Any initial impressions with E-M1.2 that you can share?
Thanks mitesh, yes of course.
Stunning IQ, no focus hunting on E-M1.2, one can hear the focussing a little bit though, not distracting to me.
Fast focussing, maybe just an insignificant bit slower than the 300/4.0 Pro.
Too heavy for me to handhold for more than a couple of minutes. Excellent for sturdy tripod use.
The big tuna 300/2.8, little tuna 150/2.0 and 300/4.0 Pro are keepers for me. The latter two primarily used handheld with IBIS.
The 90-250 and 150/2 are out of stock. I was going to get them along with the 300/2.8 to make it a "holy trinity" and sell off my Canon stuff. Maybe it's a good thing they're out .
Spectacular - just like a regular MFT lens like the 300/4 Pro - no focus hunting. Period! E-M1.2 + 150/2.0 will be my go to lens for TVIF, i.e. Turkey Vultures in Flight near their roost, as soon as they are back in NM. With regards to focus speed the E-M1.2 is in a league of its own for both Olympus FT and MFT lenses.
K-H.
That's good to hear. The only thing that has me hesitating about the lens is the fact that it's somewhat limited in use on the E-M1 II.
There was a really good comparison done over at mu-43 that compared the 40-150 PRO, 50-200 SWD, and 150/2. I'm not a big fan that the burst rate is limited to about 5 fps with the lens, as I enjoy shooting motorsports, and having a nice burst rate can be very helpful. I'm also not a fan that the lens isn't compatible with ProCapture (shame on you Olympus).
I currently own the 50-200 SWD, but have been toying around with the idea of replacing it with a 40-150 PRO to take advantage of the new features and higher burst rates, along with a Panasonic 100-300 II (no ProCapture, but it will do higher burst rates).
mitesh wrote:
The 90-250 and 150/2 are out of stock. I was going to get them along with the 300/2.8 to make it a "holy trinity" and sell off my Canon stuff. Maybe it's a good thing they're out .
Just remember you will need a 300 f/2 to replicate the DOF from the 600/4 on 1DX....just saying....
arbitrage wrote:
Just remember you will need a 300 f/2 to replicate the DOF from the 600/4 on 1DX....just saying....
A 600mm FOV with an f/2.8 aperture would be fantastic, one stop of background blur be damned!
I'm just not clear on what limitations adapting this would impose on the E-M1.2. On the bright side, maybe Brian will be my friend if I own a "purdy" black lens .
That's good to hear. The only thing that has me hesitating about the lens is the fact that it's somewhat limited in use on the E-M1 II.
There was a really good comparison done over at mu-43 that compared the 40-150 PRO, 50-200 SWD, and 150/2. I'm not a big fan that the burst rate is limited to about 5 fps with the lens, as I enjoy shooting motorsports, and having a nice burst rate can be very helpful. I'm also not a fan that the lens isn't compatible with ProCapture (shame on you Olympus).
I currently own the 50-200 SWD, but have been toying around with the idea of replacing it with a 40-150 PRO to take advantage of the new features and higher burst rates, along with a Panasonic 100-300 II (no ProCapture, but it will do higher burst rates)....Show more →
Thanks for the reference. Very interesting.
It seems to me on E-M1.2 with IBIS off and Silent H one can get at least 40 fps, no?
Mitesh - I am thinking that if I don't like the 150/2 for whatever reason ... and possibly because of the size/weight, I will return the lens to Olympus. If I do change my mind, I will let you have first right of refusal.
mitesh wrote:
The 90-250 and 150/2 are out of stock. I was going to get them along with the 300/2.8 to make it a "holy trinity" and sell off my Canon stuff. Maybe it's a good thing they're out .
bobbytan wrote:
I did the test last night but I wasn't too pleased with the results somehow, so I will have to do another one this weekend. There is some difference in the noise level between ISO 64 and ISO 200 ... but that is not too surprising, as there is almost a 2 stop difference in ISO rating. I think you do lose some IQ. And it would be very difficult to tell if it's better to shoot at ISO 64 ... or ISO 200 with some NR applied. Is it noise-free at ISO 64? No, I don't think it's noise-free but it's a little cleaner than ISO 200. ...Show more →
Thanks Bobby for taking the extra shot - so what do you think? I mean on my 5k iMac, I see a lot of noise in the A7rII shot as well. Thanks.
PS: Neither camera is free of noise right? And if you think about it, Olympus is doing some great things that these 2 cameras are even compared on ANY level.
I will say that the E-M1.2 is pretty good up to maybe ISO 3200 - if the files are not under-exposed - and depending on one's tolerance threshold for noise. And you are right - the Sony 42MP A7RII is not noise-free, but comparing ISO-to-ISO the Sony is less noisy than the E-M1.2 especially at higher ISOs. The combination of sensor size, megapixel count, better dynamic range and better high-ISO performance makes the A7RII a better camera overall.
Edit: Personally I prefer to shoot with the E-M1.2 but it's mostly because I am more familiar with that camera and therefore more comfortable with the controls of the E-M1.2.
savingspaces wrote:
Thanks Bobby for taking the extra shot - so what do you think? I mean on my 5k iMac, I see a lot of noise in the A7rII shot as well. Thanks.
PS: Neither camera is free of noise right? And if you think about it, Olympus is doing some great things that these 2 cameras are even compared on ANY level.
bobbytan wrote:
I will say that the E-M1.2 is pretty good up to maybe ISO 3200 - if the files are not under-exposed - and depending on one's tolerance threshold for noise. And you are right - the Sony 42MP A7RII is not noise-free, but comparing ISO to ISO the Sony is less noisy than the E-M1.2 especially at higher ISOs. The combination of sensor size, megapixel count, better dynamic range and better high-ISO performance makes the A7RII a better camera overall.
Oh, I agree with you, everyone knows that the AR7 is the best mirrorless camera available. I was just wondering how much better it was in your book.
mitesh wrote:
That flicker shot is as sharp as a razor! Way to go, K-H!
Many thanks Mitesh, your feedback is much appreciated. I got in a number of bursts with several hundred shots total, handheld with C-AF L Silent @ f/5.6 (i.e. WO), 1/1000s, 420mm. I didn't go for a faster shutter speed in order to keep ISO as low as possible. When inspecting the images on my Mac I noticed that for the vast majority of them either parts or all of the Northern Flicker were in focus. I interpret this to mean that a certain percentage of the images showed some motion blur in the extreme fine feather detail around the bird's neck. I had already noticed this kind of thing when shooting Bandelier National Monument deer with little tuna 150/2.0 on E-M1.2 with a resolution capable of showing individual hairs. With such fine detail resolved It doesn't seem to take a lot of movement on parts of the deer or bird to exhibit some motion blur for the chosen shutter speed. IBIS seems to work extraordinarily well though. I hope I am not imagining those details.
bobbytan wrote:
From what I've heard/read they are terrific lenses and the E-M1.2 has given them a new lease of life and extended their product life cycle.
Yes, and it's so generous of you to offer a money back, satisfaction guarantee .
