Reading mode: Light Dark

Wildlife lens weight versus IQ

Go to last post
faunagraphy said:
Hazel123 said:
Thinking I should maybe try and hire the 300 and Olympus 100-400 and try them out.

Also if getting the 100-400 I could easily afford a new Olympus body as well.

Speaking of which. Would the Em5 be balanced enough?
Click to expand...
No. You will need a grip.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily agree with this advice. You may find you like a grip.

I use a bare M10 II with no problems. I've tried a lot of kinds of grips, up to a photosniper add-on. None of them added much.

I do sometimes attach a monopod & never extend it, using it as a handle, or a foregrip with a telephoto lens, but that's most often handy with my 100mm, f/2.8 adapted SLR lens. It's a lot heftier than an MFT lens. It's 2nd most handy with my tiny cameras with zero inertia & looooong zooms.
 
Mait said:
faunagraphy said:
Hazel123 said:
Thinking I should maybe try and hire the 300 and Olympus 100-400 and try them out.

Also if getting the 100-400 I could easily afford a new Olympus body as well.

Speaking of which. Would the Em5 be balanced enough?
Click to expand...
No. You will need a grip.
Click to expand...
I would say it is very OK to use em5 with 100-400. You are holding one hand under the lens anyway while shooting with this size of lenses so it would not be balanced anyway even with OM1 size camera.
Click to expand...
Balance is a bourgeois concept. These "balance" people never give up, no matter how illogical they are. :)
 
faunagraphy said:
Hazel123 said:
Thinking I should maybe try and hire the 300 and Olympus 100-400 and try them out.

Also if getting the 100-400 I could easily afford a new Olympus body as well.

Speaking of which. Would the Em5 be balanced enough?
Click to expand...
No. You will need a grip.
Click to expand...
With the exception of a short plastic telephoto, I would not have a long lens sticking out off a camera unsupported, unless it's hanging straight down. AFAIC, long lens shooting is all about the lens. The camera is just the recording device attached to the back of it. The left hand takes all the weight and does the aiming. The right hand just lightly holds the camera and presses the buttons. It's quite different to "normal" shooting. I can't see the need for a grip for wildlife unless you mainly shoot giraffs :)
 
BobT3218 said:
faunagraphy said:
Hazel123 said:
Thinking I should maybe try and hire the 300 and Olympus 100-400 and try them out.

Also if getting the 100-400 I could easily afford a new Olympus body as well.

Speaking of which. Would the Em5 be balanced enough?
Click to expand...
No. You will need a grip.
Click to expand...
With the exception of a short plastic telephoto, I would not have a long lens sticking out off a camera unsupported, unless it's hanging straight down. AFAIC, long lens shooting is all about the lens. The camera is just the recording device attached to the back of it. The left hand takes all the weight and does the aiming. The right hand just lightly holds the camera and presses the buttons. It's quite different to "normal" shooting. I can't see the need for a grip for wildlife unless you mainly shoot giraffs :)
Click to expand...
It distributes weight more evenly between your two arms and reduces strain. A grip adds a little weight but more importantly, allows your right hand to take some of the strain away from your left. If it's a battery grip, you'd also be bringing the center of gravity closer to your core.

I agree that it's a personal thing. But I shot my E-M5 for years without a grip and after purchasing the HLD-6, it's almost never been without it. Even the 5 lb Canon 300mm f2.8L was comfortable to use. If I need to save space, I remove the battery grip part but still keep the 'gripping' grip attached.
 
Bobapingu said:
With the exception of a short plastic telephoto, I would not have a long lens sticking out off a camera unsupported, unless it's hanging straight down. AFAIC, long lens shooting is all about the lens. The camera is just the recording device attached to the back of it. The left hand takes all the weight and does the aiming. The right hand just lightly holds the camera and presses the buttons. It's quite different to "normal" shooting.
Click to expand...
Bobapingu said:
I can't see the need for a grip for wildlife unless you mainly shoot giraffs :)
Click to expand...
Bob, I see it differently . . .

Without a battery grip I can’t get a good RH grip with my little finger on the camera - I find I need a lot more grip pressure with my other fingers without the battery grip.

I also find the battery grips offer much better handling of the camera when picking it up and putting it down.

I also use Olympus Grip Straps which give me added security when carrying the camera in the bush and I’m in difficult terrain and often needing my left hand free. I’ve had plenty of stumbles and trips and a large grip and grip strap help me to hang onto the expensive gear when I’ve needed to break or arrest my fall

So I have battery grips and an Olympus Grip Strap on all of my cameras that I use for bird photography with big lenses; E-5, E-M1 II, E-M1 III, 5DIII, 5DIV, 7DII

and the grips stay on even when I’m using smaller lenses with those cameras shooting landscapes and people etc

The only time I remove the grips is when we travel overseas and I want a smaller camera profile.

Peter
 
Messier Object said:
BobT3218 said:
With the exception of a short plastic telephoto, I would not have a long lens sticking out off a camera unsupported, unless it's hanging straight down. AFAIC, long lens shooting is all about the lens. The camera is just the recording device attached to the back of it. The left hand takes all the weight and does the aiming. The right hand just lightly holds the camera and presses the buttons. It's quite different to "normal" shooting.

I can't see the need for a grip for wildlife unless you mainly shoot giraffs :)
Click to expand...
Bob, I see it differently . . .

Without a battery grip I can’t get a good RH grip with my little finger on the camera - I find I need a lot more grip pressure with my other fingers without the battery grip.

I also find the battery grips offer much better handling of the camera when picking it up and putting it down.

I also use Olympus Grip Straps which give me added security when carrying the camera in the bush and I’m in difficult terrain and often needing my left hand free. I’ve had plenty of stumbles and trips and a large grip and grip strap help me to hang onto the expensive gear when I’ve needed to break or arrest my fall

So I have battery grips and an Olympus Grip Strap on all of my cameras that I use for bird photography with big lenses; E-5, E-M1 II, E-M1 III, 5DIII, 5DIV, 7DII

and the grips stay on even when I’m using smaller lenses with those cameras shooting landscapes and people etc

The only time I remove the grips is when we travel overseas and I want a smaller camera profile.

Peter
Click to expand...
I can't entirely disagree with you because when I had an E-3 + 50-200SWD, I also often used a grip and whrist strap. However, perhaps it's the aditional weight of the 300/4 + MS20 but I would feel most uncomfortable carrying it around with a wrist strap and grip particlarly with those four puny little lens flange screws. Also, I would not and probably could not take a photo with the 300 without holding the weight of the lens in my left hand.
Regarding the little finger thing, I guess it depends on one's hands. I certainly found it annoying with the E-M1.1. I understand it was fixed with the E-M1.2 but it's certainly not an issue with the OM-1.
In any case, my technique is quite different now but then my gear is different in so many ways so not surprising I guess.
 
faunagraphy said:
BobT3218 said:
faunagraphy said:
Hazel123 said:
Thinking I should maybe try and hire the 300 and Olympus 100-400 and try them out.

Also if getting the 100-400 I could easily afford a new Olympus body as well.

Speaking of which. Would the Em5 be balanced enough?
Click to expand...
No. You will need a grip.
Click to expand...
With the exception of a short plastic telephoto, I would not have a long lens sticking out off a camera unsupported, unless it's hanging straight down. AFAIC, long lens shooting is all about the lens. The camera is just the recording device attached to the back of it. The left hand takes all the weight and does the aiming. The right hand just lightly holds the camera and presses the buttons. It's quite different to "normal" shooting. I can't see the need for a grip for wildlife unless you mainly shoot giraffs :)
Click to expand...
It distributes weight more evenly between your two arms and reduces strain. A grip adds a little weight but more importantly, allows your right hand to take some of the strain away from your left. If it's a battery grip, you'd also be bringing the center of gravity closer to your core.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how adding more weight for center of gravity purposes will reduce strain as you first said, people aren't usually trying to balance teles on a knife's edge (unless it's a gimbal) or on a single finger and it's no big deal to move the hand under the lens forward or back... The grip isn't under anything in landscape orientation, how is it supporting weight? In portrait I can kinda see the increased area helping a bit, maybe.
faunagraphy said:
I agree that it's a personal thing. But I shot my E-M5 for years without a grip and after purchasing the HLD-6, it's almost never been without it. Even the 5 lb Canon 300mm f2.8L was comfortable to use. If I need to save space, I remove the battery grip part but still keep the 'gripping' grip attached.
Click to expand...
Highly subjective, I think a grip actually helps more with bringing the camera up than with actual shooting but YMMV... The thumb rest area and even the front grip of the E-M5 have also seen a lot of changes between the original and Mk II and between that and the Mk III. We all have different hand sizes and habits, so it's totally fair to say a grip might make a certain body more comfortable for you, but I don't buy the balance argument tbh.
 
Last edited:
BobT3218 said:
Messier Object said:
BobT3218 said:
With the exception of a short plastic telephoto, I would not have a long lens sticking out off a camera unsupported, unless it's hanging straight down. AFAIC, long lens shooting is all about the lens. The camera is just the recording device attached to the back of it. The left hand takes all the weight and does the aiming. The right hand just lightly holds the camera and presses the buttons. It's quite different to "normal" shooting.

I can't see the need for a grip for wildlife unless you mainly shoot giraffs :)
Click to expand...
Bob, I see it differently . . .

Without a battery grip I can’t get a good RH grip with my little finger on the camera - I find I need a lot more grip pressure with my other fingers without the battery grip.

I also find the battery grips offer much better handling of the camera when picking it up and putting it down.

I also use Olympus Grip Straps which give me added security when carrying the camera in the bush and I’m in difficult terrain and often needing my left hand free. I’ve had plenty of stumbles and trips and a large grip and grip strap help me to hang onto the expensive gear when I’ve needed to break or arrest my fall

So I have battery grips and an Olympus Grip Strap on all of my cameras that I use for bird photography with big lenses; E-5, E-M1 II, E-M1 III, 5DIII, 5DIV, 7DII

and the grips stay on even when I’m using smaller lenses with those cameras shooting landscapes and people etc

The only time I remove the grips is when we travel overseas and I want a smaller camera profile.

Peter
Click to expand...
I can't entirely disagree with you because when I had an E-3 + 50-200SWD, I also often used a grip and whrist strap. However, perhaps it's the aditional weight of the 300/4 + MS20 but I would feel most uncomfortable carrying it around with a wrist strap and grip particlarly with those four puny little lens flange screws. Also, I would not and probably could not take a photo with the 300 without holding the weight of the lens in my left hand.
Regarding the little finger thing, I guess it depends on one's hands. I certainly found it annoying with the E-M1.1. I understand it was fixed with the E-M1.2 but it's certainly not an issue with the OM-1.
In any case, my technique is quite different now but then my gear is different in so many ways so not surprising I guess.
Click to expand...
eventually we each work out what works best for us.

My heaviest lens is around 3,3Kg and I use it hand-held and I walk around in the bush with it in my hands. And note, the grip strap I’m using isn’t a wrist strap, it fits around the back of your hand and allows a much more relaxed grip by your hand without loss of security - if you are jarred or you stumble you’re less likely to lose the camera from your hand.

And yes, those 4 puny little flange screws and the same on the MMF adapter don’t give me a lot of confidence, yet I try to not let that apparent weakness limit the way use the camera. The weight of my Zuiko 300mm f/2.8 didn’t break my E-5 and I am not pulling any punches when a I use it in my E-M1 II or III.

Peter
 
It's definitely a personal thing.
I use the Panasonic 100-400 on a Gx9.
I cradle the lens with my left hand and have all my buttons in easy reach on a small light body.
I like the grip on my fz330. With lighter lenses I can see a point.
But the gx9 feels so natural to use for me with this lens and makes the whole setup a weight I'm happy to carry.
 
Algreen345 said:
I had the 300mm f4 Pro for a few months and tested it against the 50-200 SWD + EC14 and the Sigma APO 300mm f4 Tele Macro in Canon EF Mount.

Price differences:

Olympus 300mm f4 Pro - $2500

Olympus 50-200 SWD + EC14 - $600

Sigma APO 300mm F4 + Metabones Smart Adapter = $500

The 300mm F4 focuses the fastest, followed by the 50-200 SWD, and the Sigma.

The IQ differences were minor in most cases. The Sigma has the best bokeh, but at f4.5 for the two 300mm lenses and f4.9 for the SWD, sharpness differences and color are so close you really won't notice. What I did notice the most is the focus speed, but since my EM1.2 could never reliably capture BIF, and most of my work is stationary, I sold the 300mm f4 Pro and kept the other two.

Later, I found a newer version of the Sigma APO 300mm f4 with an HSM engine that focuses faster than the SWD. It cost $250 and that's what I use now with the Metabones adapter. No C-AF, but S-AF is fast and accurate. An example from yesterday.

749c190c41d44722beb139c7feb192fa.jpg

There are a huge number of Canon EF lenses that work with Metabones Smart Adapters that are far cheaper on the used market than Olympus pro lenses. They produce stunning images with Olympus cameras for prices not much more than the 75-300 new.
Click to expand...
It is a nice shot. I sold the 50-200 SWD. I was on my 3rd set of SWD motors. I found I always used it 200mm so needed something longer. Got the 1.4xTC but the combo seemed a bit soft. The 300/4 was a revelation however, without the benefit of a zoom, one needs to improve acquisition skills.
 
Skeeterbytes said:
Jack Tingle said:
The "it's soft at 300mm" knock has 3 parts in my experience.
  1. Handholding a 300mm, non-OIS lens with only IBIS is marginal. You'll be getting bad shots due to slight movement. Try it on a tripod/monopod/beanbag to see if it's the lens. Keep your shutter speed above 1/200th. Preferably above 1/250th.
  2. AF challenges: Olympus CDAF is not great in dim or lower contrast environments. I often punt & go to MF. So often I dedicated the M10 II's Fn3 to MF toggle. Otherwise you have to use the SCP. No lens body switch or clutch on this lens.
  3. Marketing probably said, "278mm? No, no, it has to be 300! So what if 10% of the lenses will be soft? Who cares?"
Click to expand...
Technique and conditions do have their impacts. It's also the case that the 75-300, like many zooms, performs best wide and resolution decays as one zooms long . Add the slow aperture plus need to stop down to get sharpest results and you get back to the "need direct sun" dilemma presented by pretty much all affordable super-tele zooms.

A lot revolves around one's expectations, because most of us are accustomed to gazing at shots by super-photographers using super-quality gear. Then we're talking real money (e.g., a $10k Oly rig or $18k Sony rig).

Cheers,

Rick
Click to expand...
A Sony 200-600mm is about $2k and an A7R3 (which works surprisingly well for wildlife as long as you're not shooting BIF) is around another $2K. So if you're looking for reach (the R3 crops to 1.5x with 18MPix) and brightness (f6.3 at the long end) and you're willing to deal with 3 kilos of lens + camera (!!!) it's not that expensive.



A7R3 + 200-600mm f6.3
A7R3 + 200-600mm f6.3



Where m4/3rd really shines is going lightweight. For that I think it's hard to beat an EM-5mk3 with the Panasonic 100-300mm (v2). The Pany is much faster to focus than the Oly 75-300 and if you can get a good copy is reasonably sharp in the center wide open. That gets you 200-600 (f11 equiv at the long end) in a game changing (for me anyway : ) combo that come under a kilogram (!!).



e-m5III + 100-300mm mk 2
e-m5III + 100-300mm mk 2
 
netHead said:
Skeeterbytes said:
Jack Tingle said:
The "it's soft at 300mm" knock has 3 parts in my experience.
  1. Handholding a 300mm, non-OIS lens with only IBIS is marginal. You'll be getting bad shots due to slight movement. Try it on a tripod/monopod/beanbag to see if it's the lens. Keep your shutter speed above 1/200th. Preferably above 1/250th.
  2. AF challenges: Olympus CDAF is not great in dim or lower contrast environments. I often punt & go to MF. So often I dedicated the M10 II's Fn3 to MF toggle. Otherwise you have to use the SCP. No lens body switch or clutch on this lens.
  3. Marketing probably said, "278mm? No, no, it has to be 300! So what if 10% of the lenses will be soft? Who cares?"
Click to expand...
Technique and conditions do have their impacts. It's also the case that the 75-300, like many zooms, performs best wide and resolution decays as one zooms long . Add the slow aperture plus need to stop down to get sharpest results and you get back to the "need direct sun" dilemma presented by pretty much all affordable super-tele zooms.

A lot revolves around one's expectations, because most of us are accustomed to gazing at shots by super-photographers using super-quality gear. Then we're talking real money (e.g., a $10k Oly rig or $18k Sony rig).

Cheers,

Rick
Click to expand...
A Sony 200-600mm is about $2k and an A7R3 (which works surprisingly well for wildlife as long as you're not shooting BIF) is around another $2K. So if you're looking for reach (the R3 crops to 1.5x with 18MPix) and brightness (f6.3 at the long end) and you're willing to deal with 3 kilos of lens + camera (!!!) it's not that expensive.

A7R3 + 200-600mm f6.3
A7R3 + 200-600mm f6.3

Where m4/3rd really shines is going lightweight. For that I think it's hard to beat an EM-5mk3 with the Panasonic 100-300mm (v2). The Pany is much faster to focus than the Oly 75-300 and if you can get a good copy is reasonably sharp in the center wide open. That gets you 200-600 (f11 equiv at the long end) in a game changing (for me anyway : ) combo that come under a kilogram (!!).

e-m5III + 100-300mm mk 2
e-m5III + 100-300mm mk 2
Click to expand...
Well I'll be getting the EM5 iii which helps! But have already bought the Olympus 75-300. I can't comment on the autofocus yet as it didn't work on my first copy so hopefully it will on the second copy.

Although I liked it so much at the 75mm end I was tempted to send it back and get the 75mm f1.8! for the better IQ. But then I wouldn't have a longer wildlife lens.
 
Last edited:
Hazel123 said:
netHead said:
Skeeterbytes said:
Jack Tingle said:
The "it's soft at 300mm" knock has 3 parts in my experience.
  1. Handholding a 300mm, non-OIS lens with only IBIS is marginal. You'll be getting bad shots due to slight movement. Try it on a tripod/monopod/beanbag to see if it's the lens. Keep your shutter speed above 1/200th. Preferably above 1/250th.
  2. AF challenges: Olympus CDAF is not great in dim or lower contrast environments. I often punt & go to MF. So often I dedicated the M10 II's Fn3 to MF toggle. Otherwise you have to use the SCP. No lens body switch or clutch on this lens.
  3. Marketing probably said, "278mm? No, no, it has to be 300! So what if 10% of the lenses will be soft? Who cares?"
Click to expand...
Technique and conditions do have their impacts. It's also the case that the 75-300, like many zooms, performs best wide and resolution decays as one zooms long . Add the slow aperture plus need to stop down to get sharpest results and you get back to the "need direct sun" dilemma presented by pretty much all affordable super-tele zooms.

A lot revolves around one's expectations, because most of us are accustomed to gazing at shots by super-photographers using super-quality gear. Then we're talking real money (e.g., a $10k Oly rig or $18k Sony rig).

Cheers,

Rick
Click to expand...
A Sony 200-600mm is about $2k and an A7R3 (which works surprisingly well for wildlife as long as you're not shooting BIF) is around another $2K. So if you're looking for reach (the R3 crops to 1.5x with 18MPix) and brightness (f6.3 at the long end) and you're willing to deal with 3 kilos of lens + camera (!!!) it's not that expensive.

A7R3 + 200-600mm f6.3
A7R3 + 200-600mm f6.3

Where m4/3rd really shines is going lightweight. For that I think it's hard to beat an EM-5mk3 with the Panasonic 100-300mm (v2). The Pany is much faster to focus than the Oly 75-300 and if you can get a good copy is reasonably sharp in the center wide open. That gets you 200-600 (f11 equiv at the long end) in a game changing (for me anyway : ) combo that come under a kilogram (!!).

e-m5III + 100-300mm mk 2
e-m5III + 100-300mm mk 2
Click to expand...
Well I'll be getting the EM5 iii which helps! But have already bought the Olympus 75-300. I can't comment on the autofocus yet as it didn't work on my first copy so hopefully it will on the second copy.

Although I liked it so much at the 75mm end I was tempted to send it back and get the 75mm f1.8! for the better IQ. But then I wouldn't have a longer wildlife lens.
Click to expand...
The 75-300 is slow to focus but definitely usable - e.g. you can see it struggle if you try tracking anything, for instance.

But you can't beat it for reach vs weight, that's for sure. Folks certainly have fun with it and for us non-pros that's what it's about, no? : )
 
netHead said:
Hazel123 said:
netHead said:
Skeeterbytes said:
Jack Tingle said:
The "it's soft at 300mm" knock has 3 parts in my experience.
  1. Handholding a 300mm, non-OIS lens with only IBIS is marginal. You'll be getting bad shots due to slight movement. Try it on a tripod/monopod/beanbag to see if it's the lens. Keep your shutter speed above 1/200th. Preferably above 1/250th.
  2. AF challenges: Olympus CDAF is not great in dim or lower contrast environments. I often punt & go to MF. So often I dedicated the M10 II's Fn3 to MF toggle. Otherwise you have to use the SCP. No lens body switch or clutch on this lens.
  3. Marketing probably said, "278mm? No, no, it has to be 300! So what if 10% of the lenses will be soft? Who cares?"
Click to expand...
Technique and conditions do have their impacts. It's also the case that the 75-300, like many zooms, performs best wide and resolution decays as one zooms long . Add the slow aperture plus need to stop down to get sharpest results and you get back to the "need direct sun" dilemma presented by pretty much all affordable super-tele zooms.

A lot revolves around one's expectations, because most of us are accustomed to gazing at shots by super-photographers using super-quality gear. Then we're talking real money (e.g., a $10k Oly rig or $18k Sony rig).

Cheers,

Rick
Click to expand...
A Sony 200-600mm is about $2k and an A7R3 (which works surprisingly well for wildlife as long as you're not shooting BIF) is around another $2K. So if you're looking for reach (the R3 crops to 1.5x with 18MPix) and brightness (f6.3 at the long end) and you're willing to deal with 3 kilos of lens + camera (!!!) it's not that expensive.

A7R3 + 200-600mm f6.3
A7R3 + 200-600mm f6.3

Where m4/3rd really shines is going lightweight. For that I think it's hard to beat an EM-5mk3 with the Panasonic 100-300mm (v2). The Pany is much faster to focus than the Oly 75-300 and if you can get a good copy is reasonably sharp in the center wide open. That gets you 200-600 (f11 equiv at the long end) in a game changing (for me anyway : ) combo that come under a kilogram (!!).

e-m5III + 100-300mm mk 2
e-m5III + 100-300mm mk 2
Click to expand...
Well I'll be getting the EM5 iii which helps! But have already bought the Olympus 75-300. I can't comment on the autofocus yet as it didn't work on my first copy so hopefully it will on the second copy.

Although I liked it so much at the 75mm end I was tempted to send it back and get the 75mm f1.8! for the better IQ. But then I wouldn't have a longer wildlife lens.
Click to expand...
The 75-300 is slow to focus but definitely usable - e.g. you can see it struggle if you try tracking anything, for instance.

But you can't beat it for reach vs weight, that's for sure. Folks certainly have fun with it and for us non-pros that's what it's about, no? : )
Click to expand...
Thanks. And I have only just found the thumbs up button on this forum - lol!
 
So my second copy has arrived and is much better. The focus locks on and the zoom barrel rotates without sticking - as it should be. Only went out for about half an hour and took quite a lot of bad photos lol! The better ones were where I used manual focus and nothing was moving! I need some practice with the lens.

My first attempt at photographing birds.

Unfortunately, all that pointing at the sky revealed there is a mark on the sensor. Thought it was the lens at first but checked with another lens and it's the same.

Anyway nothing fantastic here but I like the lens a lot it's easy and comfortable to hold and use and doesn't make my arms ache. I'm not sure my hands were steady though and need to practice technique - and maybe use a tripod. Still had a few autofocus issues. Even with slow moving subjects. Focus locked on but some didn't look sharp (my eyesight isn't the best so maybe I need to adjust the dioptre).

Jpeg from camera
Jpeg from camera

Raw cropped
Raw cropped

cf618153b20d4dd8bc14300182eeb49d.jpg

Jpeg from camera cropped
Jpeg from camera cropped

Attempt at bird in flight LOL!
Attempt at bird in flight LOL!

4cd93df79c32440490065bd422a4af68.jpg

Jpeg from camera
Jpeg from camera
 
Last edited:
Pretty solid for the first outing, looks like sensor swabs will be your next order. :P
 
Skeeterbytes said:
Impulses said:
Pretty solid for the first outing, looks like sensor swabs will be your next order. :P
Click to expand...
:-)

She's camera shopping so that spot should be fixed pretty soon.

Cheers,

Rick
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing :-). New camera soon, no spot. But have sent for a lens cleaning kit as well.
 
Hazel123 said:
So my second copy has arrived and is much better. The focus locks on and the zoom barrel rotates without sticking - as it should be. Only went out for about half an hour and took quite a lot of bad photos lol! The better ones were where I used manual focus and nothing was moving! I need some practice with the lens.

My first attempt at photographing birds.
Click to expand...
Great that you're in business now! Nice first-light shots.
Hazel123 said:
Unfortunately, all that pointing at the sky revealed there is a mark on the sensor. Thought it was the lens at first but checked with another lens and it's the same.
Click to expand...
I consider swabs, or touching the sensor in any way, a last resort. In my experience anything not removed by the sensor-shake can be removed with careful application of a rocket blower. (People working in tougher environments may not be so lucky.) Avoid canned air (may contain oils) and your mouth of course, and work in a dust-free space. I usually do the job with the camera facing down to avoid depositing anything new in the sensor box. A fuzzball this big is generally visible with a flashlight, so it's easy to verify when it's gone.
Hazel123 said:
Attempt at bird in flight LOL!
Attempt at bird in flight LOL!

4cd93df79c32440490065bd422a4af68.jpg

Jpeg from camera
Jpeg from camera
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Made the switch - 2 month update
2
Replies
34
Views
393
Owlsfan
O
T
Making the switch to OM
2
Replies
35
Views
193
bluevellet
bluevellet
A
  • User review User review
OM System M.Zuiko Digital ED 50-200mm F2.8 IS Pro Lens Review
Replies
1
Views
1K
HicHic
HicHic
B
Camera/lens combination for telephoto landscapes
Replies
11
Views
82
jalywol
jalywol
Timmi
OM 50-200 2.8 First Look Events
Replies
0
Views
2
Timmi
Timmi

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top