoto isn't my priority right now so I don't mind waiting to see if the lenses on the roadmap ever materialize and how well they would complement my 12-100mm, but I can understand if your needs are different.

300mm F4 seems very... specialized, and it's the most expensive too. If you have any doubt about it at all, then it's probably not the right choice.

 

[ac12]

I hadn’t even thought about waiting for future lenses. I guess what I’m wondering is what are the chances of those lenses materializing now given the changes with Olympus’s imaging business.

The one issue that I see with the Oly 100-400mm is that it may not be fast enough for indoor events or other low light settings. I don’t know too much about this lens to make that judgment. The other thing I wonder is what if I go straight for the Oly 300mm F4. That might be too long I find especially if it’s the equivalent of a 600mm field of view on full frame.

Olympus has not changed the roadmap, so presumably, the lenses are still planned, and hopefully still on track.
Thought the timing maybe different.

I would not use anything slower than f/2.8 for indoor events. So forget the 100-400 as an indoor lens.
The issue is lighting or lack of lighting. And if the venue has dim lighting, you will need all the lens speed you can get. That is the issue, you do not know how much light you will have at the various venues. So the faster the better, just in case.

The jump from 12-100 to a 300/4 is a pretty big jump. But it all depends on what you shoot. If you shoot small birds, that may work out just fine.

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

Can I offer you an alternative then? If you want a specialised lens for indoor events I would recommend a mix of two: Panasonic X 35-200mm F 2.8 because it is wider then Oly counterpart, smaller and lighter and cheaper (I've seen some go as low as 500 £ if you are patient and lucky) AND the Olympus 75mm F 1.8 for truly dark moments when extra light is possible and you have room to work (for example when everyone is sitting down, like a speech or a lecture, the award moment, etc). Both of these lenses used cost about as much as the Oly 40-150mm F 2.8.
Now my recommendation of a Panasonic lens is purely as you interest for event and indoors seems to be higher on your list then anything else. The weight will have a large impact on your hand stability and comfort shooting for many hours. AF should be fast enough (I have not own that lens or been in that situation to give you a more accurate statement) as the subjects tend to be more predictable and less erratic (unless it's indoor sports). And under 100mm the AF is less stressed on precision accuracy compared to longer telephoto (aka you have more DoF to work with and some wiggle room for error) and is less demanding on the IBIS. If you can find a 2ns hand 1st generation lens it could be cheap enough to consider it an additional tool for the right job instead of a universal tool.
Olympus 75mm can be an amazing option if you have the working distance to use it, large venues or sports centers if you want more then just headshots. There are many peeps here who has used this lens in such situations and they could give you more information on their experience.

 

[Ross the fiddler]

I hadn’t even thought about waiting for future lenses. I guess what I’m wondering is what are the chances of those lenses materializing now given the changes with Olympus’s imaging business.

The one issue that I see with the Oly 100-400mm is that it may not be fast enough for indoor events or other low light settings. I don’t know too much about this lens to make that judgment. The other thing I wonder is what if I go straight for the Oly 300mm F4. That might be too long I find especially if it’s the equivalent of a 600mm field of view on full frame.

No, the 100-400 lens is really only suitable for outdoor, good light situations (as others have already said). Anyhow, what sort of indoor activities would require that amount of reach though? The 40-150 f2.8 serves well in many situations.

 

[Ross the fiddler]

Went back and read the forum rules and I couldn't find any rule saying I had to own a lens to comment about it.

Maybe you should have read my post that you quoted, which was completely appropriate for someone who doesn't own the lenses since it was in reference to the camera.

I would like to apologise for my comment & realise I had totally misjudged you (thought you were someone else) as you are very experienced in using your gear with plenty of great photographs to prove it.
I’m sorry.

 

[bassman]

I have the 40-150/2.8 and MC-14, the Panny 100-400, and the Panny 35-100/2.8.

I took the two longer lenses on an African Safari, and used both throughout with good results. At dawn and dusk, the 40-150 was much more useful due to the aperture. But sometimes you just need the reach of the 100-400 with our 20MP cameras. No problems using the Panny on my E-M1s. OIS works better at those long focal lengths in my experience, and I had no problem hand-holding it while bracing my arm on something.

I find the 40-150 long enough for high school baseball, even with the limited positioning I can get to (usually outside the outfield fence). I bring the MC14 but rarely use it.

The only indoor sport I’ve shot is middle school basketball, and the 40-150 is more than long enough.

The 40-150 also works well for kids‘ stage performances. The tripod mount on a monopod works great.

For walking around and/or most traveling, I’ll take the 35-100/2.8. It’s small enough that I can fit a two zoom kit into a small shoulder bag with it and the 12-40/2.8 or Panny 12-35/2.8.

 

[ac12]

I have the 40-150/2.8 and MC-14, the Panny 100-400, and the Panny 35-100/2.8.

I took the two longer lenses on an African Safari, and used both throughout with good results. At dawn and dusk, the 40-150 was much more useful due to the aperture. But sometimes you just need the reach of the 100-400 with our 20MP cameras. No problems using the Panny on my E-M1s. OIS works better at those long focal lengths in my experience, and I had no problem hand-holding it while bracing my arm on something.

I find the 40-150 long enough for high school baseball, even with the limited positioning I can get to (usually outside the outfield fence). I bring the MC14 but rarely use it.

The only indoor sport I’ve shot is middle school basketball, and the 40-150 is more than long enough.

The 40-150 also works well for kids‘ stage performances. The tripod mount on a monopod works great.

For walking around and/or most traveling, I’ll take the 35-100/2.8. It’s small enough that I can fit a two zoom kit into a small shoulder bag with it and the 12-40/2.8 or Panny 12-35/2.8.

I use the 75-300 at 300 outside the outfield fence, to be able to shoot the batter. That's a LONG shot, from outside centerfield, so I can line up the pitcher and batter in the shot.

Are you shooting basketball from the bleachers or the court floor?
On the court floor, I find it is a 2-lens job. If I am near the end line, 12-40 for the near court, 40-150 for the far court.
I've shot volleyball from the bleachers with the 40-150, but limited to the players on the other side of the court from me.

Yes, I agree about the Panasonic 35-100/2.8. It is because of the small size and light weight that I've been looking at it, for when I don't want to lug the 40-150/2.8.
I'm hoping that one of the lenses on the Olympus lens road map will be a small/light 40-150/4.

 

[Ross the fiddler]

I use the 75-300 at 300 outside the outfield fence, to be able to shoot the batter. That's a LONG shot, from outside centerfield, so I can line up the pitcher and batter in the shot.

Are you shooting basketball from the bleachers or the court floor?
On the court floor, I find it is a 2-lens job. If I am near the end line, 12-40 for the near court, 40-150 for the far court.
I've shot volleyball from the bleachers with the 40-150, but limited to the players on the other side of the court from me.

Yes, I agree about the Panasonic 35-100/2.8. It is because of the small size and light weight that I've been looking at it, for when I don't want to lug the 40-150/2.8.
I'm hoping that one of the lenses on the Olympus lens road map will be a small/light 40-150/4.

A Pro 40-150 f4 with OIS would be useful, but is that likely? I suppose it would be as a compliment to the (very expensive) 150-400 Pro, but the 12-100 f4 would probably be better to have though.

 

[Aristophanes]

A Pro 40-150 f4 with OIS would be useful, but is that likely? I suppose it would be as a compliment to the (very expensive) 150-400 Pro, but the 12-100 f4 would probably be better to have though.

Complement the 12-45/4 which is now offered bundled with the EM5.3 as the PRO kit lens. OIS would be very useful, but design might make TC compatibility iffy, for example.

A compact, light 45-200/4.5 with OIS but no TC would be a great kit with either the EM5.3 or EM1.x.

But the OP really needs the 150-400!

 

[L0n3Gr3yW0lf]

Complement the 12-45/4 which is now offered bundled with the EM5.3 as the PRO kit lens. OIS would be very useful, but design might make TC compatibility iffy, for example.

A compact, light 45-200/4.5 with OIS but no TC would be a great kit with either the EM5.3 or EM1.x.

But the OP really needs the 150-400!

Who doesn't ... anyone need a soul for trade-in ... Lucifer is on his 2nd vacation unfortunately:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

... if not I I can throw in a left testicle, right kidney, right lung and MAYBE right eyeball ... my mom told me she made me with spare organs, that's why she didn't give me a warranty and told me no refund and no returns