Notice: Undefined variable: splityear in /var/www/vhosts/fredmiranda.com/httpdocs/forum/viewtopic.php on line 99 Micro Four-Thirds Image Thread - Leica & Alternative Gear - Photography - FM Forums
sum1sgrampa wrote:
In the 50 years I've been living in my house I've never had a Dragonfly land on a plant in the yard. My 300 F4 rental arrived this morning so I was sitting in a lawn chair pointing it at flowers, lawn statues, whatever. Then this guy decided to show up and plopped himself down right in front of me. Didn't even move out of my chair
OM-1 Olympus 300 F4
PV Hiker wrote:
Somebody rented a toy to play with?
Yes, I did Honestly I'm not sure what to do now. Do I want to spend another $2000 on the used market or $3000 new on a focal length I already have covered with my 100-400 ? Here's the obvious; IQ is definitely a step up but certainly not night and day. F4 vs F 6.3 was immediately noticeable and cannot be understated. The oof backgrounds are noticeably better also.
But here's the thing I wasn't expecting. I'm not very good at tracking BIF. Even these big, slow ones that I tend to shoot. I usually end up with a bunch of very poorly framed images and parts of the bird cutoff. When I got home and started editing I was shocked to see this series that I'm posting below. These are straight out of camera and in order as shot. No cropping, just resized for web. Not to mention, every one of them is in perfect focus.
For reference I've used the
Nikon 500 F4 AF-I on a D500 nearly impossible to handhold, always from a tripod
Sigma 150-600 S on a D500 Very awkward lens and front heavy when extended to 600mm
Nikon Z 400 4.5 on a Z9 this lens may be too light on the Z9 ??
Nikon Z 180-600 on a Z9 much better than the Sigma S but still long and fairly heavy
Om-1 and Olympus 100-400 easier to handle than the Sigma S but still gets front heavy when extended
Which brings me to the 300 F4. Is this lens just the perfect combination of size and mass that led to me finally getting so many images in frame ? Was I just lucky ? I don't recall getting this lucky before. keep in mind, I was also shooting from a kayak. This alone may convince me to make the purchase.
Gary
And before someone says "that's a slow moving bird, I could capture that with any combo," I'm talking about me and my shortcomings when it comes to tracking.
Hi Gary That's right, so the margins are small and there are not that big improvements overall.. if you have a good example of, for example, 100-400
then 150-400 is not a wow upgrade either.. so it is possible as I wrote before to take just as good pictures with 100-400 .. here too the upgrade is quite small .. but there are advantages.. better IS and more light and the built-in Tc better weather sealing etc..
The 300 is very good and I think it has an advantage in terms of quality image wise against both 100-400 and also 150-400 .. but then it is a prime and that is its disadvantage against the zooms which are so more useful overall.. you sometimes sacrifice a little image quality but it also means that you can get slightly different pictures with the zooms
Then as always the price! 150-400 is filthy expensive
even the 300 is not cheap as a used one either
you should have had a mc14 to test it with, it works well but of course you lose some light but then 420mm f5.6
That's difficult how to do
I would have probably taken the 100-400 and moved on since you have very high quality in your pictures with it and then saved the money especially if you are thinking about a new 300 then you can take these 3000 dollars and save and put on a Used 150--400 in the future if you get to save more money..
I don't know what the used price is in the USA.. I paid about 5800 Us for my used = about 55000 Swedish kr
maybe you can rent a 150-400 in the future and test and see if it is worth saving for
Very nice pictures from you with the 300 f4 which is a good lens..I also think the image quality is a step up, even if it's marginal.
that's why I can't sell mine
Ronny
by the way is the series of pictures with the heron with the mark II?
probably if you had the mark I one of the pictures would have been out of focus and then resumed it again after one or two pictures.. is quite annoying as I experience with the mark I , although it's not like that all the time but quite often
that's why I hope for an upgrade also on the camera body with at least 30 MP and even better AF
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.300mm F4.0 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
Ronny Olsson wrote:
Hi Gary That's right, so the margins are small and there are not that big improvements overall.. if you have a good example of, for example, 100-400
then 150-400 is not a wow upgrade either.. so it is possible as I wrote before to take just as good pictures with 100-400 .. here too the upgrade is quite small .. but there are advantages.. better IS and more light and the built-in Tc better weather sealing etc..
The 300 is very good and I think it has an advantage in terms of quality image wise against both 100-400 and also 150-400 .. but then it is a prime and that is its disadvantage against the zooms which are so more useful overall.. you sometimes sacrifice a little image quality but it also means that you can get slightly different pictures with the zooms
Then as always the price! 150-400 is filthy expensive
even the 300 is not cheap as a used one either
you should have had a mc14 to test it with, it works well but of course you lose some light but then 420mm f5.6
That's difficult how to do
I would have probably taken the 100-400 and moved on since you have very high quality in your pictures with it and then saved the money especially if you are thinking about a new 300 then you can take these 3000 dollars and save and put on a Used 150--400 in the future if you get to save more money..
I don't know what the used price is in the USA.. I paid about 5800 Us for my used = about 55000 Swedish kr
maybe you can rent a 150-400 in the future and test and see if it is worth saving for
Very nice pictures from you with the 300 f4 which is a good lens..I also think the image quality is a step up, even if it's marginal.
that's why I can't sell mine
Ronny
by the way is the series of pictures with the heron with the mark II?
probably if you had the mark I one of the pictures would have been out of focus and then resumed it again after one or two pictures.. is quite annoying as I experience with the mark I , although it's not like that all the time but quite often
that's why I hope for an upgrade also on the camera body with at least 30 MP and even better AF
Thanks very much for the input Ronny. Always useful information. No, the exif is accurate, these were with the Mark 1. I was more impressed with the fact that I was able to keep the bird in frame through this series and beyond. That's rare for me. It's kind of an effortless combo to shoot.
Great shots of the Heron !
