Disappointed OM-1 mk2 100-400mm (2 Viewers)

[10ForCash]

Omg how disappointed am I !!
Just spent all this money and the pictures are awful.
I must be doing something wrong as the photos I'm getting are not much better than my Nikon P1000!!
I am on setting P with bird detection on continuous auto focus and all other setting all ready factory preset. I spent a few days I'm Portugal capturing some nice birds but the quality is awful. Feel so let down. I have tried setting A, tc on and off , lens hood on/off but no difference. Could this be just the quality of the 100-400mm lense as I can't see it being the body or maybe me and the other half are doing something wrong. Whoever takes the shot its the same 😕😕

 

[seawatcher]

Omg how disappointed am I !!
Just spent all this money and the pictures are awful.
I must be doing something wrong as the photos I'm getting are not much better than my Nikon P1000!!
I am on setting P with bird detection on continuous auto focus and all other setting all ready factory preset. I spent a few days I'm Portugal capturing some nice birds but the quality is awful. Feel so let down. I have tried setting A, tc on and off , lens hood on/off but no difference. Could this be just the quality of the 100-400mm lense as I can't see it being the body or maybe me and the other half are doing something wrong. Whoever takes the shot its the same 😕😕

I have the OM-1 and have until recently used this with the 100-400mm. Not the best lens, but I have taken some mega photos using this combination. Not sure how you have set up your camera, but I would avoid using the P setting. Better to use M, A or S. I wouldn't try and use a teleconverter with that lens until you are sure what it is capable of. It took me a long time before I dared to use a TC, and the results were rather mediocre.
I wouldn't give up just yet, but try and familiarise yourself with the camera, the lens and how to use it. I suggest you do a search on the internet to see what settings others recommend for this combination.
SW

 

[Elkhornsun]

There is the expectation by some people that a more expensive camera will automatically produce better pictures with money taking the place of investing time in learning. Always a good idea to practice at home and learn how to use the camera before you go on a trip.

There are a great many videos on youtube for this camera that provide advice on settings and use of this camera. You do need to spend some time watching them and practicing with your camera.

If you are unable to invest the time then better to go back to a point and shoot camera or a smartphone.

 

[laurencejackson]

There is the expectation by some people that a more expensive camera will automatically produce better pictures with money taking the place of investing time in learning. Always a good idea to practice at home and learn how to use the camera before you go on a trip.

There are a great many videos on youtube for this camera that provide advice on settings and use of this camera. You do need to spend some time watching them and practicing with your camera.

If you are unable to invest the time then better to go back to a point and shoot camera or a smartphone.

Exactly. If I'm getting poor results I always assume with any new camera, lens etc, that 'I' am the one at fault, not the gear....Youtube is your friend otherwise, why bother?

 

[10ForCash]

I have been watching YouTube videos especially Mike Lane ones and had the settings exactly the same but still no good, then I read that setting P was the best so tried that and spent each half day on a certain setting but same.

 

[10ForCash]

I have been watching YouTube videos especially Mike Lane ones and had the settings exactly the same but still no good, then I read that setting P was the best so tried that and spent each half day on a certain setting but same. Lots of

Exactly. If I'm getting poor results I always assume with any new camera, lens etc, that 'I' am the one at fault, not the gear....Youtube is your friend otherwise, why bother?

That's what I was thinking but how can we both be wrong, what could we possibly be doing wrong if that's the case 🤔

 

[aucarius]

I had the Olympus 100-400mm paired with an OM1v1 & sold it off for a 300mm PRO after poor results. I was using the TC with it so expected some softness but my final straw was using it a zoo on a sunny day without the TC still producing noticeable softness. For me it was either invest time & more money in some sharpening software, or try another lens. So I sold it & bought a second-hand PRO 300mm & have been much happier with the results; much sharper & minimal effort/practice to handle the lack of a zoom.
Some people have gotten great results from the 100-400mm but it wasn't for me; copy variation could be a factor, but since my time is most precious I decided to go with a lens that's more reliable.

 

[Jim M.]

Omg how disappointed am I !!
Just spent all this money and the pictures are awful.
I must be doing something wrong as the photos I'm getting are not much better than my Nikon P1000!!
I am on setting P with bird detection on continuous auto focus and all other setting all ready factory preset. I spent a few days I'm Portugal capturing some nice birds but the quality is awful. Feel so let down. I have tried setting A, tc on and off , lens hood on/off but no difference. Could this be just the quality of the 100-400mm lense as I can't see it being the body or maybe me and the other half are doing something wrong. Whoever takes the shot its the same 😕😕

Kind of a meaningless discussion unless you post photos with EXIF data. Also saying the "quality" is awful is very vague--what about the "quality" don't you like--softness, blurriness, noisiness, exposure, etc.?

 

[Geordiestew]

This was the most drama in 9 posts I've ever experienced. Real rollercoaster! Thank you!

Good luck with next camera.

 

[njlarsen]

I would support what Jim wrote: please post examples so we can see for ourselves what might be going on.
Niels

 

[BogBean]

I've gone from P1000 to OM1 and 100-400.
I don't think the OM1 and 100-400 does take "much better bird photos" than the P1000.
Not If we are talking ideal light conditions, static subject a couple of metres away, viewing on a PC screen.

But the OM1 with the 100-400 gives more predictable results, with more creative control. (and for insects the OM1 plus the 90mm macro lens is in a different league to the p1000.)

I prefer the P1000 from my two pics below in similar conditions. If I was just taking pics of static birds, I'd maybe be questioning my rationale for switching as well. (Particularly as the OM1 pic needed quite a lot of lightroom editing, the P1000 was straight out of the camera.)

 

[njlarsen]

I prefer the P1000 from my two pics below in similar conditions.

you know which one is what but I do not?

 

[BogBean]

you know which one is what but I do not?

The Lark was P1000, very close from the car window.
I'd say the Turnstone was similar distance away, light probably not as bright.
That's the problem we never take the same pic twice!

 

[MelospizaMelodiaFan]

Take a moment and realize that there is a significant learning curve here. Give yourself and your gear time to get familiar and grow together. I suspect that it is your beginner experience level, instead of the gear. Take a look at the small sensor photography blog, and you'll see excellent images taken with the 100-400.

 

[BogBean]

I had the Olympus 100-400mm paired with an OM1v1 & sold it off for a 300mm PRO after poor results. I was using the TC with it so expected some softness but my final straw was using it a zoo on a sunny day without the TC still producing noticeable softness. For me it was either invest time & more money in some sharpening software, or try another lens. So I sold it & bought a second-hand PRO 300mm & have been much happier with the results; much sharper & minimal effort/practice to handle the lack of a zoom.
Some people have gotten great results from the 100-400mm but it wasn't for me; copy variation could be a factor, but since my time is most precious I decided to go with a lens that's more reliable.

The 100-400 plus 1.4TC seems to be a winner regarding movie footage.
This was 40metres away, with zoom lens at 400mm, and also in-camera teleconvertor on..
1568mm equiv. if my maths is correct.
The frame is about the size of my thumbnail at arms length, which is pretty good considering you can still see a bit of feather detail.

 

[njlarsen]

The Lark was P1000, very close from the car window.
I'd say the Turnstone was similar distance away, light probably not as bright.
That's the problem we never take the same pic twice!

I think one of the main differences is a harsher application of sharpening in the P1000 photo. As you can set your default to be stronger in the other camera, this might be a way to go. If you do, I would suggest you save both jpg and raw, as you might change your taste later.
Niels