Showcase Olympus 100-400 f/5.0-6.3

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,267
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
Iso 6400. Jpeg.




01023808-02.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)




01023810-01.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,267
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
01023704-01.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



01023920-02.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Hendrik

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
1,998
Location
Wayland MA
Real Name
Hendrik
Brooding Heron

Here's a very brief comparison between the 100-400 (+MC-14) and the 300 Pro (+MC-20). I shot these two images standing on the same spot within a minute of each other. Unfortunately I did not have the presence of mind to align the settings as you will see in the EXIF.

The first is from the E-M1.3 and 300 Pro, MC-20 (600mm, f/8, 1/800, iso 400)

_H5B4330m43.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


The second is from the E-M1.2 and 100-400, MC-14 (560mm, f/9, 1/1600, iso 1600 - thanks to +1EV))

_H3B9024m43.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


I performed the same crop in Lightroom (2400 wide, eye centered on the upper left golden ratio crosshair). Normal LR intake sharpening only. The exposure was adjusted on the second to align it with the un-manipulated first. I also had to dial the color back a bit to get the sky to match, despite the elevated iso. At 100% there is not a great deal to choose between. They would be equally useful, I think. I might return soon to see how difficult it is to persuade the 100-400 to match the performance of the 300 at identical shutter speeds.
 

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,267
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
The iso1600 vs iso400 makes it tricky to determine anything conclusive. I can definitely see more "grain" in the 100-400 but if you weren't comparing directly between shots you probably wouldn't mind.
 

Hendrik

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
1,998
Location
Wayland MA
Real Name
Hendrik
The iso1600 vs iso400 makes it tricky to determine anything conclusive. I can definitely see more "grain" in the 100-400 but if you weren't comparing directly between shots you probably wouldn't mind.
To my eye, there's nothing about the 100-400 image that couldn't be massaged to be essentially indistinguishable from the 300 image. I have to admit I'm impressed...
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2016
Messages
489
Real Name
Dave Cherry
The 100-400 is an excellent lens. On Wednesday, I finally took delivery of a 150-400, and I am very impressed--as you would expect. Until they get sold, I still have a 300 Pro and the 100-400. I will attempt some sort of basic comparison at a common focal length and aperture of all three if I get a chance. One thing I can say right off the bat is that the Bokeh on the 150-400 is outstanding.
 

John King

Member of SOFA
Joined
Apr 20, 2020
Messages
2,900
Location
Beaumaris, Melbourne, Australia
Real Name
John ...
The 100-400 is an excellent lens. On Wednesday, I finally took delivery of a 150-400, and I am very impressed--as you would expect. Until they get sold, I still have a 300 Pro and the 100-400. I will attempt some sort of basic comparison at a common focal length and aperture of all three if I get a chance. One thing I can say right off the bat is that the Bokeh on the 150-400 is outstanding.
Congrats, Dave. Enjoy!
 

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,267
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
OI000228-01.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,267
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
OI000278-02.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



OI000274-01.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Hendrik

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
1,998
Location
Wayland MA
Real Name
Hendrik
Over the past few days I've been carrying the 100-400 without a TC, partially to get the wide end a little bit wider (as if 200mm equiv. could be considered 'wide'.) Minimal processing in Lightroom. Only LR-standard capture sharpening. All cropped to amount given before downsize for forum, no further sharpening.

Canada Goose, browsing. (9.8mp)
_H3B9218m43.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Tree Swallow (6.3mp)
_H3B9257m43.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Great Blue Heron on the prowl for an evening meal (5.8mp)
_H3B9311m43.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


The same heron (8.5mp)
_H3B9315m43.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Hendrik

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Feb 27, 2015
Messages
1,998
Location
Wayland MA
Real Name
Hendrik
Minimum focus distance - no crop. Standard Lightroom capture sharpening only.
_H3B9371m43.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

saladin

Mu-43 Hall of Famer
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
2,267
Location
Melbourne
Real Name
jason
OI000081-03.jpeg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

RAH

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
1,833
Location
New Hampshire
Real Name
Rich
When i unboxed it the first thing which come in my mind was "WOW, WHAT A BIG, HEAVY LENS!!!!"
Until now the 12-100 is my biggest and heaviest mFT Lens. And this is in mFT mind for most users too big and heavy. The new 100-400 tops it all. Such sizes i still good know from my Canon Days, over 5 years ago...
My plan was to sell my 75-300 after i got the 100-400. But it is so much tinyer and lighter that i think i will hold it, especially when i don't know if i need a long tele and when i go on vacation.
The 100-400 is well solid build, has a "pro" like finish, you can add the MC-14 and MC-20. Has an IS which is good at this lenghts. But i think i will never carry it out when i think i will not need this range...
I agree that the 100-400 is heavy. But the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM (latest version - VERY nice, IMHO) weighs 3.46 lbs./1570g (without tripod mount). This is a full 1 lb over the 100-400.

I agree that the 100-400 just isn't a good walk-around replacement for the 75-300. Now if they would just upgrade that lens a little (tc compatibility; weather sealing - if not too much added weight!, etc)...
 
Last edited:

L0n3Gr3yW0lf

Dad Pun Joke Master Over Nine Thousand Meme Lord
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
1,183
Location
UK
Real Name
Ovidiu
Had my first decent (I would say more than decent, to be honest) encounter with a young female Roe Deer. In the garden at the workplace, she showed up around 19:30 around the edge of the garden, she looked a bit more alert than I would have preferred (probably because 2 of my work colleagues were not very subtly saying LOOK OVI, A DEER :doh:). I took a few snaps from inside the building but the AF was being finicky so I decided to go a bit riskier.

W0LF4352-Edit.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

I went on the left side and kept a very low profile to hide behind a long fence that got me about 7-8 meters away from her, I walked like a cat with tiptoes first and trying to sneak the best that I could. It got me to the edge of the wooden fence and I took a very low position, about eye level to hers on one of my knees, she's barely bigger than a labradoodle.
This is when I realized 400mm IS A LOT of reach for a subject this close :eek:

W0LF4363-Edit.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
So I had to zoom out a bit ... which I shouldn't complain about, it should give me a bit brighter image and sharper (in theory that is).

W0LF4372-Edit.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

She was quite aware of my presents (duh ... I'm probably bigger than her :p ) ... and my breathing was a bit more raspy and irregular (I have worked for the last 11 hours).

W0LF4387-Edit.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

The whole encounter did not last very long as we were both quite anxious, me to get back to work before someone wacks me over the head like its 1899 and she for feeling stalked by an unknown and unworthy wanna-be photographer :p

W0LF4393-Edit.JPG
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Last image before she was too scared and darted off. The output is quite pleasing and I love it quite a bit, the AF was not the most reliable but luckily I was shooting in Low Burst Electronic Shutter to increase the chances of a good sharp image. The exposure was a bit of a fight, at f 6.3 I had to go as low as 1/125th of a second to keep ISO around 1.600 to 2.500. If I had more time and on my own time I would have approached the situation a lot differently, more low profile, more focus on slow movements and time with the subject, more attention to stability and autofocus.
 

Mattliff

New to Mu-43
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
3
A few shots with the new Olympus 100-400mm.

1/250 sec. f/6.3 400mm ISO640
Green Heron.
P5140186_Nik_Nik_Nik_DxO.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


1/200 sec. f/6.3 400mm ISO400
Baby Green Herons.
P5140294_Nik_DxO.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



1/500 sec. f/6 210mm ISO2500
Red Bellied Woodpecker.
P5140070_Nik_Nik_Nik_DxO-1.jpg
Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Mu-43 is a fan site and not associated with Olympus, Panasonic, or other manufacturers mentioned on this site.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom