drj3

My evaluation was at 1/1250 hand held. I did have one shot with dual stabilization which I saw as significantly less good (significant to me not statistically) than the others, so that would have ...

The snap manual focus ring of great of quick pre-focus or pre setting a manual focus distance for quick  refocus to that point, but not fine enough for precise manual focus.  Use the regular ...

The refresh rate is probably 1/60, take a photo at 1/60 with maximum aperture and see if they are the same.  Just guessing.

You could add the 100-400 f4.5-5.6 for another $2400, crop it to the mFTs size image as the 300mm f4+MC14 and have the equivalent FOV and aperture/IQ for about the same cost and have 6MP instead ...

That would also happen if the camera was suddenly moved during the 1/13 second exposure time. The E-M1.1 had a slow readout time (about 1/13 second) so the actual time the camera was exposing the ...

If Olympus releases a new higher end model next year that surpasses the E-M1.2 in performance, it will be over $2000.

Actually CAF on the E-M1.2 does change focus even with very small movements and change in distance.  I regularly shoot small stationary birds with the DTC (digital teleconverter) used as a 2X ...

I find CAF on the E-M1.2 to be as fast and accurate as SAF.  Both have some refocus error even with a stationary target.  The bird took off (third image) and flew along the edge of the water and ...

I only used Auto for this test.  The E-M1.2 only has vertical or horizontal panning or Auto where it is supposed to determine pan direction and not correct that.  I find BIFs may need either, so I ...

I photographed a variety of Great Egrets and Great Blue Herons at 1/1250, MC14+300mm f4, C-AF Sensitivity = +2, Electronic Shutter, 10 fps, 5 Center focus points and compared three different ...

Sorry that first sentence should have said equal in sharpness to the Olympus 300mm f4. The Lenstip review said the Nikon 500mm f5.6 was basically equivalent to the Nikon 300mm f4. The images I have ...

My typical walk is 2.6 miles around the local wildlife controlled marsh.  At well beyond the age required for RMD's from retirement accounts, the 500mm f4 lens would be far too much like work for ...

I am not sure how the lens could cause that.  Why don't you post this on the Micro Four Thirds forum where you will also get comments from GH4 users.  It looks like a sync problem with the strobe ...

Please post your evaluation after you get the 500mm f5.6.  Real world results with BIFs in the sky would be more useful than the Lenstip statement about contrast against bright light.

Some people can hand hold the 500mm f4 or 600mm f4, but in the field I have rarely seen anyone hand holding the 500mm f4.  I don't think I have ever seen a 600mm f4 hand held.  I do see them ...

I assume you mean LW/PH.  According to ephotozine the Olympus 300mm f4 used on an E-M5 was about 2750 LW/PH at f4 and about 3100 LW/PH at f5.6. For comparison the 200-500 f5.6 Nikon (according to ...

If it is equivalent in sharpness to the 300mm f4 PF as indicated in the review, then I doubt it would be equal in sharpness.  However, the difference would probably not be that important in most ...

This does not really surprise me. The resolution results are very good, but not great on their test (similar to the 300mm f4 and a little better than the 200-500mm f5.6 zoom indicated in the ...

The only time I have used the lens with non Dual stabilization is with the E-M10.1 and the MC14+300mm f4. I have not used it extensively, so no careful resolution evaluation. I found that either ...

I use the Electronic shutter for most BIF photography.  Last year I did a days testing with flying ducks, alternating the Mechanical and Electronic shutters and found only 2 or 3 images where ...