Hello evrevery,
A few weeks back i posted some of my photos of a recent airwhow and shared some of my thoughts about tge gear i was using. I'm not satisfied with the response i got. Not exatlye thth it was wrong just that i probebly could have worded it better. So bacically i was using the panasonic g7 and the 100-300 mk2. I was happy with the results i manged to get but i want to get even better shots next time. My problem is is that i would love to stay with m4/3 systems but I'M not sure that it would be able to get me the results i want. This is becouse i have a very small budget. So it is not possible for me to go and buy a em1 mk2 with the p100-400mm as much as i would like to. So my question is would si.ething like the gx9 em5 2 gh4 or any other m4/3 camera or lens system that will be able to get me better results than my current setup? Or am i better moving on to something better like a nikon d5500 with sigma 150-600? I might mention that i i will always buy used. I might also mention that i really really like m4)3for there exelent all in one capability and versatility. I have also looked at other cameras like fuji xt2 but fuji only do one super telephoto but it's very expensive.
Any of your help would be greatly appreciated.
In life, as in chess, forethought wins.
So I have read thru this thread and your other thread with the airshow photos. I get exactly what you are saying. While most of them are "sharp", none of them have that final bit of WoW to them. They just seem to lack that final little bit of punch to bring out the little details. Below are a few of my airshow shots that I think demonstrate that final bit of punch that comes from using a high quality lens. All photos taken with the original EM1, first 3 are with the Olympus ZD 150mm f2.0 and the last 2 images with the Olympus MZ 300mm f4.0 Pro (last image with the MC-14). Also, most of these images have no crop, a couple have no more than a 150px crop and one is actually larger than original photo (image filled the frame so I added canvas and sky using content aware to make a good composition).
This is the one I added canvas to.
No crop
~150px crop
~100px crop
no crop
I shoot 1 airshow a year (missed it this year) and have found my ZD 150mm f2.0 to be the perfect focal length (without any TC's) for this air show. Last year was my first time with the MZ 300mm f4.0 Pro and I didn't use it much. I much prefer the formation shots and the 300/4 is just a lot of reach. It was good for those isolation of a single aircraft shots above.
I get what you are saying about the 100-300...……………….
Now...………………….
You mention getting a Nikon and the Sigma 150-600 but you don't specify which version. Honestly, the "C" version is probably on par with your 100-300 and I don't really think you would gain much if anything. The "S" version is a different story, but it is also more expensive. After looking at a lot of images from these lenses as well as looking at various testing sites I personally believe the "C" version is on par with the m4/3 xxx-300 lenses and the "S" version to equal the Panny 100-400. The Panny 100-300mk2 has a distinct advantage over the "C" version in it's weather sealing, as well as over the Olympus 75-300.
My understanding is that all the xxx-300 lenses in the m4/3 world are more or less equal in IQ. So your lens is the same as my Olympus 75-300 and as others and myself have learned these lenses are much better stopped down a full stop. You shot wide-open in your images and they would have gained a little more sharpness if stopped down. As others have pointed out this series of lenses tends to be soft at the long end. I found that I got better results if I stayed between 270mm and 280mm.
If you want to stay in the m3/4 world and get better images your choices are limited. You can either get one of the better and more expensive lenses like the Panny 100-400, 50-200, 200 or the Olympus 40-150 or 300/4 (which may also require one of the various TC's to get the reach wanted).
Or...……………………...
You could pick up a used original EM1 and pair it with the Olympus ZD 50-200 SWD and the EC-14. I recently started
this thread where I compared the Olympus 75-300, 50-200 SWD w/ EC-14 and 300/4. The SWD slots in between the two lenses with respect to IQ and is not far behind the 150/2 based on
this thread where I compared those to lenses. Yes, focus is a bit slower on the 4/3 lenses than the m4/3...………...but I have had no problem shooting airshows with my 150/2 which I find focuses basically the same as the 50-200 SWD. I do only recommend the SWD version because having that instant access to manual focus when in CAF is a life saver at times.
Just my 2 pennies...………..
Phocal
Oh...……………..
One last thing...……………...
I find the xxx-300 lenses to be to light for their focal length. While the size and weight are great for carrying around the lens, it is really a detriment to handholding. You need some weight to counteract those small movements that come from say breathing. With the light lens even a small shallow breath can cause the camera to move, where a heavier lens takes a larger and deeper breath to get any movement in the camera. So when using these light lenses with extreme reach you have to pay very close attention to your shooting technique. With my 150/2 w/ EC-20 (combo I used a lot before getting the 300/4) I don't have to really concentrate on technique until I get down in shutter speed. With my 75-300 it seems I always have to concentrate on it, even at faster shutter speeds. Now the 300/4 with dual IS is just stupid good and blows me away with how low I can actually shoot that combo.
