New Oly 100-400 at the zoo

My new M.Zuiko Digital ED 100-400 mm f/5.0-6.3 IS Lens (can these names get any longer?) arrived Thursday. On Friday morning, I took it to the Fresno Chaffee Zoo for a couple hours for a workout. The purpose of this “little” (and hopefully entertaining) essay and my two follow-up posts--all three with images--is to provide practical examples of what the 100-400 can do first time out in partially skilled hands. All images are SOOC jpegs. I cropped three images to eliminate annoying objects that intruded upon the only available line-of-sight and I squared up one flower image because I like it better than way.

Since I moved from FT to MFT in 2019, my typical zoo kit has consisted of an Olympus E-M1 Mk II or Mk III, a 40-150 mm f/2.8 lens, and both teleconverters, along with the 60 mm f/2.8 macro for flowers and bugs. However, the 40-150, even with the TCs, is too short for some of the larger exhibits and even for some of the smaller animals in the smaller exhibits. For example, when the elephants are 300 to 400 feet (90 to 120 m) away on the far side of their “yard,” you want more than the 40-150 and MC-20 can deliver.

I was pretty certain that the 100-400 would be the ultimate sub-$7,500 zoo lens, and boy howdy was I impressed with the results. (I wasn’t actually worried at all because my son bought his 100-400 about six weeks ago and he had already proved the point at the same zoo.) While I am not a bird-in-flight shooter, I want to try my hand at it at Avila Beach/Port San Luis on the Central Coast. Lots of birds there.

I had originally planned to compare the 100-400 side-by-side with the 40-150, but I had loaned the latter to my oldest daughter and wasn’t able to get it back until Saturday, so the 100-400 had to go it alone. I also brought a monopod, but at the last minute decided to leave it in the car and see how two hours of hand holding would work out. The weight wasn’t a problem for me while walking around because much of the time I carried the camera and lens by the lens foot. Nor was the weight a problem while shooting as long as I held the lens correctly. One lesson I learned while shooting is that I was initially putting my left hand where it would be on the 40-150 (that danged muscle memory) and this created an imbalance that made the lens feel heavier. Once I got the hang of sliding my left hand further out along the barrel, I didn’t notice the weight nearly as much. I just need more practice. That means more trips to the zoo and less time doing yard work. YEAH!

I shot the 100-400 across the entire range of focal lengths and apertures. However, I mostly used focal lengths between 300 mm and 400 mm, and even longer when using the TCs. Why buy a long lens if you don’t intend to use it long…at least the first time out, right? Also, I mostly kept the lens wide open because (1) it’s not a particularly fast lens, (2) it was a cloudy day, and (3) the Tropical Rainforest exhibit is enclosed in a heavy mesh and can be several stops darker than outside. Finally, the 100-400 focuses a little slower than the 40-150, although the focus distance limiter is a big help. Fortunately, most of the animals weren’t moving all that quickly so focus speed was rarely an issue.

This first set of images shows the 100-400 used for “portraits” and close-ups. This will be followed by some examples using the teleconverters out to 800 mm, then some examples of relatively slow shutter speeds and how good the non-synced IBIS turns out to be. Hint: it’s pretty darned good, although I’m sure it pales in comparison to the 12-100, 300, and 150-400.

Portrait of a ring-tailed lemur breaking off a piece of that Kit-Kat bar.

The zoo was decorated for their annual Zoo Boo event. This guy is obviously not a fan of pumpkin spice lattes.

The 100-400 makes a very good close-up lens. This flower and the moth (?) were not much further away than the 1.3 m close focusing distance.

Another flower, this time about 6 feet (1.8 m) away, and a very creamy background. You will note that the center stamens are in focus, but the edges of many of the petals are not. Well, for a 400-mm focal length and that distance, the depth of field is only about 0.1 in (2.5 mm).

Overall, I am very pleased with the sharpness of the 100-400 with and without the teleconverters. It’s perhaps not laser sharp, but I have absolutely no complaints. Maybe my technique needs improving or maybe I really should have used a monopod or even a tripod…or maybe I should have spent five times as much. Who knows. In any event, Olympus has a winner with this lens.

I shot each of the lion images while standing and carrying perhaps 7 pounds (3 kg) on my back (LowePro Flipside 300, the original version, plus a few pounds of additional gear).

We start with the female lion at three different focal lengths and three different distances.

Here the lion was about 100 feet (30 m) away and I used a focal length of 361 mm. I was shooting through the same steel cable fence you see in the third image.

Here the lion was about 80 feet (24 m) away and I used a focal length of 400 mm. I was able to shoot over the fence on this side of the lion enclosure because the fence now runs along the bottom of a swale. Kitty cats look so harmless this way, but looks can be deceiving.

Finally, the female lion likes to move back and forth along the fence for tens of minutes at a time. This is because lunch is right on the other side of the fence (e.g. 63-year-old amateur photographers). Here I was about 12 feet (3.6 m) away from the fence and I used a focal length of 560 mm (400 mm and the MC-14). Now, THAT’s a portrait.

Now for the male lion, who hardly moved a muscle while I was there. I guess he’s got it figured out. In all four images, he was about 100 feet (30 m) away, lazing on top of a rock that lets him survey his entire domain…when he can be bothered to survey it. For all four images, I shot through the same steel cable fence mentioned above.

Starting at 400 mm, I was able to get most of the lion in the frame and lots of detail in his mane.

Next, using the MC-14 to get to 464 mm. I included this image because it looks like the lion is scrutinizing my gear. I’m pretty sure he rarely sees Olympus, and when he does it’s probably attached to some member of my family.

Now, using the MC-14 to get to 560 mm. The details are holding up really well.

Finally, using the MC-20 to get to 800 mm. I am amazed. Handholding an equivalent focal length of 1,600 mm (which is longer than my smallest telescope, which is 1,250 mm) and being able to count his whiskers. I will NOT be returning this lens.

This last series I shot in the Tropical Rainforest exhibit, with my favorite animals in the whole zoo as subjects: the two Blue and Gold Macaws. Sometimes they hang out together, but on Friday they occupied different perches that were out of sight of each other. In both cases, I was about 12 to 15 feet (4-5 m) away from the birds.

For each of these images, I used a focal length of 400 mm and an aperture of f/6.3. I changed the ISO to force a change in the shutter speed. I have arranged these images from the fastest shutter speed to the slowest. I shot standing up when the shutter speeds were 1/100 or faster. For the two images with longer shutter speeds, I sat on a low bench and braced my elbows on my knees. It worked.

An ISO of 3200 produced a shutter speed of 1/200. The fine detail seems to be decent at this ISO (it wasn’t too good at 6,400 and higher, which I also tried but am not showing here).

Dropping the ISO to 1600 lengthened the shutter speeds to 1/125 and 1/100 (next image), respectively. Three stops of lens IS is equivalent to 1/800, which is what “The Rule” tells us is appropriate for a 400-mm MFT lens.

See comment for previous image.

Dropping the ISO to 800 while catching a little extra light through a hole in the clouds kept the shutter speed at 1/100.

Next, dropping the ISO to 400 produced shutter speeds of 1/40 and 1/30 (next image), respectively. Here, I braced my elbows on my knees.

See comment for previous image.

I don’t know about y’all, but I think all six macaw images turned out really good.

One final note, I think the bokeh with this lens is really nice.

Very nice photos, especially the ones from the parrot.

Lens seems indeed great in terms of IQ but for birds (especially small ones) you can’t work at such low shutter speeds unfortunately. For 800mm and in order to compensate for birds slight movement (even breathing) I need at least 1/500 which makes the f6.3 with the m43 sensor a bit limiting. Now if they fly, I need to raise the speed to 1/2000 and ISO can go up very very easily…

Outstanding images. A great promotion for the lens, which is now on my list.

The Macaw shots came out really well!

Without question, the 100-400 is not the best birding lens in MFT.  The 150-400 is a full stop faster at maximum focal length and I suspect it focuses much quicker as well.  However, in good light, I can see the 100-400 doing a decent job with flying birds.  Since I am not a birder (I just play around with it from time to time), I think spending 20% of the cost of the 150-400 to get a lens this good is a screaming deal.  On the other hand, I would not turn down a 150-400 if someone gave it to me.

BTW, the purpose of my macaw experiment was to see how slow I could go handheld with stationary or nearly stationary objects.  What I found was that down to 1/100s at 400 mm, the combo of IBIS and Lens IS made almost everything a keeper unless I messed up.  Slower than that required better technique (like bracing my elbows on my knees).  Down to 1/30s, my keeper rate was no worse that about 2/3.  I didn't try anything slower.

One final thing I neglected to mention:  while looking at the elephants I got try out the weather sealing on my 100-400.  Yep, it rained maybe three dozen drops over a two-minute period.  Came through with flying colors. 

Overall, a very nice set. It shows that Olympus (OM) is on the right track in producing extremely competitive wildlife and sports lenses and bodies. I, too, could not really justify the 150-400 as birding for me is, as of yet, still a secondary hobby, though one I enjoy. I guess I am stuck with the 300F4........

Your shot of the Lemur is a great capture. On the 1st parrot shot it kind of looks like the focus was at the neck and not the eye as the neck feathers are especially sharp and a very nice capture for detail and color.

You are correct that I missed focus just a bit on the first parrot pic.  I hadn't paid close enough attention to that image. 

According to PhotoPills, depth of field for 400 mm at f/6.3 is about 9/16" (if 12' away) to 29/32" (if 15' away), but here it's probably closer to the 9/16" given the actual distance between the eye and the feathers.  I tend to rock back and forth just a little when I shoot and that's not good when the DOF is so shallow.

Great images, I would like to get this lens.

Thanks

Thank you for doing this review!

Lovely pictures.

I wonder how this lens compares to PL 100-400 f/4-6.3. PL is significantly more expensive but bit faster on the short end.

Of course, neither of these lenses are not their best on dim conditions but that's what you should except from this price and size category.

Looking forward to add couple of lenses to my inventory with E-M1 mk II.

20mm f/1.4 and 40-150 f/4 are definitely on the want list already.

The Oly takes teleconverters and I understand that the Pany does not. As you can see from my images, in good light the Oly 100-400 does very well with and without the TCs.

The difference between f/4.5 (Pany) and f/5.0 (Oly) at 100 mm is only 1/3 stop. I don't think this is important because most of us probably use a lens like this a lot more toward the long end, where the apertures are virtually identical, than toward the short end.

Also, keep in mind that at 400 mm, the f/6.3 of the either 100-400 is only one stop slower than the f/4.5 of the Oly 150-400. Considering that the Oly 100-400 is 20% the cost of the Oly 150-400 and about half the weight, I consider it to be an excellent bargain. Not that I wouldn't mind getting my hands on an Oly 150-400, I can't justify the cost for what I normally shoot.

Yannis1976 wrote:

Very nice photos, especially the ones from the parrot.

Lens seems indeed great in terms of IQ but for birds (especially small ones) you can’t work at such low shutter speeds unfortunately. For 800mm and in order to compensate for birds slight movement (even breathing) I need at least 1/500 which makes the f6.3 with the m43 sensor a bit limiting. Now if they fly, I need to raise the speed to 1/2000 and ISO can go up very very easily…

I agree with you Yannis but there is a workaround. Setting the frame rate to 18 fps electronic shutter and taking short 1/80s bursts I was able to get small birds during this dark winter. 2 out of 3 showed actual or micro movement but 1 in 3 were spot on. Takes a bit of culling but shows the versatility of An EM1 m III  with a 300mm f4 pro and 1.4 TC’s.

Really useful 3 posts. It will be really helpful for those choosing which long lens to get, whether or not they are on a budget  Thank you for your work.

Brandon birder wrote:

Yannis1976 wrote:

Very nice photos, especially the ones from the parrot.

Lens seems indeed great in terms of IQ but for birds (especially small ones) you can’t work at such low shutter speeds unfortunately. For 800mm and in order to compensate for birds slight movement (even breathing) I need at least 1/500 which makes the f6.3 with the m43 sensor a bit limiting. Now if they fly, I need to raise the speed to 1/2000 and ISO can go up very very easily…

I agree with you Yannis but there is a workaround. Setting the frame rate to 18 fps electronic shutter and taking short 1/80s bursts I was able to get small birds during this dark winter. 2 out of 3 showed actual or micro movement but 1 in 3 were spot on. Takes a bit of culling but shows the versatility of An EM1 m III with a 300mm f4 pro and 1.4 TC’s.

First time I hear of this technique and to be honest I am not sure it works. If it does it means that birds while flying move less at some fractions of seconds. Curious to test it…

My wife has the 75-300 and I think it's pretty good for a budget lens. Looking at images on-screen at normal resolution, I can't tell any sharpness difference between it and the 100-400. However, I haven't done any serious testing or pixel peeping to look for differences either because it wouldn't serve any purpose for me.

BTW, Oly's own MTF charts indicate that the 100-400 is a bit sharper (see below). If ultimate sharpness in a MFT lens in this focal range is really that important, there is always the 300 f/4 for about $1000 more (but lacking the convenience of a zoom) or the 150-400 f/4.5 for five times as much. For me, excellent sharpness is far more important than ultimate sharpness and the 100-400 delivers. It is plenty sharp for its price and capability.

The 100-400 brings a lot more to the table than the 75-300: longer native reach, ability to use teleconverters for even more reach, better build, weather sealing, image stabilization (non sync), slightly faster focusing (my impression), a focus limiter, and a tripod collar. The 75-300 wins for weight and price, but it's really a false comparison because of the differences I just pointed out.

So, rather than being disappointed that the 100-400 is not significantly sharper than the 75-300, I am thrilled by its excellent sharpness and all the other features and benefits.  The 75-300 and the 100-400 are very different lenses serving very different markets.

Oly 75-300 @ 75 mm

Oly 75-300 @ 300 mm

Oly 100-400 @ 100 mm & 400 mm

Yannis1976 wrote:

Brandon birder wrote:

Yannis1976 wrote:

Very nice photos, especially the ones from the parrot.

Lens seems indeed great in terms of IQ but for birds (especially small ones) you can’t work at such low shutter speeds unfortunately. For 800mm and in order to compensate for birds slight movement (even breathing) I need at least 1/500 which makes the f6.3 with the m43 sensor a bit limiting. Now if they fly, I need to raise the speed to 1/2000 and ISO can go up very very easily…

I agree with you Yannis but there is a workaround. Setting the frame rate to 18 fps electronic shutter and taking short 1/80s bursts I was able to get small birds during this dark winter. 2 out of 3 showed actual or micro movement but 1 in 3 were spot on. Takes a bit of culling but shows the versatility of An EM1 m III with a 300mm f4 pro and 1.4 TC’s.

First time I hear of this technique and to be honest I am not sure it works. If it does it means that birds while flying move less at some fractions of seconds. Curious to test it…

You’re right I’ve never used it for flying birds as hit rate would be very low, though there is a moment when the wings are static before a direction change. So if panning well it’s possible. May be more so with the higher rate procapture of the OM1.

No I was referring to small active birds in poor winter light and it works very well especially if you watch the birds movement pauses. I've not tried it but procapture may be useful here too. Try it out.