In defence of the OM100-400 lens (birdsssss)...

I am one of the people not being very happy with the lens. However browsing all the photos (817!!) I have taken with it so far, some of them are quite good and sharp. I decided to collect the best of them in this post.

It seems one common characteristic of all of them was closer distance (vs the bad ones). correct exposure (to protect highlights), focus (CAF) and good environmental conditions (weather, heat and light).

And heat seems to be quite a significant factor because most of the good photos are from April and the more we move into summer, I get less good photos!

Had reduced the exposure to save the highlights and thankfully CAF worked well capturing the bird eyes

There will be a part II as I already exceeded this space

glassoholic wrote:

[...] If it's any conciliation, my experience with a consumer type ultra tele zoom, like an Oly 75-300, is even more frustrating chasing top notch results... you can get them but it's a much lower percentage.

I was just about to write, that those results are at a level I would expect from my Oly 75-300. Knowing your camera and practice helps tilt the odds in your favour a bit.

When birding I find it helps not to expect seeing that rare beautiful bird doing something special but being very happy when you do have that incredible luck of being there at the right moment. Being there and getting it right with a camera, that is a very happy day indeed.

In defence of my consumer type utra zoom... although I long for more reach I have decided for myself that the chances that I take a camera with me is higher the less the equipment weighs.

My experiences with the PL100-400 are similar to yours with the Oly but it doesn't stop me pushing for those more distant opportunities.  The big improvement in these type of pics for me was DXO PureRaw.

Some random shots from me:

glassoholic wrote:

I think any ULTRA TELE zoom less than the (Super Duper) Pro 150-400 will have these gotchas if you are looking for top notch results AND very high repeatability. The PL200 and 300 Pro lie imbetween the "normal" prosumer type zoom and what you could expect from a 150-400 Pro. If you can get a usable number of top notch pics with your prosumer zoom regularly... job done!

If it's any conciliation, my experience with a consumer type ultra tele zoom, like an Oly 75-300, is even more frustrating chasing top notch results... you can get them but it's a much lower percentage. I found the biggest difference was focus speed improvement and accuracy when jumping up to a prosumer super tele zoom.

I have a few friends that have the Oly 100-400 paired with their OM-1, and at times complain that the focus seems slow to lock and/or hold. I have not tried their lenses but that seems to be similar to what I experience with my 75-300 on my OM-1. Maybe the expectations for this 100-400 need to be adjusted a bit.

I might add that I have not found the same situation with my PL100-400 which has been stellar in focusing speed and accuracy since pairing it with the OM-1. I seem to recall reading that the focus motors in the PL lenses are good up to 240 frames per second, so that may be the difference… but I have no documentation to cite that this is the case.

glassoholic wrote:

gary0319 wrote:

glassoholic wrote:

I think any ULTRA TELE zoom less than the (Super Duper) Pro 150-400 will have these gotchas if you are looking for top notch results AND very high repeatability. The PL200 and 300 Pro lie imbetween the "normal" prosumer type zoom and what you could expect from a 150-400 Pro. If you can get a usable number of top notch pics with your prosumer zoom regularly... job done!

If it's any conciliation, my experience with a consumer type ultra tele zoom, like an Oly 75-300, is even more frustrating chasing top notch results... you can get them but it's a much lower percentage. I found the biggest difference was focus speed improvement and accuracy when jumping up to a prosumer super tele zoom.

I have a few friends that have the Oly 100-400 paired with their OM-1, and at times complain that the focus seems slow to lock and/or hold. I have not tried their lenses but that seems to be similar to what I experience with my 75-300 on my OM-1. Maybe the expectations for this 100-400 need to be adjusted a bit.

I might add that I have not found the same situation with my PL10O-400 which has been stellar in focusing speed and accuracy since pairing it with the OM-1. I seem to recall that the focus motors in the PL lenses are good up to 240 frames per second, so that may be the difference… but I have no documentation to cite that this is the case.

I don't know the Oly 100-400, but my PL 100-400 gives up nothing in focus speed and accuracy to anything else I own, including the PL 200 and Oly 300 Pro. If there is a tele lens that focuses a tad quicker, it would be my Oly 40-150 Pro... but as that is a shorter focal length, it's probably not fair to directly compare to the others.

I should have mentioned that those friends of mine are comparing their Oly 100-400 to their 40-150 f/2.8 and 300f/4 Pro lenses, and there is a difference.

No3, 5 and 6 are my favorites, but overall they all look good.

gary0319 wrote:

glassoholic wrote:

I think any ULTRA TELE zoom less than the (Super Duper) Pro 150-400 will have these gotchas if you are looking for top notch results AND very high repeatability. The PL200 and 300 Pro lie imbetween the "normal" prosumer type zoom and what you could expect from a 150-400 Pro. If you can get a usable number of top notch pics with your prosumer zoom regularly... job done!

If it's any conciliation, my experience with a consumer type ultra tele zoom, like an Oly 75-300, is even more frustrating chasing top notch results... you can get them but it's a much lower percentage. I found the biggest difference was focus speed improvement and accuracy when jumping up to a prosumer super tele zoom.

I have a few friends that have the Oly 100-400 paired with their OM-1, and at times complain that the focus seems slow to lock and/or hold. I have not tried their lenses but that seems to be similar to what I experience with my 75-300 on my OM-1. Maybe the expectations for this 100-400 need to be adjusted a bit.

I might add that I have not found the same situation with my PL100-400 which has been stellar in focusing speed and accuracy since pairing it with the OM-1. I seem to recall reading that the focus motors in the PL lenses are good up to 240 frames per second, so that may be the difference… but I have no documentation to cite that this is the case.

I had the MZ40-150mm Pro as well as the MZ100-400mm and the 40-150 is definitely snappier than the 100-400. If you use the lens focus limiter it helped, but was still less responsive. The PL100-400mm I tried was faster than the MZ100-400mm.

My PL200mm is on par with the MZ40-150 Pro. A little faster than the PL100-400 but not by much. Yet noticeably sharper than all of those in good light (even with the 1.4xTC and comparable with the long end of the 100-400mm's with the 2xTC), yet retains much better detail and focusing ability as soon as conditions and light worsens.

The MZ40-150 Pro was excellent bare and very good with the 1.4x TC yet really didn't like how the 2x TC affected quality and focusing. Really nice lens, yet too shorter reach for me.

The sharpness of this lens occasionally amazes me, this shot has zero post sharpening done:

Interesting observation regarding IQ of this lens and ambient heat. Ive never liked the output from my copy but I do live where it is often 80F-110F.

Forum poster Mait seem to have a very good copy and Ill ask him what climate he shoots in...

Your copy does seem sharp.

With reference to the OP - what is the climate these were shot in?

These with Zuiko 100-400mm..

Sujiar wrote:

Interesting observation regarding IQ of this lens and ambient heat. Ive never liked the output from my copy but I do live where it is often 80F-110F.

Forum poster Mait seem to have a very good copy and Ill ask him what climate he shoots in...

It is summer right now, about 20 C of temp. I do get heat haze often when shooting animals on fields for example, it happens with all lenses. If the heat is not a problem and bright subjects are quite a bit underexposed then it is most of the time sharp (i shoot bursts and select the best out of it, there are many oof too but that seems to be normal).

JuhaV wrote:

These with Zuiko 100-400mm..

The last one is extra sharp

Serguei Palto wrote:

Trevor Carpenter wrote:

My experiences with the PL100-400 are similar to yours with the Oly but it doesn't stop me pushing for those more distant opportunities. The big improvement in these type of pics for me was DXO PureRaw.

PureRaw can create the illusion ..., and that is all...

I believe it can remove noise instead what you said.