rscheffler wrote:
[
Any reconsideration now that Sony has announced the 100-400 f/4.5? It's virtually the same size and weight as the 150-400 but half the price. No built-in TC and pixel density of the new a7RVI at ~67 MP is still short of 80MP FF equivalent reach in the OM-1, not to mention it's not a fully stacked sensor with the speed of the OM-1... but I'm guessing image quality differences at the pixel level will not be that much different.
The proof will be in the pudding but at least based upon PCMagazine’s testing of the Sony 100-400/4.5 and OM 50-200/2.8, I would expect the 150-400 to still eek out better performance. The 100-400/4.5 isn’t outperforming the 60MP sensor the way that the Sony GM300 is. The 50-200/2.8 is outperforming the sensor based upon the predicted Strehl ratio based upon the ability of the lens to maintain sharpness down to a very tight f-stop. So if the 150-400 is built similarly, it will be good.
That said, all of the analysis still really insists that there room for OM System to discount the 150-400 but while it’s still unique in many ways, they have no pressure to drop the price
I’m seeing that eBay prices seem to be going up not down…
AlanD wrote:
The proof will be in the pudding but at least based upon PCMagazine’s testing of the Sony 100-400/4.5 and OM 50-200/2.8, I would expect the 150-400 to still eek out better performance. The 100-400/4.5 isn’t outperforming the 60MP sensor the way that the Sony GM300 is. The 50-200/2.8 is outperforming the sensor based upon the predicted Strehl ratio based upon the ability of the lens to maintain sharpness down to a very tight f-stop. So if the 150-400 is built similarly, it will be good.
That said, all of the analysis still really insists that there room for OM System to discount the 150-400 but while it’s still unique in many ways, they have no pressure to drop the price
I’m seeing that eBay prices seem to be going up not down… ...Show more →
I agree we need to see more about how the 100-400 performs at the pixel level. It's price point is interesting because it is considerably lower than similar focal length lenses from competitors, such as the Canon EF 200-400 or 100-300/2.8 w/1.4x TC, or Nikon 180-400. It will be interesting to see the price of Nikon's recently announced 120-300/2.8 TC. So the question in my mind is why is it that much less expensive (what has been optically sacrificed for this price point)? Obviously it's slightly slower at f/4.5, which is kind of irrelevant nowadays. And it doesn't have a built-in TC.
Has anyone noticed that the 150-400's price in Japan is considerably lower than in the USA? I was not looking to find this out but while recently in Tokyo and visiting camera stores, one had the 150-400 in stock at JPY 792000, which is 720000 pre-tax. USD equivalent of the pre-tax price is about $4500. This price is also listed on the Map Camera website while Yodobashi is JPY 800000 pre-tax (about USD 5000). Compare this to the current price at B&H of $8600...
I was browsing the camera stores in Tokyo precisely because of the usually modestly better pricing currently in Japan for a number of other brands, but this really caught me by surprise because this lens has historically been difficult to get and has commanded a premium.
The 150-400 has been versatile and enjoyable. But to me slightly disappointing with some axial, (longitudinal), chromatic aberration showing at the long end and more so with the 1.25 engaged. It is the somewhat strong blue / yellow coloration around edges and highlights beyond the plane of focus. When it shows up it is almost impossible to get rid of. DxO does not remove it nor LR with its manual selector tool to any predictable or successful degree.
By contrast, the OM 300f4 with or without 1.4x or 2x does not have any worth talking about. Nor do my Sony 300/600GM with or without the 1.4x or 2X. My Sony 400GM does with the 1.4x and more so with the 2X on a similar level with the OM 150-400.
Maybe it is the current limit with a long zoom, but still disappointing. I have not used a Sony long zoom other than the 100-400f5.6 GM, which is also largely free of visible axial chromatics.
If anyone has a post process trick to effectively and consistently control this?
Perhaps you have a slightly poor copy, or do you have lens corrections turned off? I have not heard of any complaints about aberrations. I do not have the lens yet, but I will order it soon. Once I have tested it, I can let you know. Whenever the chromatic aberration sliders do not do a proper job, I magnify the image 200 to 400% and brush "away" the aberrations with the defringe slider. It usually does the job, especially in combination with some slight adjustments with the aforementioned sliders. I mostly use this method with the 300 Pro and MC-20, though the built-in corrections do a great job. Sometimes, I do it with the 90 Macro after bracketing. The worst performance is from my OM 20, where there often are traces even after built-in and software corrections.
white wrote:
The 150-400 has been versatile and enjoyable. But to me slightly disappointing with some axial, (longitudinal), chromatic aberration showing at the long end and more so with the 1.25 engaged. It is the somewhat strong blue / yellow coloration around edges and highlights beyond the plane of focus. When it shows up it is almost impossible to get rid of. DxO does not remove it nor LR with its manual selector tool to any predictable or successful degree.
By contrast, the OM 300f4 with or without 1.4x or 2x does not have any worth talking about. Nor do my Sony 300/600GM with or without the 1.4x or 2X. My Sony 400GM does with the 1.4x and more so with the 2X on a similar level with the OM 150-400.
Maybe it is the current limit with a long zoom, but still disappointing. I have not used a Sony long zoom other than the 100-400f5.6 GM, which is also largely free of visible axial chromatics.
If anyone has a post process trick to effectively and consistently control this?...Show more →
Frederik0711 wrote:
Perhaps you have a slightly poor copy, or do you have lens corrections turned off? I have not heard of any complaints about aberrations. I do not have the lens yet, but I will order it soon. Once I have tested it, I can let you know. Whenever the chromatic aberration sliders do not do a proper job, I magnify the image 200 to 400% and brush "away" the aberrations with the defringe slider. It usually does the job, especially in combination with some slight adjustments with the aforementioned sliders. I mostly use this method with the 300 Pro and MC-20, though the built-in corrections do a great job. Sometimes, I do it with the 90 Macro after bracketing. The worst performance is from my OM 20, where there often are traces even after built-in and software corrections.
white wrote:
The 150-400 has been versatile and enjoyable. But to me slightly disappointing with some axial, (longitudinal), chromatic aberration showing at the long end and more so with the 1.25 engaged. It is the somewhat strong blue / yellow coloration around edges and highlights beyond the plane of focus. When it shows up it is almost impossible to get rid of. DxO does not remove it nor LR with its manual selector tool to any predictable or successful degree.
By contrast, the OM 300f4 with or without 1.4x or 2x does not have any worth talking about. Nor do my Sony 300/600GM with or without the 1.4x or 2X. My Sony 400GM does with the 1.4x and more so with the 2X on a similar level with the OM 150-400.
Maybe it is the current limit with a long zoom, but still disappointing. I have not used a Sony long zoom other than the 100-400f5.6 GM, which is also largely free of visible axial chromatics.
If anyone has a post process trick to effectively and consistently control this?...Show more →
Hi
I don't really understand what you mean by the problem
I have taken a lot of different pictures and subjects with the lens and I haven't seen or noticed anything remarkable about LoCA but to be honest I haven't pixel-pip and looked for it that way either
Do you have a picture where you can show the problem?
Regarding Petapixel, I have seen and also read this review, at least the ones I find online and on YouTube, and there is nothing said about this LoCA problem if I didn't miss it
If you do an AI search on petapixel reviews, you will get the following
PetaPixel considers the OM System M.Zuiko ED 150-400mm f/4.5 IS PRO to be one of the best optical super telephoto lenses on the market, distinguished by extreme sharpness and minimal chromatic aberration (LoCa) thanks to the built-in 1.25x teleconverter. The lens offers versatility with up to 1000mm focal length (full frame), weather sealing and good macro capabilities, but with a high professional price tag. Read the full review at PetaPixel.
although they may have done more than this review ?
So I'm not defending the lens but I would love to see something that you perceive as a problem as you describe
some axial, (longitudinal), chromatic aberration showing at the long end and more so with the 1.25 engaged. It is the somewhat strong blue / yellow coloration around edges and highlights beyond the plane of focus
Thanks
Ronny
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
OM Digital Solutions OM-1 + OLYMPUS M.150-400mm F4.5 by Ronny Olsson, on Flickr
There will obviously be variation in copies, especially zoom lenses. Your copy is either suboptimal, or you have too high expectations. As you mentioned yourself, it depends on the situation. Even my 300 Pro suffers from aberrations at times. The global sliders do not always work, and that is why I mentioned brushing with masks. That is not only true for aberrations, but also for adjusting exposure on specific parts of an image, without clipping highlights or shadows. Anyway, I recommend trying it. It is a lot of work, but it is worth it, if the aberrations are noticeable and bother you.
white wrote:
Chris at Petapixel review did note LoCa present.
The manual eye dropper in LR can work well but not consistently or completely. One has to evaluate for unintentional artifacts.
The issue is not obvious in all images, the lighting and contrast will vary the effect.
Variation in copies is quite common
If it is under warranty, perhaps a submission of the lens for an examination or a possible adjustment of it. If it is outside the warranty, omsystem applies a fixed price for this lens where everything that is wrong or broken is replaced. At least that's how it is in Europe.
I don't really understand what you mean by the problem
I have taken a lot of different pictures and subjects with the lens and I haven't seen or noticed anything remarkable about LoCA but to be honest I haven't pixel-pip and looked for it that way either
Do you have a picture where you can show the problem?
Regarding Petapixel, I have seen and also read this review, at least the ones I find online and on YouTube, and there is nothing said about this LoCA problem if I didn't miss it
If you do an AI search on petapixel reviews, you will get the following
PetaPixel considers the OM System M.Zuiko ED 150-400mm f/4.5 IS PRO to be one of the best optical super telephoto lenses on the market, distinguished by extreme sharpness and minimal chromatic aberration (LoCa) thanks to the built-in 1.25x teleconverter. The lens offers versatility with up to 1000mm focal length (full frame), weather sealing and good macro capabilities, but with a high professional price tag. Read the full review at PetaPixel.
although they may have done more than this review ?
So I'm not defending the lens but I would love to see something that you perceive as a problem as you describe
some axial, (longitudinal), chromatic aberration showing at the long end and more so with the 1.25 engaged. It is the somewhat strong blue / yellow coloration around edges and highlights beyond the plane of focus
It was not actually the PetaPixal review but an earlier one he did in Alberta with DP Review that I can not find right now. He did not examine LoCa at all on the Petapixel review which he usually does.
Low res postings on this site are not going to show much unless it was really bad. I have a link to two quick images on my Google Drive. Note the feet of the birds get more blue/cyan in the distance while any anterior out of focus feet are more yellow. I doubt I have a bad copy, other issues would show up first.
Not trying to make a big deal of this here, if you do not see it that is great. My nature is to be critical and also I have the comparison of my fleet of Sony long lenses that are super clean, but for the 400GM with converters. Also I found the OM 300f4 to be stellar. I just wondered for anyone who also feels that there is some LoCa if they had any image processing work around that was time efficient and repeatable.
white wrote:
The 150-400 has been versatile and enjoyable. But to me slightly disappointing with some axial, (longitudinal), chromatic aberration showing at the long end and more so with the 1.25 engaged. It is the somewhat strong blue / yellow coloration around edges and highlights beyond the plane of focus. When it shows up it is almost impossible to get rid of. DxO does not remove it nor LR with its manual selector tool to any predictable or successful degree.
By contrast, the OM 300f4 with or without 1.4x or 2x does not have any worth talking about. Nor do my Sony 300/600GM with or without the 1.4x or 2X. My Sony 400GM does with the 1.4x and more so with the 2X on a similar level with the OM 150-400.
Maybe it is the current limit with a long zoom, but still disappointing. I have not used a Sony long zoom other than the 100-400f5.6 GM, which is also largely free of visible axial chromatics.
If anyone has a post process trick to effectively and consistently control this?...Show more →
Was yours made in Japan or Vietnam?
Mine was made in Japan and I see no CA.
Alan Kefauver wrote:
Was yours made in Japan or Vietnam?
Mine was made in Japan and I see no CA.
I am starting to think most are possibly missing the point. I have no lateral chromatic aberrations that most people think about when the topic of CA comes up. My lens is sharp. If there is any lateral CA then DxO easily gets rid of it or the Camera body removes it with auto corrections. I am only talking about Longitudinal Chromatics, (Also referred to as LoCa or axial). This is often more subtle and I think many dismiss or overlook it. It is a color tinge to out of focus highlights before and after the point of focus. It diminishes with stopping down. For this lens, foreground out of focus highlights may show a bit of a yellow edge while background out of focus highlights have a blue tinge outlining the highlight. Depending on the image, it may not show up at all if there are no really strong highlights. LoCa is harder to correct than the more common talked about lateral. There is an eyedropper tool in LR that can be used to select the edge of the aberration to cancel it out; sometimes it works fully or partially or leaves other artifacts. I was just wondering for those that noticed it if they had a better approach. There probably is none. It is highly unlikely my lens is unique in this area...it is otherwise a good performer with good resolution and even works well with a 1.4X.
We have had these lenses since they came out. I may or may not have what you describe. But for me without examples I'm not dailed in to know if it exists for me.
Valid point of what factory they came out of. Maybe early Japan factory had tighter specifications?
