mitesh
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.9 #9 · Olympus M.Zuiko 150-400 F/4.5 Image Thread | |
wjmeyer wrote:
This thread is making me seriously consider trying Olympus again, I tried back around 2012 and loved the lenses and convenience but AF and high ISO pushed me back to Nikon. I now shoot with Nikon Z6 and had the new Z 100-400 f/4.5 - 5.6 and have been looking at the new 800 f/6.3 PF. But this new 150-400 f/4.5 Pro has really piqued my curiosity and I wonder if I would like it more even with the DOF gap between MFT and FF. As I get older I am appreciating "lighter" gear that is more handy, but I also like the "look" of FF with the bokeh of wide open shots. Have any of you with the Oly 150-400 had or currently own FF gear and do you find yourself going for the Oly gear more? Some of the shots in this thread are simply stunning and I would not have guessed came from MFT had I not known, but how much of these are the exception and not the rule? I think most of us want to post our "best" and sometimes it's just a matter of being in the right place at the right time, but with the OM-1's new AF, I wonder how much this new system may help with getting more of those keeper (best) shots. I know I'm fishing here and will likely get answers all over the place, but hoping to hear from others who came from similar experience with FF and have decided to make the switch to MFT especially with this lens and the new OM-1 tech. I realize this is somewhat of a hijack from the purpose of this thread but then I think, "what is the purpose of this thread?" - if not to entice others who may not have the camera/lens and show off its capabilities... consider me enticed  ...Show more →
Like you, I previously shot m4/3 (2017-2018) and ended up selling it for the same reasons you did; namely, inconsistent C-AF and perceived IQ differences from FF. The Olympus 150-400 lens paired with the OM-1 which brought the promise of improved AF and the benefits of an improved sensor (better IQ, blackout-free shooting, less rolling shutter when shooting fast movement in silent mode, etc.), is what brought me back into the fold. I've only had the combo out for a few outings, but so far, I am quite pleased with what I see.
Let's just stipulate that there will always be IQ differences between m4/3 and FF, just as there will be between FF and Medium or Large Format. It's not worth arguing about the technical minutiae. The only thing that matters – and this is a subjective consideration for each individual – is what is good enough for you and which compromises you are willing to accept. With today's impressive NR software, I am much less concerned about the high-ISO performance of a camera than I was just a few years ago. I don't hesitate to run my FF Sony a1 at ISO 10,000-16,000 when needed because I know I can clean up the files with the click of a button. Similarly, I won't fret about shooting my OM-1 at ISO 6,400-8,000 if I have to. As long as I expose properly and compose to maximize available resolution, I feel like I'll be able to get a hi-res file that's perfectly usable for most presentation mediums (definitely for web).
As for the bokeh/DOF characteristics of FF shots compared to m4/3 shots, to some extent, no matter which format you are shooting, the photographer needs to manage composition to achieve a look. I posted an osprey image above and if I compare the bokeh in that shot to a similar osprey image shot with my a1 + 200-600, there is a slight difference in the character of the OOF area, but I frankly don't care. Someone else very well might.
The AF of the OM-1 is leaps and bounds improved over the E–M1 II that I had previously. I haven't challenged it with fast flying small birds, but I've put the subject detection in a few situations where it had to deal with an obscured target (small bird partially obscured while foraging in tall grass, perched heron with leaves/branches obscuring it) and uneven lighting, and the system worked perfectly. As for birds-in-flight, I had no issues with larger birds such as cormorants, seagulls, pelicans, osprey and eagles – all with the stock settings. I would say the performance was in the same ballpark as what I would get from Sony a9. Keep in mind this is still limited experience and before making a broad, sweeping claim like "OM-1 AF is as good as Sony!", I would need more days and more targets in varying conditions. The improvement is certain; it's the scope that we can debate.
With all of those positives about the new OM combo, I'm still not selling my Sony FF gear. The reason has nothing to do with the OM gear. It's a personal choice because I enjoy shooting the Sony and there are some things about it that I really like and don't want to give up. So for now, I'll keep both systems. I feel confident that I can get images that I am happy with while using either system.
|
