Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Oly E-M10 IV and 100-400mm f/5-6.3 IS announced
#1
https://olympus.com.au/product/dslr/em10mk4/index.html

https://olympus.com.au/product/dslr/mlen...index.html

※ This product is not compatible with the 5-axis sync IS that works with in-body 5-axis image stabilisation.

So they gave up one of their biggest selling points.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#2
Maybe it wasn't possible to have sync-is with this lens, or maybe it is reserved for the 150-400 Pro.

However, I do see messages that although it won't have sync-is. it will still work with IBIS for the 3rd axis, for roll.

Balanced review and comparison with the Panasonic Leica 100-400 here:
https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/micro-f...100-400mm/

Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 1 zoom, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
#3
The photos from the dpreview gallery of the Oly 100-400 are very bad. I find that none of them at 400mm are sharp.
The comparison at mirrorlesscomparison.com show the Oly 100-400 in a much better light.
Wonder if dpreview received a bad sample or if it is related to their technique?
The Oly is much bigger than the Pana while offering a smaller aperture range. If the reviewer at mirrorlesscomparison is correct, it seems to be optically better than the Pana however.
--Florent

Flickr gallery
#4
I reckon the 100-400mm doesn't offer sync IS because it's a Sigma lens - possibly featuring Sigma's miserable OS (not compatible to sync-IS ...) - which would explain the mediocre efficiency rating.

For better samples - go here:

https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipM1...ZtM0E4UEN3

And while we are at ranting - why does this lens cost $1500 and the near-identical Sigma costs $800?
Sure there's the economy of scale - but it's also a way to push a system into oblivion.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#5
Lenstip is not so impressed by this lens:
https://www.lenstip.com/144.4-article-Ol...mmary.html
#6
Well, it's made in JP - probably because it's made or at least pre-assembled by Sigma?

I'd say the lens is alright - it's just the price tag and the poor IS implementation that I don't understand.

Also - you can use an EF-MFT AF adapter to mount such FF lenses. If I had the choice between this one and a Canon EF 70-300L IS with adapter (costing the same), I'd probably settle for the Canon lens.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#7
(08-05-2020, 08:39 AM)Klaus Wrote: Well, it's made in JP - probably because it's made or at least pre-assembled by Sigma?

I'd say the lens is alright - it's just the price tag and the poor IS implementation that I don't understand.

Also - you can use an EF-MFT AF adapter to mount such FF lenses. If I had the choice between this one and a Canon EF 70-300L IS with adapter (costing the same), I'd probably settle for the Canon lens.
That is the type of thing I do, just that similar FF lenses are quite a bit heavier and a lot less compact Smile.

Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 1 zoom, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
#8
Well, not in this specific case ;-)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#9
If the Olympus 100-400 is really a Sigma design (as I've heard loads of times already) does that mean it's an FF lens in disguise?
#10
(08-05-2020, 07:20 AM)goran h Wrote: Lenstip is not so impressed by this lens:
https://www.lenstip.com/144.4-article-Ol...mmary.html
Hmm, other than that they do not state clearly what the sunnary is, all you can deduct is that they may not like the size of it.

However, a 100-400 is a big lens, on any system, there is no escaping from it. Could they have made it smaller? Possibly, but from the initial test reviews i have seen so far, it actually is slightly better than the PL 100-400 is, and that may have affected the size.

Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 1 zoom, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)