Beeeees... and some of them in flight :-)

I have been experimenting with the 100-400 to understand its pros and cons with my EM1.3. Subject distance and sun light plays a huge role on the final result, but for some subjects the lens works very good...

The lens is of course softer than my 12-100 but works good for insects due to the longer distance from subject.

Hit ratio is very low with the flying bees, but eventually out of the tens of photos some of them are in focus and can look great!

Good set! I have the Oly 100-400 and an E-M1 mk2 so this should be indicative. I haven't yet had much decent weather to truly try it out during our cool, damp spring. Hoping to catch some birds and BEES in coming months. Thanks for posting these.

Garry Schaefer wrote:

Good set! I have the Oly 100-400 and an E-M1 mk2 so this should be indicative. I haven't yet had much decent weather to truly try it out during our cool, damp spring. Hoping to catch some birds and BEES in coming months. Thanks for posting these.

For close subjects works pretty good, but the further you get from your subjects, the worse the lens gets. I will post another message with birds from today.

nice work, one of my favourite subjects which I have been studying and recording for 15+ years

Beware, it can become addictive 

The 100-400 makes a nice long range way of shooting these and Pro cap Low is a great tool for recording those bits my reflexes are too slow to get

Brian Wadie wrote:

nice work, one of my favourite subjects which I have been studying and recording for 15+ years

Beware, it can become addictive

The 100-400 makes a nice long range way of shooting these and Pro cap Low is a great tool for recording those bits my reflexes are too slow to get

Hahaha, I already find it addictive!! And yes Pro cap Low works very good.

However, although I am not using it so much anymore, I still find the Fuji XT3+70-300 a more capable kit for that specific work (insects, bees, butterflies etc). Sensor, CAF and sharpness at 300mm are better...

However, although I am not using it so much anymore, I still find the Fuji XT3+70-300 a more capable kit for that specific work (insects, bees, butterflies etc). Sensor, CAF and sharpness at 300mm are better...

I've not used the Fuji system but have no problems whatever shooting bees, bugs and butterflies behavioural and flight images with the Olympus kit with good enough results to win competitions and have had requests to use my images in various museums and the occasional journal.

Its largely spending a lot of time sitting and watching their behaviour and only when I understand it, picking up the camera

That plus loads of practise (and if I'm honest, loads of luck  )

Lots of examples in my flikr albums

So much to learn, so little time left to do it!

Yannis1976 wrote:

Garry Schaefer wrote:

Good set! I have the Oly 100-400 and an E-M1 mk2 so this should be indicative. I haven't yet had much decent weather to truly try it out during our cool, damp spring. Hoping to catch some birds and BEES in coming months. Thanks for posting these.

For close subjects works pretty good, but the further you get from your subjects, the worse the lens gets. I will post another message with birds from today.

Nice set. I shoot bees pretty often myself. Really good shots are few and far between in a wild setting. But, I find shooting them with a long lens like the 300 F4 to be difficult because of the necessity of maneuvering about. Consequently, I mostly get better shots of them with the 60mm macro. But, only certain bees and even M or F sexes allow close approach. Then too, the bees move rapidly in typically unpredictable directions and they rotate as well when on a flower. So, only on occasion, with their speed and unpredictable motion, does the focus fall where one would like it. But the really good shots are terrific.

Do you think that when farther away you get worse results, or do you think that when distant there is not enough pixel definition?

I don't crop my shots, but just value those with the subject in focus and the distance/composition just right of higher quality.

nprnncbl wrote:

Nice! In flight is particularly challenging.

Are you using MF or AF on those? I find that when I use AF with the Oly 60mm macro (on an EM5), that the focus is unpredictable, and just slow enough that I miss a lot; I typically have better results from MF.

CAF with longer lenses than the 60mm macro. Its a fantastic lens, but so far no bee has let me come that close.

Gary from Seattle wrote:

Yannis1976 wrote:

Garry Schaefer wrote:

Good set! I have the Oly 100-400 and an E-M1 mk2 so this should be indicative. I haven't yet had much decent weather to truly try it out during our cool, damp spring. Hoping to catch some birds and BEES in coming months. Thanks for posting these.

For close subjects works pretty good, but the further you get from your subjects, the worse the lens gets. I will post another message with birds from today.

Nice set. I shoot bees pretty often myself. Really good shots are few and far between in a wild setting. But, I find shooting them with a long lens like the 300 F4 to be difficult because of the necessity of maneuvering about. Consequently, I mostly get better shots of them with the 60mm macro. But, only certain bees and even M or F sexes allow close approach. Then too, the bees move rapidly in typically unpredictable directions and they rotate as well when on a flower. So, only on occasion, with their speed and unpredictable motion, does the focus fall where one would like it. But the really good shots are terrific.

Do you think that when farther away you get worse results, or do you think that when distant there is not enough pixel definition?

For me the 60mm macro hasn't worked well for moving insects such as bees. No living bee has let come that close to take advantage of the 60mm macro. I prefer the 12-100 (great detail if I reach enough) and then the 100-400 which lacks a bit of detail though at 400mm.

The best kit for this kind of shots though is the Fuji XT3 with the XF70-300. I may not use it too much anymore, but for bees it is great, due to larger sensor, resolution, a bit better CAF and very sharp at 300mm (450mm).

I don't crop my shots, but just value those with the subject in focus and the distance/composition just right of higher quality.

Insects in flight, including bees, are one of my favourite subjects. I don't have a long lens that gives good enough definition, so I am stuck with the Oly 60 and the Panny 30. After a year of having both lenses in my bag, I much prefer the Panasonic lens for its much faster AF (I only use S-AF), but the focal length is so short I haveto crop to get any results that please me. I imagine that OM1 users will find their cameras exceptionally successful for flying insects, particularly with a long lens like the 100-400 or 150-400 and the much better tracking implementation. I'm looking forward to being jealous of their future photos

I'm keen on hawk moths and bee-flies where I am; there are some bees but not enough to make them a real target.

Today I tried both the 12-100 and my Fuji XT3+70-300 kit. Vs the OM 100-400, the level of detail I get from the 12-100 is noticeably better even with highly cropped images. I need to get closer though which is some cases scares the bees, but still I get better images from the 12-100:

Brian Wadie wrote:

However, although I am not using it so much anymore, I still find the Fuji XT3+70-300 a more capable kit for that specific work (insects, bees, butterflies etc). Sensor, CAF and sharpness at 300mm are better...

I've not used the Fuji system but have no problems whatever shooting bees, bugs and butterflies behavioural and flight images with the Olympus kit with good enough results to win competitions and have had requests to use my images in various museums and the occasional journal.

Its largely spending a lot of time sitting and watching their behaviour and only when I understand it, picking up the camera

That plus loads of practise (and if I'm honest, loads of luck )

Lots of examples in my flikr albums

So much to learn, so little time left to do it!

I believe its a matter of lens, since the results I am getting with the 12-100 match in sharpness the ones I get from the XT3+70-300 (check my other message with the 12-100). Also CAF hit rate with the Fuji is bit better..

some nice ones there

"I believe its a matter of lens, since the results I am getting with the 12-100 match in sharpness the ones I get from the XT3+70-300 (check my other message with the 12-100). Also CAF hit rate with the Fuji is bit better.."

I agree absolutely about the importance of a good lens to get the best results but as I say, I can make no useful comment re the comparison between systems

One thing I have noticed on going back to using the EM-1 mk3 whilst my OM-1 is out of action, using the EM-1 is a lot harder than using the OM-1 for this subject and my success rate lower (with the same lenses)

I'm already out of practise 

Brian Wadie wrote:

"I believe its a matter of lens, since the results I am getting with the 12-100 match in sharpness the ones I get from the XT3+70-300 (check my other message with the 12-100). Also CAF hit rate with the Fuji is bit better.."

I agree absolutely about the importance of a good lens to get the best results but as I say, I can make no useful comment re the comparison between systems

One thing I have noticed on going back to using the EM-1 mk3 whilst my OM-1 is out of action, using the EM-1 is a lot harder than using the OM-1 for this subject and my success rate lower (with the same lenses)

I'm already out of practise

Yes, I guess the OM1 is game changer in terms of hit ratio.