Review New Oly 100-400: Impressions and images

[PeeBee]

Oly still gets your business. so does that mean you'll be parting with your mc14?

I have no problem spending with Olympus at this time. I'm trying to build as complete a kit as possible whilst the future is looking uncertain. I'm not sure what I'll do with the MC14 yet. I'll decide once I have the 20 if it makes the 14 redundant.

 

[OldRex]

The Cockatoo's came to play again and insisted I capture some of it.

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

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

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

 

[Holoholo55]

I know that this is about UK, but if it's really true that they are not going to be available, period, then it would seem to be true in USA too, right?

On that front, I got an email on 10/13 from B&H - admittedly awhile ago - saying that it was still out of stock. I just checked it now on their website and it says "Expected availability: Nov 16, 2020" which is kind of what I've been expecting.

So are we to not panic? Or can this really be happening (not being able to get it)? But I want it! (I just stamped my foot).

I just checked Getolympus.com (US) and it shows as backordered, not shipping until mid-November. Nothing about it being discontinued or out of production. I have one, pre-ordered and shipped in September, so I'm glad I did that. I think they are still trying to catch up with demand. Hang in there!

https://www.getolympus.com/us/en/lenses/m-zuiko-digital-ed-100-400mm-f5-0-6-3-is.html

Interesting. It is listed on Olympus UK, but I guess you can't order direct from them, unlike the US website. We're lucky in that respect because they sell reconditioned bodies and lenses at a discount.

 

[PhotoCal]

Finally, after getting this lens in early September, the area had semi-decent conditions so I visited an inland wildlife area.

This photo is SOOC JPEG, uploaded to a smartphone (via the Oly Share app) and then posted.

The air quality was poor so I didn't attempt any further (distance-wise) images. Viewing through binocs was tough.

I'm pleased with the lens.

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

 

[Shortsonfire79]

Everyone has done it already. Here's my Halloween full moon. According to Space.com, Saturday's Blue Moon was the first full moon on Halloween in 76 years. According to the Farmers' Almanac, it won't happen again until 2039. I completely regret not getting some interesting Halloween-esq details in the foreground.

Focus point was on the top right 2 o clock position. This makes the face a bit soft but I really wanted to get the crater detail along that edge.

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

 

[PhotoCal]

My first ever moon shot.
I don't know if it turned out acceptable because it's not something I normally do (or care to). I was visiting a friend who shoots FF and has a telezoom.
If this shot is lousy it's probably because of my skills. If it's good then I credit gear and luck.
SOOC JPEG, transferred via Oly Share to smartphone, then uploaded here.

 

[Shortsonfire79]

That's about as mine looks before cropping! I too have only tried to shoot the moon once before this past weekend. Last week I learned about the Looney 11 rule (compliments Sunny 16). The moon was cool but I probably won't try again unless it's for a daytime shot.

 

[PhotoCal]

That's about as mine looks before cropping! I too have only tried to shoot the moon once before this past weekend. Last week I learned about the Looney 11 rule (compliments Sunny 16). The moon was cool but I probably won't try again unless it's for a daytime shot.

I'd never heard of the Looney 11 rule! Thanks for sharing that.
It was nice weather outside for a moon shot.
My shooting companion has a family connection to lunar photography. By that, I mean taking pictures on the moon.

 

[OldRex]

Not much to point it at, at the moment. Birdy O'clock again
Apart from a crop, this is SOOC.

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

 

[tiago.ereira]

Got mine today but did not have time to test it properly. Just attached it to my EM1.2 and took a few test shots indoors.
Could get very sharp shots (portrait) at around 1/60s which is promising.
Way heavier than I was expecting and there is an annoying rotation on the mount. I would say it rotates about 1mm so when I grab the lens with my left hand and the camera with the right hand it feels like they are not properly attached. Anyone with the same issue?
I got my 12-40 to check if it would also move but it doesn’t. Rock solid. The 100-400 however doesn’t feel great as the rotation is highly noticeable.
Also checked for tilt movement but fortunately there is none so the sealing should be ok for now, but I don’t like the rotation feeling and that could also compromise the weather sealing in future because rotation movements might wear the rubber seal IMO.

Did a quick search on google and found other users complaining about this issue. Should I be worried or should I ignore it? It is the first time I buy something that doesn’t seem 100% like it should and had to be the most expensive lens...
A bit disappointed to be honest...

Edited to include two videos of my lens on a EM1mk2

This is the problem I was talking about.

 

[Mountain_Man_79]

That stinks. I have some adapted lenses on cheap $9 adapters that do that, but most certainly not a single native lens. That’s way too expensive a lens to be OK with that behavior imho

 

[Ross the fiddler]

Got mine today but did not have time to test it properly. Just attached it to my EM1.2 and took a few test shots indoors.
Could get very sharp shots (portrait) at around 1/60s which is promising.
Way heavier than I was expecting and there is an annoying rotation on the mount. I would say it rotates about 1mm so when I grab the lens with my left hand and the camera with the right hand it feels like they are not properly attached. Anyone with the same issue?
I got my 12-40 to check if it would also move but it doesn’t. Rock solid. The 100-400 however doesn’t feel great as the rotation is highly noticeable.
Also checked for tilt movement but fortunately there is none so the sealing should be ok for now, but I don’t like the rotation feeling and that could also compromise the weather sealing in future because rotation movements might wear the rubber seal IMO.

Did a quick search on google and found other users complaining about this issue. Should I be worried or should I ignore it? It is the first time I buy something that doesn’t seem 100% like it should and had to be the most expensive lens...
A bit disappointed to be honest...

Edited to include two videos of my lens on a EM1mk2

This is the problem I was talking about.

What does the lens locking pin hole look like. I received my lens today & after trying it I took a photo of the locking pin hole area. My lens has no more movement than the other lenses on my E-M1 II.

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

 

[retiredfromlife]

Got mine today but did not have time to test it properly. Just attached it to my EM1.2 and took a few test shots indoors.
Could get very sharp shots (portrait) at around 1/60s which is promising.
Way heavier than I was expecting and there is an annoying rotation on the mount. I would say it rotates about 1mm so when I grab the lens with my left hand and the camera with the right hand it feels like they are not properly attached. Anyone with the same issue?
I got my 12-40 to check if it would also move but it doesn’t. Rock solid. The 100-400 however doesn’t feel great as the rotation is highly noticeable.
Also checked for tilt movement but fortunately there is none so the sealing should be ok for now, but I don’t like the rotation feeling and that could also compromise the weather sealing in future because rotation movements might wear the rubber seal IMO.

Did a quick search on google and found other users complaining about this issue. Should I be worried or should I ignore it? It is the first time I buy something that doesn’t seem 100% like it should and had to be the most expensive lens...
A bit disappointed to be honest...

Edited to include two videos of my lens on a EM1mk2

This is the problem I was talking about.

That looks too much.
How does the hole compare to the picture that Ross posted above? His holes look to have some bruising on the inserts like the start of ware.
none of my Olympus or Panasonic lenses have insets. Maybe the insert material is softer than the mounting holes in other lenses?

 

[Ross the fiddler]

Got mine today but did not have time to test it properly. Just attached it to my EM1.2 and took a few test shots indoors.
Could get very sharp shots (portrait) at around 1/60s which is promising.
Way heavier than I was expecting and there is an annoying rotation on the mount. I would say it rotates about 1mm so when I grab the lens with my left hand and the camera with the right hand it feels like they are not properly attached. Anyone with the same issue?
I got my 12-40 to check if it would also move but it doesn’t. Rock solid. The 100-400 however doesn’t feel great as the rotation is highly noticeable.
Also checked for tilt movement but fortunately there is none so the sealing should be ok for now, but I don’t like the rotation feeling and that could also compromise the weather sealing in future because rotation movements might wear the rubber seal IMO.

Did a quick search on google and found other users complaining about this issue. Should I be worried or should I ignore it? It is the first time I buy something that doesn’t seem 100% like it should and had to be the most expensive lens...
A bit disappointed to be honest...

Edited to include two videos of my lens on a EM1mk2

This is the problem I was talking about.

I can see the camera & lens moving around. If you want to show us how much movement there is then the camera should be sitting on something solid. There is movement in all the lenses to a degree, not without any movement. Mine is very minimal, like my other Pro zoom lenses.

 

[Ross the fiddler]

That looks too much.
How does the hole compare to the picture that Ross posted above? His holes look to have some bruising on the inserts like the start of ware.
none of my Olympus or Panasonic lenses have insets. Maybe the insert material is softer than the mounting holes in other lenses?

I didn't take a photo before & may be from testing beforehand too, but I would think that inset would be stainless steel & maybe a replaceable piece. I'm not going to get my scriber out to test it though.

 

[RichardC]

I can see the camera & lens moving around. If you want to show us how much movement there is then the camera should be sitting on something solid. There is movement in all the lenses to a degree, not without any movement. Mine is very minimal, like my other Pro zoom lenses.

My pro lenses and my 75mm also move a tiny amount on both of my EM1 Mk2 bodies. It's never been an issue.

 

[comment23]

Some more excellent stuff from Thomas Stirr here: https://smallsensorphotography.com/three-strike-test

For those who may want a brief synopsis before clicking through: this article features tough conditions, some deliberately forced to test the lens/user, and some very good results. Ed - as has been said before, a good photographer can make good photos anywhere with any camera. Also includes Interesting observations about the value of the upcoming E-M1X Bird AI firmware update in relation to the crazy reach with a 2x TC.

 

[RAH]

His pictures are very nice and its a good demonstration of the lens plus TC. However, I wonder what he means when he says "All of the photographs in this article are displayed as 100% captures without any cropping done to them." I believe him when he says he didn't crop them, but 100% display? I cannot get it to do that, at least on my monitor. They must either be downsized or they automatically adjust to the monitor resolution. Regardless, I'm not seeing them at 100%.

 

[RichardC]

His pictures are very nice and its a good demonstration of the lens plus TC. However, I wonder what he means when he says "All of the photographs in this article are displayed as 100% captures without any cropping done to them. I believe him when he says he didn't crop them, but 100% display? I cannot get it to do that, at least on my monitor. They must either be downsized or they automatically adjust to the monitor resolution. Regardless, I'm not seeing them at 100%.

He does note in the comments that he's not prepared to make anything available at full resolution. That's his prerogative I suppose.

 

[Pluttis]

His pictures are very nice and its a good demonstration of the lens plus TC. However, I wonder what he means when he says "All of the photographs in this article are displayed as 100% captures without any cropping done to them. I believe him when he says he didn't crop them, but 100% display? I cannot get it to do that, at least on my monitor. They must either be downsized or they automatically adjust to the monitor resolution. Regardless, I'm not seeing them at 100%.

He shows what he say...100% captures, the hole frames without any crop.

Not 100% as in full size images or 100% crops.