[edom31]

E-PM1. Evil tongues claim that your camera has a massively improved autofocus system compared to older PENs. And the color is better than on the new Olympus models. Upgraded matrix from E5. So I'm looking at these inexpensive cameras and thinking about buying one).

I can attest that the AF in the E-PM1 is quite fast, accurate and reliable. Overall I am also happy with the color production from this little guy. I wouldn't splurge more on M43; while nice and compact, I do love the hefty Kit for now offered in my Pentax dSLRs and an old D60 6MP Canon.

[WPRESTO]

I'm familiar with that debate. It can get additionally complicated if the dam is holding back a century's worth of silt--especially if that silt may be contaminated.

There was some controversy & mystery when the vastly larger earthen-fill Windsor Dam was built upstream creating Quabbin Reservoir, the major water supply for Boston as well as numerous towns along the aqueduct. It's been thought that there was a hatter in one of the flooded towns who had a pit or well where mercury was discarded. No one knows for sure and the water from The Quabbin, SFAIK, has never tested positive for excess mercury.

[edom31]

E-PM1 sporting the Sigma 19/2.8 EX DN







And a 3-shot stitch:

[edom31]

E-PM1 sporting the Sigma 19/2.8 EX DN

[AgentL]

[Clarkey]

Continuing the series:

First light in the mist by Aaron, on Flickr

[northcoastgreg]

Is anyone here tempted by the new 150-400/4.5?

It's an intriguing lens, but even if I could afford the $7,500 price tag, the weight would put me off. If could handle 4 lbs+ in a lens, I think I would go with the DFA 150-450. I suspect that, paired with a KP or K3iii, that lens would give you better images, especially at higher ISOs than the Oly monster. I've instead ordered Oly 100-400 — much lighter and considerably more affordable. It's been out of stock since its release back in September, so I don't know when I'll get it. But I'm in no hurry. It will give my E-M5ii a new lease on life, since I haven't used the camera much in the last three years (since acquiring a KP). But it seems to me as a compact wildlife kit, m43 makes a good deal of sense.

[LeeRunge]

It's an intriguing lens, but even if I could afford the $7,500 price tag, the weight would put me off. If could handle 4 lbs+ in a lens, I think I would go with the DFA 150-450. I suspect that, paired with a KP or K3iii, that lens would give you better images, especially at higher ISOs than the Oly monster. I've instead ordered Oly 100-400 — much lighter and considerably more affordable. It's been out of stock since its release back in September, so I don't know when I'll get it. But I'm in no hurry. It will give my E-M5ii a new lease on life, since I haven't used the camera much in the last three years (since acquiring a KP). But it seems to me as a compact wildlife kit, m43 makes a good deal of sense.

For long lens a D500 and Sigma/Tamron 150-600 is probably the move. Costs about 2500-2700 for both and you'll get top of the line AF. The Oly lens is way to expensive. I mean for the price of that Oly lens you can get a D850 with the Tamron or Sigma (which both have good image quality) and have a much better combo for under 4k.

I love the OMD's but once in the EM1 series and pro lenses they loose a lot of the compactness that makes them attractive. The EM10 and primes I have are super compact for travel. The Em1 is basically the same size as a Nikon Z6. and the Lenses in the Pro line are close to full frame size when compared with FF mirrorless. It kind of loses it's appeal then. Prices are just as much too.

[dadipentak]

Is anyone here tempted by the new 150-400/4.5?

Well, I said "I'm gonna get one!!!" and that's probably true but it may take some time to scrape up the cash. In the meantime, I acquired the MC 20 2xTC. Actually got it a couple of months ago but needed my son's help updating firmware. ( No gear or computers were damaged in the process so I'll spare you the righteous rant about how Olympus' new owners need to pay more attention to their users' experience with such things.)


I tried it out today and had perfect conditions (overcast and windy) to put it to the test. Luckily, a Coopers Hawk (or Sharp-Shinned--I don't really try to tell them apart) showed up. He was holding onto his branch for dear life.

OLY EM1mII, mz 300/4, MC20 [1/800, f/9, ISO 1600]






It's been denoised and tweeked a bit in PP but (unsurprisingly) not as sharp as I used to get with my FA*600/4 + 1.5x combo.
(note, however, that there was a branch between me and body of the bird.) On the other hand, this was hand-held (ever try to hand-hold an FA*600/4? Or, for that matter, shoot with it in a 17mph wind? )


I'm looking forward to trying this combination out in better conditions but so far I'm not convinced that it'll dampen my interest in the 100-400/5.6

[luftfluss]

Well, I said "I'm gonna get one!!!" and that's probably true but it may take some time to scrape up the cash. In the meantime, I acquired the MC 20 2xTC. Actually got it a couple of months ago but needed my son's help updating firmware. ( No gear or computers were damaged in the process so I'll spare you the righteous rant about how Olympus' new owners need to pay more attention to their users' experience with such things.)


I tried it out today and had perfect conditions (overcast and windy) to put it to the test. Luckily, a Coopers Hawk (or Sharp-Shinned--I don't really try to tell them apart) showed up. He was holding onto his branch for dear life.

OLY EM1mII, mz 300/4, MC20 [1/800, f/9, ISO 1600]

I've seen full-size images with that combo, and it's impressive how good the Oly 2x TC is.

On the other hand, this was hand-held (ever try to hand-hold an FA*600/4? Or, for that matter, shoot with it in a 17mph wind? )

Nope. The closest I've come was briefly lifting and hand-holding a K 135-600/6.7* (cheap monopod and all) while shooting on a very gusty August afternoon. That was pre-shoulder injury, so I'm not sure I would be inclined to do so again. Trying to hold everything together while also trying to adjust focus was difficult. Heck, just using that monster on a cheap monopod that kept flexing under all that weight + wind was tough.

* And your old FA*600/4 is significantly heavier than the 135-600.

[luftfluss]

It's an intriguing lens, but even if I could afford the $7,500 price tag, the weight would put me off. If could handle 4 lbs+ in a lens, I think I would go with the DFA 150-450. I suspect that, paired with a KP or K3iii, that lens would give you better images, especially at higher ISOs than the Oly monster. I've instead ordered Oly 100-400 — much lighter and considerably more affordable. It's been out of stock since its release back in September, so I don't know when I'll get it. But I'm in no hurry. It will give my E-M5ii a new lease on life, since I haven't used the camera much in the last three years (since acquiring a KP). But it seems to me as a compact wildlife kit, m43 makes a good deal of sense.

I don't think the 150-400/4.5 is going to bring anyone new into the m4/3 system, but it will be interesting to see how many of the existing users will buy it.

[luftfluss]

For long lens a D500 and Sigma/Tamron 150-600 is probably the move. Costs about 2500-2700 for both and you'll get top of the line AF. The Oly lens is way to expensive. I mean for the price of that Oly lens you can get a D850 with the Tamron or Sigma (which both have good image quality) and have a much better combo for under 4k.

I love the OMD's but once in the EM1 series and pro lenses they loose a lot of the compactness that makes them attractive. The EM10 and primes I have are super compact for travel. The Em1 is basically the same size as a Nikon Z6. and the Lenses in the Pro line are close to full frame size when compared with FF mirrorless. It kind of loses it's appeal then. Prices are just as much too.

I think m4/3 needed these PRO long telephoto lenses a few years earlier, like maybe when the EM1 was first introduced.

A Nikon D500 + Tamron 150-600 G2 is 2870g, while an Oly EM1 mkIII + Oly 100-400/6.3 is 1700g, so that's a large difference. The Oly setup is also significantly smaller.

The Oly 150-400/4.5 is in something of an odd position, where it's probably better than your typical big consumer zoom but maybe not quite specified enough to justify its price, other than to devotees of the brand. There are some parallels there with the Pentax DA 560/5.6, IMO.

[dadipentak]

That was pre-shoulder injury,

You too, eh? Ripping up my rotator cuff was a major factor in my move to M4/3.


Here's another (better) shot of that Hawk. I like the other because it's clearer that he's struggling in the wind but this is really better. I'm looking forward to shooting that combo with lower ISO and slower shutter speed.

[luftfluss]

You too, eh? Ripping up my rotator cuff was a major factor in my move to M4/3.


Here's another (better) shot of that Hawk. I like the other because it's clearer that he's struggling in the wind but this is really better. I'm looking forward to shooting that combo with lower ISO and slower shutter speed.

Yes, as I recall there was another thread where you, normhead and I all noted being members of the bad shoulder club. Mine's not too bad, some weakness and restriction in movement. M4/3 body + Oly 100-400/6.3 seems like it would be a nice combo for me, but it's hard to think about selling off some of my beautiful old (heavy) lenses to finance it, like the Adaptall 300/2.8 and 400/4.

You're shooting the Oly 300 + 2x TC hand-held?

[LeeRunge]

I think m4/3 needed these PRO long telephoto lenses a few years earlier, like maybe when the EM1 was first introduced.

A Nikon D500 + Tamron 150-600 G2 is 2870g, while an Oly EM1 mkIII + Oly 100-400/6.3 is 1700g, so that's a large difference. The Oly setup is also significantly smaller.

The Oly 150-400/4.5 is in something of an odd position, where it's probably better than your typical big consumer zoom but maybe not quite specified enough to justify its price, other than to devotees of the brand. There are some parallels there with the Pentax DA 560/5.6, IMO.

Olympus definitely needed to get those telephoto's out sooner. I'm not anti Olympus at all I have a OMD kit for travel. I almost bought the EM1 over the D-750 a few years back, the price tag stopped me as the D-750 was $400 less.