Micro Four-Thirds (3 Viewers)

Binoseeker · Nov 26, 2015

Bad Hoya UV-filter

I have installed the new MB firmware version 2.0 now.

I got my Canon 400 lens back from the repair shop today. They didn’t find any fault with the lens but the fault was with the brand new Hoya UV(C) HMC 77mm filter which was crappy...at least it was not good on my lens. They tested the lens in some kind of projector thingy…

I took some photos this evening with and with out the uv-filter and behold, I can see the degradation with the uv-filter on…..so, if you are not satisfied with the sharpness of the photos, remove the filter if you have such and try again….

JGobeil · Nov 26, 2015

Binoseeker said:
I have installed the new MB firmware version 2.0 now.

I got my Canon 400 lens back from the repair shop today. They didn’t find any fault with the lens but the fault was with the brand new Hoya UV(C) HMC 77mm filter which was crappy...at least it was not good on my lens. They tested the lens in some kind of projector thingy…

I took some photos this evening with and with out the uv-filter and behold, I can see the degradation with the uv-filter on…..so, if you are not satisfied with the sharpness of the photos, remove the filter if you have such and try again….

I never use filters for the reason you just demonstrated.... IMO, a lens hood provides adequate protection.

I tested the 400mm lens for front/back focus today. Difficult test because there is too much DOF. The light was no good outside so I had to test inside with artificial light. Distance 7 meters. The test chart made by Jackson, as suggested by Tord, is just about useless with the 400mm at close range. I had to revert to the classic AA batteries.

With or without the 1.4X TC, the focus is right on the center battery for 17 shots out of 20. One is half way between batteries 4 and 5, one between 5 and 6, and one on battery 6. Can't complain about close range autofocus. The focus was not good on 2 of the 20 shots, just like the duck on my previous post, but it still seemed centered on the middle battery.

Photo #1: 400mm lens with Metabones Adapter
Photo #2: with 1.4X Canon Extender II

Tord · Nov 26, 2015

JGobeil said:
Hi Tord. Samples and comments would be appreciated.

Hi Jules,
Some samples, result of casual birding around my home. All handheld, F/5.6. Single AF point (small). IBIS.1.

The first five are cropped ~65-75%.
The herons are full frames.

As you can see light conditions were quite mediocre, calling for ISO 1600 except the perched Heron which was taken at ISO 200 during a short sun breakthrough. Conditions were quite windy, maybe 8 m/s and 12 m/s in the gusts. Enough to cause subject motion during gusts.

The last one with the heron by the river is quite remarkable. I was surprised how well the AF managed to resolve this situation, considering the amount of twigs in the way. I aimed at the eye, recomposed and fired, no MF fine tuning involved. 1/100s, the IBIS did a quite good job. Apologies for less than perfect framing but this is as far as I could get(!) from the subject.

I'd say that 50% or more of the ~50-100 shots I took are focus spot on. Of the remaining, 25% are good enough to qualify for keepers, and 25% are not. Again, this was in lousy light conditions.

I also tested the CAF and it sort of works in the sense tracking of slow moving subject is possible, though the performance is quite slow. Hardly useable on BIF.

The IQ/sharpness is almost as good as what the TLAPO804 scope delivers. I miss the extra 20% reach, but as a portable, hand held setup the metabones + 400/5.6 is a serious contender. I might buy one. It would be interesting to underestand if it also works on the other EF lenses of interest (non-IS).

It also felt strange to just carry around a camera without tripod.

Tord · Nov 26, 2015

Now with attachments

Tord · Nov 26, 2015

And more attachments, ran into the limit of 5.
The last one is a crop rendered at 100%.

DanC.Licks · Nov 27, 2015

Yup, those look like the real thing.B

I would love to try a 100-400 II, and I am going to look for someone around here that has one to try. Don't want to have to buy to try, obviously. If it comes close to the 400 at 400, it would be worth considering. Seems to be a stunning and very well built lens, and not that much bigger and heavier than the 400. That and a couple of TCs would be the ideal walk-around rig, though I suspect it would be stuck at 400 mm most of the time, which would make it rather pointless. The 400 is so nice....

Hermann · Nov 27, 2015

Binoseeker said:
I got my Canon 400 lens back from the repair shop today. They didn’t find any fault with the lens but the fault was with the brand new Hoya UV(C) HMC 77mm filter which was crappy...at least it was not good on my lens. They tested the lens in some kind of projector thingy…

I took some photos this evening with and with out the uv-filter and behold, I can see the degradation with the uv-filter on…..so, if you are not satisfied with the sharpness of the photos, remove the filter if you have such and try again….

Yep, filters may cause all sorts of problems. I still use filters on my long lenses and my scopes, and it took me a while to understand how important it is to get decent ones. I had problems with various makes over the years. The ones that work best in my experience (and the only ones I use nowadays) are those by Canon, Nikon and Leica. Never had a problem with a filter made by these three manufacturers.

Hermann

DanC.Licks · Nov 27, 2015

Anders,
Too bad you didn't say anything about the filter in your original post (#444) about the soft results. I am sure some of us would have jumped on it!

I only use a filter when I know the lens is going to be subjected to extreme conditions, like dust or salty air. Otherwise, never. Don't even own one for the 400. Really good filters are expensive, and I really wonder if they are worth it. Some do, some don't.

JGobeil · Nov 27, 2015

DanC.Licks said:
Yup, those look like the real thing.B
I would love to try a 100-400 II, and I am going to look for someone around here that has one to try. Don't want to have to buy to try, obviously. If it comes close to the 400 at 400, it would be worth considering. Seems to be a stunning and very well built lens, and not that much bigger and heavier than the 400. That and a couple of TCs would be the ideal walk-around rig, though I suspect it would be stuck at 400 mm most of the time, which would make it rather pointless. The 400 is so nice....

Hi Tord,

Nice photos taken with the 400mm indeed. You are much better than I am finding the birds at close range. You seem to have more practice since you use the scope for close range photos, which I don't. I alway use the 100-300mm for those photos and the scope is limited to 20-30m. and more.

Here is my opinion after about 500 test photos:

It is very sharp. Not as such as my SW80ED but more than my 100-300mm.
IBIS works very well with it - no noise, no vibrations.
Autofocus is quite fast and accurate at short range. To work well, it needs a good contrast target. I think but cannot confirm that it is not as accurate as range increases. More tests needed.
CA is always present and can be easily removed most of the time.
It works quite well with both Canon Extenders (1.4X II and 2.0X III tested). Both Autofocus and IBIS work fine and focus is still quite fast. The 1.4X gives better results than cropping, not sure for the 2X, more tests needed.
It can do BIF providing the bird doesn't fly too fast and that the BG is clear and neat, eg. blue sky.

How does it perform for my needs ?

It is definitely not a complete all around birding lens because it has too much power for close range work. Also, I find that the birds are difficult to find. Finally, its minimum focus distance is 3.5m.
BIF ? Well, is there a very good BIF lens in the M43 world ?
It can replace my SW80ED. 560mm with the 1.4X is equivalent in reach and the autofocus is often accurate (in my tests so far, see above) and fast. It is much lighter and smaller. It is so much easier and fun to use !

Conclusion: it is a keeper and I suspect the SW80ED won't see much use... However, I will have to keep the 100-300mm and carry both lenses when birding.

Now, the 100-400mm II... It is indeed a very nice lens and reviews are very nice. Some thaughts:

25% more weight than the 400mm. But it covers much more distance, from 1m. to...
Only 5% longer when opened than the 400mm (lens only).
It is an expensive proposition: I got my 400mm used for 1/3 the price.
It has the potential to be a complete all-around birding lens. Nice range, not too heavy, takes TCs well and it is sharp.
Personnaly, I think I would get the Panasonic 100-400mm instead of that one.

DanC.Licks · Nov 27, 2015

The Panasonic does indeed look interesting. Do we know when it will be out and what it will cost? Slightly slower than the Canon, but its advantages are clear. I would expect the AF to be better than the Canon/Metabones on the long end, but I could be wrong. Also, we don't know if there is or will be TCs for it. Maybe the MC-14 will work???

Tord · Nov 27, 2015

Jules,

A tip for quickly finding the birds at close range when framed by many objects - make sure the lens or scope are prefocused, this way less risk missing them when aiming and finding you are pointing at the wrong place. Get the instant feedback that the blurred silhouette in the viewfinder is the bird.

Tord · Nov 27, 2015

DanC.Licks said:
Anders,
Too bad you didn't say anything about the filter in your original post (#444) about the soft results. I am sure some of us would have jumped on it!
I only use a filter when I know the lens is going to be subjected to extreme conditions, like dust or salty air. Otherwise, never. Don't even own one for the 400. Really good filters are expensive, and I really wonder if they are worth it. Some do, some don't.

+1

I use filters for wide angle lenses only. The lens hood of a telephoto is deep enough to protect the front lens.

JGobeil · Nov 27, 2015

DanC.Licks said:
The Panasonic does indeed look interesting. Do we know when it will be out and what it will cost? Slightly slower than the Canon, but its advantages are clear. I would expect the AF to be better than the Canon/Metabones on the long end, but I could be wrong. Also, we don't know if there is or will be TCs for it. Maybe the MC-14 will work???

Agreed. From 100mm f/4 to 400mm f/6.3 is very nice indeed. Add a set of auto extension tubes and it becomes a nice macro lens. It should also be decent for BIF: my 100-300mm is already not that bad and it is a cheap consumer grade lens dating a few years, imagine a new generation pro lens ! Also, it should be quite sharp and autofocus should be instantaneous, being a pro lens designed for M43.

The big unknown are the price and the availability of a TC. Will Pana make one ? Will the lens have room at the back to allow fitting the Oly TC ? Without a TC, it doesn't have enough reach to replace my scope.

Price ? Unknown. There are lots of rumors from cheap to very expensive.

The Olympus 300mm is another interesting lens. It should be sharp, fast and it is made to work with the EM-1. A 1.4X TC is already available. Price unknown. However, there are not even rumors of a 2X TC, so it cannot replace my SW80ED.

For nature photography, I need a to be able to take photos from a few cm to 100m. The complete outfit to carry needs to be as light as possible. As I see it, these are my options:

Pana 100-400mm + 1.4x TC (Available ???) - Sell the 100-300mm and the 400mm/MB
400mm/MB + 100-300mm
400mm/MB + Pana 100-400mm - $$$ - Sell the 100-300mm

I decided to go for the 400mm because of unknown price and TC availability plus uncertain delivery date of the Panasonic 100-400mm. Also, I got it for a good price and it should keep its value. The SW80ED is not anymore part of my solution... Too big, too heavy, too manual... Anybody interested ?

EDIT: The Panasonic 100-400mm seems to be a dream lens for my needs...
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3931450

JGobeil · Nov 27, 2015

Tord said:
Jules,

A tip for quickly finding the birds at close range when framed by many objects - make sure the lens or scope are prefocused, this way less risk missing them when aiming and finding you are pointing at the wrong place. Get the instant feedback that the blurred silhouette in the viewfinder is the bird.

Thanks Tord. I only need practice to graduate from 300mm to 400mm... Lots of practice judging from the frustrations of the past week. :C :C :C IMHO, I am still convinced that the 400mm is not a short range birding lens and that it is not a replacement for my 100-300mm.

Binoseeker · Nov 27, 2015

Thanks for all your comments on my filter issue.

That was an eye opener....

JGobeil · Nov 28, 2015

Olympus Firmware 4.0 for the EM-1

I installed the firmware but I have yet to test it in the field.

Focus Stacking/Bracketing is not operative with the Canon 400mm/MB. The option is greyed out. I suspect it is because the camera doesn't see the lens as M43. It works fine with all my M43 lenses the Oly 12-40 and 14-150, the Pana 100-300.

IMO, it should be possible for Metabones to bypass this restriction in the firmware just like they did with the TCs. Let's give them some time.

DanC.Licks · Nov 28, 2015

The restriction is in the Olympus software. Stacking and bracketing only works with certain lenses.
Focus stacking with the 400 is possible. This one I did of the neighbor's pond. Set the camera to 7fps, held the buttown down and slowly turned the focus ring. Hand held, IS1 on.

Stacked with Zerene stacker.
I have even done focus stacks with the 600mm scope. No problem. Pure stacking on moon shots often.

JGobeil · Nov 28, 2015

DanC.Licks said:
The restriction is in the Olympus software. Stacking and bracketing only works with certain lenses.
Focus stacking with the 400 is possible. This one I did of the neighbor's pond. Set the camera to 7fps, held the buttown down and slowly turned the focus ring. Hand held, IS1 on.
View attachment 566176

Stacked with Zerene stacker.
I have even done focus stacks with the 600mm scope. No problem. Pure stacking on moon shots often.
View attachment 566177

Nice shots Dan. It would still be nice to do it automatically. I tried it and it works beautifully.

It would also be nice for bird photos. Focus a bit closer than the eye, take the shot(s) and select the best one. IMO focus stacking is less interesting because it outputs a JPEG. I hate that !

DanC.Licks · Nov 29, 2015

JPG only?...., that's not so cool.
Focus stacking with birds would be nice, if you can convince them to stay still long enough.

Would also be hard to get the micro adjustment fine enough at distance. Try it with the 400. Focus either MF or S-AF/MF and fire of a burst turning the focus ring ever so slightly. Plan on throwing out a lot, but you might end up with three or four that can then be stacked.
I did a standard stack once of a Kestrel sitting on a fence. There was a lot of air movement, end each individual shot was crap, but the stack was better. Here a single frame and the 4 shot stack:

As I have often said, air is our worst enemy, and any astro-photographer will back that up. They will sometimes stack hundreds of frames, often taken with different filters etc, to get one good shot. Not practical with birds, but the principle is the same.

At any rate, stacking is a big and an interesting subject, and if it really has to be good, I would not expect wonders from the E-M1. Its stacking software is for sure quite basic and won't be able to compare with PS or any of the other stacking programs out there, some even for free, like CombineZ. Still, it is a great addition to the firmware and will be fun to use if you have compatible lenses.

When shooting with the scope, I have often shot a burst and turned the microfocus knob back and forth a little, then selected the best. Focus bracketing. Now I am into point and shoot.:smoke:

JGobeil · Nov 29, 2015

DanC.Licks said:
JPG only?...., that's not so cool.
Focus stacking with birds would be nice, if you can convince them to stay still long enough. Would also be hard to get the micro adjustment fine enough at distance. Try it with the 400. Focus either MF or S-AF/MF and fire of a burst turning the focus ring ever so slightly. Plan on throwing out a lot, but you might end up with three or four that can then be stacked.
I did a standard stack once of a Kestrel sitting on a fence. There was a lot of air movement, end each individual shot was crap, but the stack was better. Here a single frame and the 4 shot stack:
View attachment 566224 View attachment 566225
As I have often said, air is our worst enemy, and any astro-photographer will back that up. They will sometimes stack hundreds of frames, often taken with different filters etc, to get one good shot. Not practical with birds, but the principle is the same.

At any rate, stacking is a big and an interesting subject, and if it really has to be good, I would not expect wonders from the E-M1. Its stacking software is for sure quite basic and won't be able to compare with PS or any of the other stacking programs out there, some even for free, like CombineZ. Still, it is a great addition to the firmware and will be fun to use if you have compatible lenses.

When shooting with the scope, I have often shot a burst and turned the microfocus knob back and forth a little, then selected the best. Focus bracketing. Now I am into point and shoot.:smoke:

Focus Bracketing with the EM-1 is lightning quick which could make it nice for birding. You select up to 999 shots, the focus and time differences, and it focuses from back to front. In post processing you can choose the best one or stack with software. In theory, this would insure a perfectly focused shot.

Focus Stacking is nicer because it takes the shots with +/- focus from the focus point instead of from the back. It then outputs the stack JPEG but keeps the originals which you can use later.

I tried stacking quickly and it works fine. I will send an email to Metabones suggesting they fix the problem in their firmware.

Micro Four-Thirds (3 Viewers)

Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.

Nature Photographer

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Attachments

AKA Daniel Bradley

Well-known member

AKA Daniel Bradley

Nature Photographer

AKA Daniel Bradley

Well-known member

Well-known member

Nature Photographer

Nature Photographer

Mostly using spectacles (myopic) with binoculars.

Nature Photographer

AKA Daniel Bradley

Nature Photographer

AKA Daniel Bradley

Nature Photographer

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread