-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
MFT lens 100-400mm, Leica DG, announced (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter k.hoogteyling
- Start date
Ian Shepherd
Well-known member
Some recent birding pics with G7/pl100-400
A few birding pics with G7 and 100-400. Gulls from around 50m, curlew from 25m. Sparrowhawk from just 6m, but through window glass, at iso 2000 on a dark day.
A few birding pics with G7 and 100-400. Gulls from around 50m, curlew from 25m. Sparrowhawk from just 6m, but through window glass, at iso 2000 on a dark day.
Attachments
Working well then Ian
Sorry to hear about the gout. Lucky it's curable. Just got to give up all your favourite food and drink.
Fantastic detail in the pigeon. I've got to get me one of those lenses.
Neil.
I decided to go all in on panasonic so I bought the gx8 on a great discount and the 100-400 since I have read really good things about it.
I haven't shot too much with it yet but BIF is practically impossible. I haven't got 1 sharp bird yet. It seems like the 100-400 is really really soft at longer distances. Up close it looks good, but other than that...
I have seen other people posting BIF and longer distance shots. I am aware of atmosphere etc, but I cant even get a seagull against the blue sky sharp.
The bokeh is also horrible in some cases. Not sure if it's the lens or just the smaller sensor that does it.
Here are some shots. No crops and one 100% close up of the geese.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6dftyqriau8u7g4/AAAMR4MBDakZ_RDveGPmvvvNa?dl=0
I am not sure what I am doing wrong.
I haven't shot too much with it yet but BIF is practically impossible. I haven't got 1 sharp bird yet. It seems like the 100-400 is really really soft at longer distances. Up close it looks good, but other than that...
I have seen other people posting BIF and longer distance shots. I am aware of atmosphere etc, but I cant even get a seagull against the blue sky sharp.
The bokeh is also horrible in some cases. Not sure if it's the lens or just the smaller sensor that does it.
Here are some shots. No crops and one 100% close up of the geese.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/6dftyqriau8u7g4/AAAMR4MBDakZ_RDveGPmvvvNa?dl=0
I am not sure what I am doing wrong.
I do not know what your experience is with cameras and using long lenses before this. It might be helpful if you give us some insight into that. In the meantime:
With my pana camera I can set the focusing area to very small. That helps with difficult focusing, such as what you have in the photo of the geese.
Secondly, do you use single focus or continuous AF? I have an older GH2, and I always use sAF; the GX8 is just about to the point where cAF should become useful, but for now try the single AF and see if you get at least a decent first photo. Additionally, try alternating between just single shots and short bursts - for me the second method works better.
Thirdly, and this is especially if your experience is little: make sure you use short shutter speeds. On the 100-300 mm that I have, I use 1/500 as a go to setting, at 400 mm on yours, you probably should try even shorter shutter times to exclude problems with wobble of the camera. The further away a bird is, the more this is true.
Fourth, for those few birds in flight I have done, I usually change to the multiple AF area setting, simply because I seem to have difficulty getting the small center point onto the bird when it is passing by me.
Hope some of this helps
Niels
With my pana camera I can set the focusing area to very small. That helps with difficult focusing, such as what you have in the photo of the geese.
Secondly, do you use single focus or continuous AF? I have an older GH2, and I always use sAF; the GX8 is just about to the point where cAF should become useful, but for now try the single AF and see if you get at least a decent first photo. Additionally, try alternating between just single shots and short bursts - for me the second method works better.
Thirdly, and this is especially if your experience is little: make sure you use short shutter speeds. On the 100-300 mm that I have, I use 1/500 as a go to setting, at 400 mm on yours, you probably should try even shorter shutter times to exclude problems with wobble of the camera. The further away a bird is, the more this is true.
Fourth, for those few birds in flight I have done, I usually change to the multiple AF area setting, simply because I seem to have difficulty getting the small center point onto the bird when it is passing by me.
Hope some of this helps
Niels
Ime not sure what your doing wrong but catching BIF on a mirrorless camera is a steep learning curve
Have you got the settings right,try these they will not work for all situations though,i often changed to center point and changed from E shutter if there was trees ect in the background.
BIF I have C1 set as follows
Shutter priority 1 to 2000th sec
Auto ISO up to 3200,my thinking a correctly exposed 3200 is better than a under exposed 1600.
+1 exposure compensation,i know sometimes you need more but in the situation I shoot in a bird could start in my frame with clear sky behind it and fly past trees ect,so I find +1 is best for me.
E shutter,i know about the problems with vertical objects when panning
AFC focus mode 2 or 6 frames a second depending on situation and target.
49 area focus points,i was surprised I settled on this,with Nikon I only used single point,the GX8 though seems to know my intended target when panning,i guess its because the bird is the only stationery object in the viewfinder.
Multi metering
Image review off
Raw.
All stabilizing off,my theory being it takes too long for the stabilizing to settle before the focusing can lock on,with Nikon I never took it off.
I have not done many BIF @ 400mm most of mine are 300mm or under but the Egret bellow is 400mm and the Chaffinch is 400mm
Have you got the settings right,try these they will not work for all situations though,i often changed to center point and changed from E shutter if there was trees ect in the background.
BIF I have C1 set as follows
Shutter priority 1 to 2000th sec
Auto ISO up to 3200,my thinking a correctly exposed 3200 is better than a under exposed 1600.
+1 exposure compensation,i know sometimes you need more but in the situation I shoot in a bird could start in my frame with clear sky behind it and fly past trees ect,so I find +1 is best for me.
E shutter,i know about the problems with vertical objects when panning
AFC focus mode 2 or 6 frames a second depending on situation and target.
49 area focus points,i was surprised I settled on this,with Nikon I only used single point,the GX8 though seems to know my intended target when panning,i guess its because the bird is the only stationery object in the viewfinder.
Multi metering
Image review off
Raw.
All stabilizing off,my theory being it takes too long for the stabilizing to settle before the focusing can lock on,with Nikon I never took it off.
I have not done many BIF @ 400mm most of mine are 300mm or under but the Egret bellow is 400mm and the Chaffinch is 400mm
Attachments
I have years of experience shooting birds, both in flight and sitting on perches.
In the case of the geese I was sitting on the ground with a shutter speed of 1/640, iso200, 400mm f5.6. The focus point was the smallest using S-AF. I took perhaps 40-50 photos making sure to be very still and I couldn't notice any atmospheric issues since I was only 20-30 metres away from them.
I will try some more with a tripod and some test targets.
In the case of the geese I was sitting on the ground with a shutter speed of 1/640, iso200, 400mm f5.6. The focus point was the smallest using S-AF. I took perhaps 40-50 photos making sure to be very still and I couldn't notice any atmospheric issues since I was only 20-30 metres away from them.
I will try some more with a tripod and some test targets.
Try some with the E shutter at the same time,if the mechanical shutter shots are unsharp but the E shutter ones are sharp its shutter shock.
I did, but i cant remember which were e-shutter and which were mechanical lol.
I do have the gx85 as well so I will try some with that to compare.
I think i said one of the reasons i changed from the GX8 to the G80 was i could never decide if i sometimes got SS or it was shake.
I just did the most unscientific test ever, but the results are kind of telling. Something is up with the GX8.
I shot several shots with both mechanical and e-shutter on the GX8. I couldn't tell a difference between them.
I did the same with the GX80. Same settings and everything.
Here is the results.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a2d45m7xgsn4nh6/GX8vsGX80.jpg?dl=0
Is this the infamous shutter shock? if so the camera is basically unusable :/
I shot several shots with both mechanical and e-shutter on the GX8. I couldn't tell a difference between them.
I did the same with the GX80. Same settings and everything.
Here is the results.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a2d45m7xgsn4nh6/GX8vsGX80.jpg?dl=0
Is this the infamous shutter shock? if so the camera is basically unusable :/
He had to appear critical of a M4/3 system, otherwise the Polish internet warriors would have ripped him apart in the comments (you'd have to read Polish to appreciate the amount of full frame snobbery
).It cant be SS with the E shutter you have some other problem,perhaps a stabilization fault,in any case it looks like a return job for the GX8.
paulthomas
Well-known member
In the photo of the geese you're clearly focusing on the grass in front of the birds rather than the birds themselves.
Well all my images in that series look like that and I used the smallest focus box covering only the geese, no grass. The results are the same in all my images in other circumstances as well.
It looks like the camera is a dud, will have to try some more tomorrow with good light.
I mean it should be able to focus quite easily on a seagull against blue sky... but nope.
Copying this from the mu43 forum.
Alright guys! I appreciate all the comments and engagement in this matter. I did a proper test this morning with a long distance subject in the form of a building.
The air was really cool early this morning so not much of heat haze going on.
Sturdy tripod, 1/400s, iso 200, f6.3, 400mm. 10 second timer etc. On tripod I deactivated OIS and handheld I turned it on again.
These are the best results I could get.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ftug2rfz8g5x9tt/Sharpnesstest.jpg?dl=0
I also tried some shots with the em1 markii that my friend has.
Now looking at those tests it is quite hard to see a difference... So the GX8 should be fine.
It seems like there are several factors to the poor performance in the geese picture earlier. I think it was part shutter shock, part heat haze, part poor handling from me and the biggest part a lens that really is not that good at distant subjects.
This puts me in a tight spot. What are my options in m43 if I return the 100-400? Will I be happy with the G80 or GH5 instead of the GX8? I just dont know. I don't want to go back to DSLR's since I think mirrorless is the future with awesome evf's and features.
The Oly 300 is alot more money and my friend has had similar issues with his 300 where it would be very soft at distances.
For the price of these optics I would expect great performance at all distances. Maybe not at all focus lengths but surely all distances.
Alright guys! I appreciate all the comments and engagement in this matter. I did a proper test this morning with a long distance subject in the form of a building.
The air was really cool early this morning so not much of heat haze going on.
Sturdy tripod, 1/400s, iso 200, f6.3, 400mm. 10 second timer etc. On tripod I deactivated OIS and handheld I turned it on again.
These are the best results I could get.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ftug2rfz8g5x9tt/Sharpnesstest.jpg?dl=0
I also tried some shots with the em1 markii that my friend has.
Now looking at those tests it is quite hard to see a difference... So the GX8 should be fine.
It seems like there are several factors to the poor performance in the geese picture earlier. I think it was part shutter shock, part heat haze, part poor handling from me and the biggest part a lens that really is not that good at distant subjects.
This puts me in a tight spot. What are my options in m43 if I return the 100-400? Will I be happy with the G80 or GH5 instead of the GX8? I just dont know. I don't want to go back to DSLR's since I think mirrorless is the future with awesome evf's and features.
The Oly 300 is alot more money and my friend has had similar issues with his 300 where it would be very soft at distances.
For the price of these optics I would expect great performance at all distances. Maybe not at all focus lengths but surely all distances.
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
From what I have seen from the 100-400mm Leica it should be sufficiently sharp in the center at 400mm, but slightly softer at the edges, if not shooting brick walls, not an issue.
https://www.cyberphoto.se/info.php?article=pana100400
The Olympus 300/4 is probably one of the sharpest 300mm lenses ever produced. Sharp all across the frame even at f/4.
Some long distance shots here:
https://www.cyberphoto.se/info.php?article=oly300micro_D1
A true 600mm/f4 lens (of top quality) will resolve better in theory (Dawes limit) in perfect conditions, but do you want to carry it + tripod etc.? Any lens will fail in heat haze/air movement etc. best way to avoid that, is to get up early...:eek!:...or get closer to the subject, shoot from a hide etc. :t: o
Main USP with MFT for me is actually video capabilities. 100-400mm Leica seems brilliant for video IMO, a fixed 300mm is a bit limited. Unfortunately the GH5 is way overpriced at the moment..
Last edited:
I have owned the 100-400 for just under one year and indeed the announcement of this lens was the chief reason why I returned to MFT. I now have entirely changed over to MFT as a result, which was quite a big surprise to me coming from Sony and MF film. My main camera is the GX8 although I recently took advantage of the absurdly good cash back offer to get a GX80 as a second body.
Birding is not my primary use of the system. Most of my work is urban landscape. But I do like the challenge of bird photography. Much more demanding than buildings!
MFT cameras come with advantages and a distinct disadvantage, imho, which is above iso800 noise becomes a big problem. By iso 1600 it seriously interferes with image qualty. The advantage though is that as someone whose back is well into its seventh decade of service I just cannot begin to cope with the 'big daddy' systems and their bazooka lenses. If you take a look at the Kingfisher photograph I posted yesterday in the photo forum, that was taken handheld, standing between two other photographers who were seated with tripods. That kind of versatility is valuable at my age - or indeed any age, I would argue. You are more likely to get the shot than not if you can seize the moment.
My chief observation about the 100-400 is that in some ways it is too long. There have been several instances where I have missed the shot because at 400mm the fov is (obviously) too narrow. Secondly, f6.3 is very slow. It might not make a lot of difference on ff sensors which can produce excellent results at iso3200/6400 but light has to be very good to avoid creeping into iso1600 and above and basically losing too much detail.
I'm glad I have the lens but especially now if I had to do it again I would instead get the version II 100-300. I am banking on the fact that the GX9 - if it arrives - will have the same sensor without AA filter as the GH5 and also the new shutter mechanism. I think the combination of the removal of the AA filter and the new shutter mechanism could sharpen the output a lot. This is not a failure of the lens, of course, but of the platform. It would be great to improve the platform to get the best out of the lens. In fact, if the GX9 never materialises I would probably change up to a GH5 at some point in the future.
If you want to check out some the bird photographs I have taken with this lens and previously with my version I 100-300 then they are in an album in my Flickr stream.
Hope this helps and adds to the discussion. I'm new here so be gentle with me!
LouisB
Birding is not my primary use of the system. Most of my work is urban landscape. But I do like the challenge of bird photography. Much more demanding than buildings!
MFT cameras come with advantages and a distinct disadvantage, imho, which is above iso800 noise becomes a big problem. By iso 1600 it seriously interferes with image qualty. The advantage though is that as someone whose back is well into its seventh decade of service I just cannot begin to cope with the 'big daddy' systems and their bazooka lenses. If you take a look at the Kingfisher photograph I posted yesterday in the photo forum, that was taken handheld, standing between two other photographers who were seated with tripods. That kind of versatility is valuable at my age - or indeed any age, I would argue. You are more likely to get the shot than not if you can seize the moment.
My chief observation about the 100-400 is that in some ways it is too long. There have been several instances where I have missed the shot because at 400mm the fov is (obviously) too narrow. Secondly, f6.3 is very slow. It might not make a lot of difference on ff sensors which can produce excellent results at iso3200/6400 but light has to be very good to avoid creeping into iso1600 and above and basically losing too much detail.
I'm glad I have the lens but especially now if I had to do it again I would instead get the version II 100-300. I am banking on the fact that the GX9 - if it arrives - will have the same sensor without AA filter as the GH5 and also the new shutter mechanism. I think the combination of the removal of the AA filter and the new shutter mechanism could sharpen the output a lot. This is not a failure of the lens, of course, but of the platform. It would be great to improve the platform to get the best out of the lens. In fact, if the GX9 never materialises I would probably change up to a GH5 at some point in the future.
If you want to check out some the bird photographs I have taken with this lens and previously with my version I 100-300 then they are in an album in my Flickr stream.
Hope this helps and adds to the discussion. I'm new here so be gentle with me!
LouisB
