I think I have found the IS to be a little delayed in full stability at times too, when half pressing the shutter button.Not remotely scientific , but two shots.
1st with 100-400.
2nd with 100-400 and 1.4TC , camera moved back to approximate same fov.
Shot on 12 second shutter delay. With a crappy little gorillapod. I left in-lens stabilisation turned on. Interestingly, on both shots, the live view wobbled a few seconds in to the countdown. On the first one, i thought perhaps i'd somehow bounced the floor, or a tiny air current. But then the exact same thing happened on the second shot. So, I suspect (strongly) that it is in fact the Ibis "settling" - for want of a better term. It didn't matter for these shots, it was well and truly steady by 12 seconds. But I do wonder what the impact would be on, say, a 2 second shutter delay? Or on a long exposure shot if you didn't have a shutter delay , or tripped the shutter with the app? I suddenly understand the recommendation to turn off IBIS when using tripods.
I doubt i quite nailed identical focus on both shots, but I feel there's a slightly shallower dof with the T/C . Happily, i couldn't say that the T/C is meaningfully less detailed, perhaps just a minute amount. The F/9 aperture is going to be a serious challenge if you need to stop action though.
View attachment 880082
View attachment 880083
I haveI love this frog photo - really shows the surface tension and reflective properties of the water.
My own 100-400 just came back from repair again. Maybe I'll take it to one of the local ponds tomorrow after I get done with morning work. Great weather this week, and I noticed last night that the frogs have just returned for spring!
The Olympus Repair Center tells me that this time they calibrated the lens at 100mm, 200mm, 300mm, and 400mm, and verified that it exceeds their standards before sending it back to me. So I performed a number of tests with it yesterday with the aperture wide open. With a flat target (newspaper) on a wall and the lens carefully aimed perpendicular to it, I got much more symmetrical results than before. There are only slight variations in sharpness at the left edge vs. the right edge - and it's not always the same side that's a little bit sharper. The formerly-soft lower right quadrant is now as sharp as the others. Central sharpness is great and edge sharpness declines noticeably at 300-400mm. These are all expected results. I believe from earlier experiences that edge-to-edge sharpness will be even better in real photos having depth.
Oddly, my photographs of flat ground targets, taken at an angle on a tripod with aperture wide open, are worse than before - not better. Within the plane of focus, left side softness starts to show at 200mm and becomes very severe at 300mm, where a full half of the image is soft and the right edge is much sharper than the center. At 400mm, there is softness on both sides but much more on the left side. Adjusting the way the lens is mounted on the tripod hasn't varied the results at all. The repair center isn't answering my questions about this, since they only test wall targets at 90 degrees. Experience tells me that this can affect real-world photos, but not as much when the target has lots of structure and depth (like tall grass). I'm guessing that this is because the focal plane is just a lot thinner on the left side. I'm going to have to re-evaluate the effectiveness of this test in gauging lens sharpness, focus accuracy, and depth-of-field.
I think this lens is as good as it'll get and am now wary of trying to exchange it. Time to use it heavily and see what the real-world results look like.
FYI, I have a Mindshift Photocross 10 and can fit the em1.2 + 1.4tc+ 100-400 attached in it, as well as a 12-40. It is a tight squeeze though! oh and here's a water vole with that comboFor those wondering, I've posted pictures of the Olympus 100-400 and EM1.2 inside a Mindshift Photocross 13 backpack.
It has much more room than the specs led me to believe it would. Room for another lens, even.
With the collar on the lens the bag was too small to fit a 13" laptop (even w/o the laptop's protective sleeve). With the lens collar off a 13" laptop barely fit (w/o the protective sleeve).
If you plan on carrying a 13" laptop and this lens I would not recommend the 13" bag.
I can't comment on how this setup functions in the field nor the bag's other attributes. I have liked other Mindshift backpacks, especially the Ultralight.
On another topic, I didn't have pictures of metal shavings in the body of an EM1.2 (created when mounting a Panasonic 100-400). These two mounting attempts were done at different stores, with different lenses and bodies. This ruled out my body being the problem. I let the salesclerks mount and remove the lenses. I don't believe I took pictures because that, to me, would have been a bit bizarre. If I did I wouldn't have kept them for five years or so.
I did not force any of the lenses I owned on my body. I know when too much force is being applied, based on my decades of mounting and dismounting lenses on various bodies.
Nor did I force the 7th lens I ordered and tried in a store. It was a bad fit on my body so I refused delivery and got my money back.
If you got a good copy of this lens and/or don't mind/didn't experience the problems I did, that's fantastic. Of course, if you're trying to sell your used copy then you'd rightfully want to quash these reports because it could lower the price you get.
When customers downplay gear problems (resulting from appropriate) use then companies have no reason to improve their quality control. It makes me question the motives of those people. Are they trying to diacourage these reports so they can make more money off of our fellow photographers?
The advice I've suggested regarding that lens is what I'd suggest for anyone considering any gear: do your research and make sure you're comfortable with the return policies in case the gear doesn't work out for you.
Meanwhile, I'm very pleased with the Olympus 100-400.
We should all be glad that we have choices because that empowers us consumers and results in lower prices.
Don't let @pdk42 find out about that critter or its days are numbered! ( https://www.mu-43.com/threads/olympus-might-join-l-mount-alliance.110839/post-1461685)
FYI, I have a Mindshift Photocross 10 and can fit the em1.2 + 1.4tc+ 100-400 attached in it, as well as a 12-40. It is a tight squeeze though! oh and here's a water vole with that combo
View attachment 880744
I would never use a sling nor recommend one. I have friends who have undergone/need to undergo surgery due to carrying weight one on shoulder.
Yea, they figured the load was manageable, too. It doesn't cause any problems until you wake up and can't move your neck.
I always go for q backpack, evenly distributed (tripod centered on the back, not the side).
A waistpack is also good, if it can hold your gear. You can also wear a waistpack with a backpack!
Knowing what you plan to shoot and how to use your gear helps you to travel light. I can't remember the last time I carried more than two lenses. I also use OEM batteries exclusively because they are consistent. Fewer batteries means less weight.