Personally, I do not use a filter. One thread that has a longer discussion: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=332975
Niels
Niels
Hi
I'm sure there has been some discussion on the use of filters but can't seem to find it.
I would be interested in views on whether the use of a protective filter adversely affects the lens performance. Also what filter would you recommend.
Thanks
David
The PL 100-400 is brilliant on the EM1ii. IQ of this pairing seems consistently better than with my GH3 or G7. The EM1ii is blazing fast in all respects and CAF performance is in a different league and meets all my birding photo requirements (not CAFtracking, which still isn't great for birds, but not needed anyway).
I'm new to M4/3 technology so may be missing the blindingly obvious, invested in a used (open box) lens 7 days ago and immediately impressed with the IQ even at full range. So far, used the lens with both G80 and EM1ii bodies and gained not too dis-similar results though perhaps things may be different in a wider range of conditions during testing.
The most noticeable difference between the two bodies I found was that the EM1ii consistently 'hunted' 3 times before AF was confirmed in SAF mode (not tried CAF). The G80 in AFC mode, came up with AF confirmation almost without fail, at the first time of asking.
I would be most grateful for any advice/comments Ian Shepherd or any other user of the EM1ii - PL100-400 is prepared to give me.
Not used the Olympus but ime not surprised at how good you find the G80 with the 100-400, ime sure folks would not believe me when i said it.
The most noticeable difference between the two bodies I found was that the EM1ii consistently 'hunted' 3 times before AF was confirmed in SAF mode (not tried CAF). The G80 in AFC mode, came up with AF confirmation almost without fail, at the first time of asking.
I would be most grateful for any advice/comments Ian Shepherd or any other user of the EM1ii - PL100-400 is prepared to give me.
I showed my results to a colleague, a semi-professional wildlife photographer and in his opinion, many of the images matched the IQ of those obtained with his EM1i - 300 f4 PRO combination. To be fair, he like me would need to undertake a far more extensive testing programme before claiming the performance of the two lenses was exactly comparable.
I just tried my E-M1 mk 2 with the PL 100-400 and autofocus acquisition was virtually instantaneous in SAF mode. There are a lot of settings on this camera, however. I would expect one of those is the issue. I assume you have the latest firmware for both camera and lens?
Many thanks nikonmike for your comments.
I showed my results to a colleague, a semi-professional wildlife photographer and in his opinion, many of the images matched the IQ of those obtained with his EM1i - 300 f4 PRO combination. To be fair, he like me would need to undertake a far more extensive testing programme before claiming the performance of the two lenses was exactly comparable. To get back to your comment, yes I agree the G80 certainly punches above its weight with the PL 100-400. Until or unless I can solve the EM1ii AF issue, the G80 will be my body of choice.
Focusing seems spot on for these
Niels
Some results from a quick test run with the G80 PL100-400 combination at 1300hrs BST today.
Images of sub-adult Herring Gull, Western Jackdaw and Common Teal are as 'back of the camera' (no cropping or editing). These results are very encouraging after only an 8 day trial period but as previously stated on this thread, an experienced user should be able to do better.
Yet to finish checking through the EM1ii settings but have to admit to not feeling too eager as things are at the moment.
Those are great pictures. I would be interested to know your camera settings and whether you are using the teleconverter. Also what picture size you use.
Thanks
David
David.
My understanding is that a TC is not compatible with this lens and I have found so far that X2 digital zoom meets my needs. I always use jpeg picture size L(4592X3448).
Settings for images shown; 1/1000 @f6.3 ISO 200 (S priority, ISOauto, AWB, DZ= X2, EC-0.33, AFC, Centre Weight, Photo Style Standard (S+1).
Lightweight tripod on rough grassland.
Thanks. I should have been clearer. I meant the Extra Tele Conversion function which to quote Panasonic "enables you to take pictures that are further enlarged without deteriorating the picture quality." However, if you shoot in Large this function isn't available. It can only be used in Medium and Small picture sizes where it gives you 1.4x and 2x enlargement respectively. As far as I understand this teleconversion is different from Digital Zoom where the image quality will deteriorate as you zoom in. Although from your pictures it looks as though even with DZ the results are impressive
I'm undecided whether this extra tele conversion is useful or whether it is better to shoot in RAW and crop in post processing.
Any views from yourself or other users would be welcome
Regards
David
Quote:
Originally Posted by crapbirder View Post
I would be most grateful for any advice/comments Ian Shepherd or any other user of the EM1ii - PL100-400 is prepared to give me.
The most noticeable difference between the two bodies I found was that the EM1ii consistently 'hunted' 3 times before AF was confirmed in SAF mode (not tried CAF). The G80 in AFC mode, came up with AF confirmation almost without fail, at the first time of asking.