1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Shootout Little Tuna vs Micro Tuna - A Look at Resolution

Discussion in 'Reviews, Tests, & Shootouts' started by Phocal, Dec 19, 2017.

  1. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Jan 3, 2014
    Houston
    The lens I compared the 300/4 to can be picked up for around $1200 :biggrin:
    oh.........I also only paid $1800 for my 300/4, picked it up used from the local camera store.

    I have also compared the 150/2 to the 50-200 SWD which can be picked up for around $400. But it really is only useful to those shooting an EM1, if you have one it's a really great lens for the money.

    First, the TC's by Olympus and Panasonic only work with a few lenses. So using a TC on the Panny 45-175 is not an option.

    In native lenses you have the following options to reach 300mm
    • Olympus 300mm f4.0
    • Panasonic 200mm f2.8 + 1.4x TC
    • Panasonic 100-400
    • Olympus 75-300
    • Panny 100-300
    I was actually thinking about doing a comparison of my 75-300 against the 300/4 and 150/2 w/ EC-20. I haven't gotten around to sending my 75-300 to KEH and was going to take it this weekend since I am going in the kayak and don't have to worry about the weight of my gear. The only issue is the photos from the 75-300 will taken from my EM5 since the EM1's will have the other two lenses attached. But it should give a good idea on how they compare to each other.

    If someone wants to send me the Panny lenses that reach 300mm for a few weeks I would happily compare them as well. I would need 3 more cameras also, since the idea is to shoot the same subject from the same distance with almost identical framing and lighting.

    I also plan to compare the 50-200 SWD w/ EC-20 to the 300/4 w/ MC-14, which I think will be really interesting.

    You are welcome and I appreciate the comment. I love converting gator photos to black and white, they are a great subject for it.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 31, 2013
    Just wanted to say on a note, those MTF numbers from Lenstip for the 150/2 are probably a little unfair to it. They were tested with the older, less dense 4/3 sensors. With the modern 16-20mp sensors we have, those should go up. By how much depends on how well the lens was designed. I don't think it would be that far off from the 300mm f/4... What those numbers look like with a 2x TC would be most interesting...
     
  3. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Jan 3, 2014
    Houston
    Really? This is the first comparison I have done of the 150/2 and 300/4 bare lens with similar framing, which means it's the first one I have done comparing the lenses resolution. All other comparison post I have done have been comparing different lenses and there have only been a few (not 10). Well I did do the one showing similar color between the 150/2 and 300/4 because I was surprised to see how similar they were and people have been asking me to do comparisons since I got the 300/4 (that was the first time I had shot anything that could be used for comparisons)

    Lets see here..........

    I am a wildlife photographer whos favorite subjects happen to be gators and frogs, birds are just a side thing because I see them while looking for gators and they make me good money. Everyone on this forum knows what subjects I tend to photograph and I wonder why when you look at one of my comparison threads (which is obvious by the title what the thread is about) you expect to see anything different? Why would I compare two lenses shooting something that is not what I am going to use the lenses for? I might as well be like everyone else who compares lenses and shoots charts and brick walls. When shooting charts the difference of an MTF of 69 compared to one of 49 seems huge and 99.9% of the people out there would assume that in real world shooting the MTF 69 lens would blow away the MTF 49 lens. But as you can see in my photographs the difference in real world shooting is subtle. Now someone who has seen this might realize that the more expensive lens they want because it has a little higher MTF than the one they can afford may not be worth buying.

    FYI...........just because differences are subtle doesn't make them any more useful than having drastic differences. Actually when comparing two lenses in different price ranges that come out being very close in real world situations is way more useful than one showing the drastic differences everyone would expect to see. Just like showing subtle differences between lenses that should be close is not as useful if the difference was actually noticeable in real world shooting.
    Not if you want to get those images accepted to a stock agency like Alamy or Getty. Shooting m4/3 is already limiting enough, but over sharpening images because you are using cheap lenses is not going to pass their submission checks.

    Actually I only paid $1800 for the lens 2 1/2 months ago and in that time have made just over $700 in images from it, so in another 3-4 months I will have made my money back.

    There are images the 300/4 can get that the 50-200 can't, since I have both lenses I think I can make a pretty good comparison there. You can keep thinking they are in the same league, but they are not.

    First, the swamp and that canoe pay the bills, put food on the table and allow me to do what I like. Most importantly it allowed me to pay cash for this $1800 lens when I came across it at the local camera store. I didn't have to save for it or even consider if I could afford it. It was a good deal and I have always planned on buying it, so I took advantage of a great find

    I spent 20 years traveling the world and the country. I now prefer to explore my home state and I love the swamps. If I can play in them and make a living doing it, why would I want to travel anywhere else? Plus people pay me to take them into the swamps, not to the deserts or mountains or great plains.......but the swamps.......so that's where I go and where I have become an expert.

    So..................

    Seriously, if my threads bother you that much don't read them. Because you know what? I am going to do more comparison threads and they will feature either gators or frogs or birds or snakes.

    The results will be what they will be, subtle or drastic.............................

    That part is out of my hands.....................

    Have a wonderful day.................................
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2017
    • Like Like x 4
    • Winner Winner x 2
  4. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 31, 2013
    That's definitely not a lens that's only 70% as sharp... Lenstip's numbers work great when you compare them with equal pixel pitch to equal pixel pitch. Those tests were done on the older 4/3 sensors that aren't as pixel dense as the modern 16-20mp sensors. You'll want to test that lens yourself using a printed chart and a free program. My suspicions are that the 150 f/2 is is closer to 6#lpmm, not 49.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. 50orsohours

    50orsohours Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Oct 13, 2013
    Portland Oregon
    Put them ankle weights your better half has laying around the house on the lens. Problem solved.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. DynaSport

    DynaSport Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Jan 5, 2013
    Dan
    I respect your opinions and photography skills. I’m not such a fan of your desire to take jabs at another forum member. Perhaps you were trying to be funny, but it comes across as mean spirited. There are plenty of forums where that is the expected behavior. It has not been the norm here. I really don’t want this site to become another mean spirited place.
     
    • Agree Agree x 8
  7. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Jan 3, 2014
    Houston
    You are probably right, but I can only go with the data that I have. I also prefer Lenstips test to any other site out there and don't like using data from one site for one lens and from another site for another lens.

    If you want to shoot charts go for it......................not my cup of tea. The only chart I shoot is my target for micro focus adjust and that's because there is no other way to accurately do it. I much prefer real world comparisons.
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2017
  8. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Jan 3, 2014
    Houston
    LOL, I have thought about it :biggrin:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Reflector

    Reflector Mu-43 All-Pro

    Aug 31, 2013
    I too prefer Lenstip, their data is fairly reliable aside from the typical sample variation. They're pretty harsh and demanding in their reviews too.

    Chart example.jpg
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    I only started shooting these things and running them through software because I noticed that my adapted glass on a focal reducer was incredibly sharp in actual usage and that my only native macro prime at that time wasn't "as insanely and incredibly sharp" in comparison around f/4 (f/5.6 on the lens). Turns out that the Nikkor 50mm f/1.2 AI-S is indeed incredibly sharp, to the point it'll beat the Olympus 60mm f/2.8 Macro which is a recordholder on Lenstip. I suspected it, but never had any good measure.

    And what was the difference?
    About 5-10lpmm at peak performance. You'll notice it on details, it just isn't as huge of a thing unless you hammer it down to 100% (if not beyond) and stare at the pixels. It does change the overall look of the image in a way like total image contrast/clarity, however.

    So the 150 f/2? Definitely has to be within 10(-something, maybe)lpmm against the 300mm f/4 in the center. 20 lpmm difference? No way, you'd start to see a bit of haziness in the fine details at that point. At least that's (less than 10lpmm dif.) what I see when I look at your shots. Caveat: Focus plane / Organic Subject / Repeatability of a shot for framing and conditions will become more dominant factors when you're comparing it against the 300mm f/4.

    I do wonder about the performance with the 2x teleconverter. The 150mm f/2 looks like a competitive option so far...
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Ed Pledger

    Ed Pledger Mu-43 Rookie

    19
    Sep 10, 2017
    Houston
    Having picked up a couple 4/3s lenses on the sorta cheap, and using them on my EM-1...the focusing there is quick enough for me in most situations. On the EM-5ii, the chimping away gets focus slowly, but accurately, however I reckon those lenses wouldn’t work worth a flip on a G9...maybe not at all. I have read that focus is very good on the EM-1 mark ii, but perhaps that is incorrect?
    I was leaning towards a G9, but the EM-1ii seems more logical, especially if it works as well or better than the original EM-1 with the 4/3s lenses. Having the focus stacking, the extended shutter speeds for HiRes, and very good IBIS might be enough to persuade me to stick with Oly for the next m4/3 body. Of course there’s always the allure of FF....Is Phocal really going for a Sony? ...This tangent could go sailing way out into the swamp, my interest in FF being to use manual legacy lenses, even Mam 645s....but getting back on topic...
    Count me as another reader perfectly happy to see lens comparisons done in nature, whether of butterflies or gators in swamps. And since I recently acquired a 150 f2, more than happy to see how well it performs for others. I am more than happy with mine so far, whether straight or with the 1.4X. Best regards and Seasons Greetings to all.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
  11. RamblinR

    RamblinR Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    617
    Aug 16, 2012
    Qld Australia
    Maria
    Lovely work as always Phocal. You really make those lenses sing.
     
  12. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Jan 3, 2014
    Houston
    Hopefully Saturday I will be able to get some shots to look at that. Going in the kayak, so will be taking the EC-20 with me. Also plan on taking the 75-300 on my EM5 and can hopefully get test shots of all three lenses to compare.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Jan 3, 2014
    Houston
    I find all 4 my 4/3 lenses to work very well on my EM1. I have shot sports and airshows with the 150/2 and 50-200 SWD and have never felt they couldn't do the job, only downfall is the slower fps in CAF. I found focus on my EM5 to be unacceptable unless it was something that is never going to move. The 50-200 SWD would also front focus every single time and could only be used in manual focus on my EM5. Personally I would never use a 4/3 lens on anything except an EM1. That is with the exception of the CDAF optimized ones, the one I have (14-54mm mk2) works well enough for most stuff on my EM5 but is much better on the EM1. I don't own the EM1mk2 but a friend who I respect says his 300/2.8 focuses much faster and better on the mk2, the cross PDAF sensors and the dedicated processor to autofocus really do make a huge difference. Plus the in camera focus limiter would be really great on something like the 50-200 SWD.

    Personally I am an Olympus shooter, not a m4/3's shooter. The design philosophy and goals of Olympus align much more with the types of cameras and lenses I want, so I am not the person to ask about Panny or Oly camera.................................I will always say Olympus.

    I am now looking for a used A7Rii to use my collection of FD lenses on for street photography. It is for a play thing and for days I just don't feel like crawling thru the swamp. After a lot of research, the A7Rii is the first A7 that gives access to full RAW files so I wouldn't buy anything made before that. They still are priced a bit higher than I want to pay, so for now I am waiting for the price to drop some.

    FYI.....................I would never take a Sony into the swamp, their weather sealing is pure crap...............................

    Well, any comparison I do will be using wildlife as the subject...............I don't shoot charts and it would be stupid for me to shoot portraits to compare two lenses when I know nothing about portrait photography or have any interest in it.

    The 150/2 is amazing bare lens and with the EC-14. If you want/need 300mm it works amazingly well with it also.

    Seasons Greetings..................
     
  14. Phocal

    Phocal Mu-43 Legend Subscribing Member

    Jan 3, 2014
    Houston
    Thanks Maria, appreciate the comment.
     
  15. KeithT

    KeithT Mu-43 Veteran

    204
    Jan 17, 2017
    South Africa
    Keith Temlett
    @Phocal@Phocal
    Well done and thank you :2thumbs:. Really enjoyed the post and I was one of those hoping you would be kind enough to show this comparison.

    I however did get them the wrong way round. Gave the alligator 06 (with the leaves in front of it in focus) to the 300/f4.:eek-31:

    Just shows how good the 150/f2 really is – with EC-14 or 20 attached – amazing piece of glass.

    As an enthusiastic amateur and on a personal note I do follow some members (there are others too) whose work I find outstanding:

    @Phocal@Phocal I will HAVE to get the 50-200 (and if I’m lucky a 150/f2 sometime down the line)

    @ijm5012@ijm5012 I now have the 12-60mm SWD, thanks Ian (plus a EC-14 – waiting for a EC-20)

    @bbarnett51@bbarnett51 great shots with both the 12-60 and 50-200

    @datagov@datagov 50-200 pics and others

    @MichaelSewell@MichaelSewell consummate professional

    @m43renegade@m43renegade stunning pics and contributions

    @alex g@alex g stunning pics and contributions

    @barry13@barry13 stunning pics and contributions

    @ak300@ak300 stunning pics and contributions

    @SVQuant@SVQuant stunning pics and contributions

    :wtf:I was a little saddened :(  by the comments made to the @Phocal@Phocal post as I personally have learnt a lot from all of you.

    Ronnie I applaud you:th_salute: for the amount of effort you put into your posts, you obviously are meticulous in your planning and the effort and time you put into your posts is awesome - and you know and understand your cameras and lenses intimately. A true professional and it shows.:bowdown:

    I was disappointed when you left the forum and I’m glad you back!!!! I do miss your earlier posts which sadly were deleted.

    The motto ‘’sharing is caring’’ comes to mind.

    Good luck with the eagles.

    Living in South Africa means the bush and wildlife is in your blood. And NO, elephants and lions do not roam the streets unless you live in a remote village.

    For those of you who appreciate how good :mu43: can be for wildlife photography you are welcome to check out this link.

    Wildlife Photography with the OMD EM-1 Mark II - Wild Eye

    In concluding I wish all of you a blessed Christmas and a photographic rewarding 2018.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 4
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  16. MichaelSewell

    MichaelSewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 1, 2015
    Burnley, UK
    Michael A. Sewell
    I confess, I tend to concern myself probably a little less than most with regards to resolving power, and I've shot more images at f16 and above than I can recall. But, that's me, and my feedback is most important from the clients I shoot for.
    That doesn't mean to say I don't find the articles interesting. I don't doubt the day will come, when I have a hypercritical client that wants images he can shave with.
    He's the client I tend to read these articles for. Not necessarily to rush out and buy a new lens. More likely, just so I get an idea of the location of a swamp to hide his body.

    @Phocal@Phocal
    I always enjoy your imagery, whatever the subject. I also appreciate the experience and subject knowledge you pass on to the forum members. And whilst I don't read these articles with the explicit goal of deciding which lens would be better suited for me, it's surprising how much I recall when mentoring others who ask about such things. Whilst resolving power isn't the utmost of my personal needs, I fully appreciate we are all different, and more to the point, so are our clients.

    My point of view regarding my own imagery is likely influenced by the fact my career focus is lighting, whereas others are ambient light. In this case, out of necessity. In these circumstances, I have no doubt the resolving power of a lens may well be paramount.

    This wasn't intended as a soapbox post, more of a thank you to @Phocal@Phocal and to point out that we are all different.
    In my wife's case, very different.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  17. MichaelSewell

    MichaelSewell Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 1, 2015
    Burnley, UK
    Michael A. Sewell
    Oh, BTW @Phocal@Phocal
    I like the B&W images best too. The texture really does pop.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  18. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Honestly, the 'compressed RAW' thing is overblown, IMO. I've never run into issues, as I understand it it's mostly an issue in. Wet high contrast scenes with heavily pushed shadows, generally at borders. I have an a7r mark I and now a Mark III. The latter is better, by maybe a stop or so, but both are much better (smoother files, more post-processing latitude) than the E-M1 for pure IQ.

    For shooting manual lenses, the Mark I is a pretty excellent camera if you don't mind the handling (some people hate the shutter placement) and the admittedly loud shutter (and no silent shutter). It is overall a very slow camera compared to the E-M1, but for a manual lenses only 'digital back' I find it works really very well indeed. I will likely convert mine to infrared (or full spectrum), since I've used it so enthusiastically since I bought it 4 years ago that it's cosmetically not particularly nice any more.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  19. Chris5107

    Chris5107 Mu-43 All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jan 28, 2011
    USA
    Chris
    Thanks for a great informative post. The only problem with your posts is that I amd drawn to shop for deals on the 150/f2 which I don't really need. :) 
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  20. Sam0912

    Sam0912 Mu-43 Veteran Subscribing Member

    292
    Mar 1, 2012
    Manchester UK
    Sam Roberts
    Thanks for another amazing post Phocal, I’m actually moving more towards panny bodies and probably a G9, but the fact that the choice is their (especially with lenses) is what I love about m43. Have got to say my old GF1 has had an awful life and survived everything thrown at it, so hoping the “Pro” panny bodies are as well sealed and robust as the olys (my EM5 has also seen plenty of hard times and never missed a beat).

    I love your gators, to me they’re a living dinasour (I that makes sense!), a really fascinating creature and amazing survivor. If I had the chance to get in that swamp, doubt I’d be away from it very often.

    Good luck with the book, I’ll be one of the first in the queue to buy it (well I’ll probably buy from Amazon, but you get the idea!)
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.