Micro 4/3 Showcase Olympus M.Zuiko 100-400 f5.0-6.3

Thought I'd try renting to see if I might want one for myself. Initial response is too large and heavy for my needs, but very good overall performance when mounted on my E-M5 Mk III.

All Handheld SOOC
P1010938.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


P1010924.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Bird was moving (cropped)
P1010962.JPG
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:
I dithered over buying this lens, as I had the PL 100-300. Took the plunge and really pleased with it. while birding isn't my primary interest I do shoot enough birds to feel it has been a worthwhile purchase. Used on my M1 Mk 11.
View attachment 306491View attachment 306493View attachment 306496
PB070074 Spoonbill.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
PB070075 spoonbill.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
PB070076 Spoonbill.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:
Good Morning,

The M. Zuiko 100-400mm is a great handholdable lens useful for many subjects, including sports. It is part of my lightweight sports kit, in place of my Canon 1DX III and 100-400mm II L.

Regards,

Edd

WBB-2.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
WBB-3.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
WBB-4.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
WBB-5.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
WBB-6.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
WBB-8.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
A quick comparison (of my copy) of the 100-400mm with 1.4x TC at f 9 and f 11 the moon ... part of it at 200% zoom-in:

1700777782984.png

There are some noticeable purple and green fringing with the teleconverter at f 11 and I can't see any extra details or contrast stopping down, at least in this situation I think the maximum aperture is the best aperture. (The RAW file has been edited and sharpened up, though I haven't passed it through Lightroom de-noising)
 
A quick comparison (of my copy) of the 100-400mm with 1.4x TC at f 9 and f 11 the moon ... part of it at 200% zoom-in:


There are some noticeable purple and green fringing with the teleconverter at f 11 and I can't see any extra details or contrast stopping down, at least in this situation I think the maximum aperture is the best aperture. (The RAW file has been edited and sharpened up, though I haven't passed it through Lightroom de-noising)
I have also found f9 the better option with that lens and TC, not that anything wider is available of course.
 
A quick comparison (of my copy) of the 100-400mm with 1.4x TC at f 9 and f 11 the moon ... part of it at 200% zoom-in:

View attachment 430945
There are some noticeable purple and green fringing with the teleconverter at f 11 and I can't see any extra details or contrast stopping down, at least in this situation I think the maximum aperture is the best aperture. (The RAW file has been edited and sharpened up, though I haven't passed it through Lightroom de-noising)
The answer is:



Do NOT look at photos at 200% !

NOT from ANY camera ...

In this simple thing lies happiness ... ;) .
 
I could swamp this thread, lol . So just a few recents. One of my favourites of the system. So adaptable.






OB270744-01.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)




OB110829-01.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


OB080391-01.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)



OA151645_jpeg.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)





OB111171-01.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)




OB070088-01.jpeg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Last edited:
1000015312.jpg
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Sorry to spoil the mood of this thread but this situation #£&ed me off beyond belief yesterday. The ducks were rolling pretty calmly on the water, I was about just above the water line and I was keeping up with the ducks in my framing. The Olympus 100-400mm f 5-6.3 is struggling for me when it comes to subject in motion, the AF small square box was on the 2nd duck from the left, the subject detection was on and seeing the ducks, the AFC was on with no Tracking, IBIS was on and on Auto but IS on the lens was off, the focus limiter was set to the entire range, metering was set to spot, I was in Manual mode, I was using Electronic Shutter 20 FPS burst and out of 43 images not one was pin sharp and this one was the best focus (mind you it's not SooC, it's RAW with lots of global and local sharpening and denoising to try and get the most out of it).
Even in the EVF the AF was going in and out between the water in the foreground, the grass in the background while detecting the ducks (focus speed is set to fastest).
And it's not even the first time it happened :(
 
A couple of things from my experience. Firstly 1/400 handheld at 400mm is not fast enough. Homer was taken on a tripod and I had enough light to go to 1/2000, you can see the weave of his trousers.

Lens IBIS on works better than IBIS off. It's not as good as full sync-is, but they do complement each other in a logical manner. If the automatic options aren't working well, try some human intervention. The AF playing around may be down to the specific situation of the water line and reflections, but that's just a suggestion. The camera doesn't see things the same way that we do, so it may be getting confused.
 
View attachment 459518
Sorry to spoil the mood of this thread but this situation #£&ed me off beyond belief yesterday. The ducks were rolling pretty calmly on the water, I was about just above the water line and I was keeping up with the ducks in my framing. The Olympus 100-400mm f 5-6.3 is struggling for me when it comes to subject in motion, the AF small square box was on the 2nd duck from the left, the subject detection was on and seeing the ducks, the AFC was on with no Tracking, IBIS was on and on Auto but IS on the lens was off, the focus limiter was set to the entire range, metering was set to spot, I was in Manual mode, I was using Electronic Shutter 20 FPS burst and out of 43 images not one was pin sharp and this one was the best focus (mind you it's not SooC, it's RAW with lots of global and local sharpening and denoising to try and get the most out of it).
Even in the EVF the AF was going in and out between the water in the foreground, the grass in the background while detecting the ducks (focus speed is set to fastest).
And it's not even the first time it happened :(
Adding to what @IanE said, did you forget the C-AF doesn't work at high frame rates. It only works at slower frame rates. At high frame rates, the first frame is the only one that will (might) be in focus.
 
Adding to what @IanE said, did you forget the C-AF doesn't work at high frame rates. It only works at slower frame rates. At high frame rates, the first frame is the only one that will (might) be in focus.
I know that the AF-C won't work past 50 FPS (on Pro lenses, 25 FPS on everything else) but I was shooting at 20 FPS which should AF-C fine. I bought the OM-1 on the premise for getting at least twice as many images in a burst with AF-C for birds and dogs compared to Sony a7 Mark IV.
For the last 6 months of testing the 100-400 and 40-150 I am more and more incline to believe that OM-1 works best with and mostly (at the performance of) the Pro lenses, all the other lenses are more to the level of E-M5 and E-M10 performance.
I'll also suggest that OM-1 users look at Thomas Eisl's video on focus.
I will watch the video tonight after work, curious to learn more.
 
Back
Top