Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Show your photos > Foto Fair

Foto Fair Post your photos for friendly, non-critical feedback. This is the place to show pictures if you aren't yet ready for full-blooded critique, or simply want to share an interesting picture with other e-group visitors.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 17th June 2019
pandora's Avatar
pandora pandora is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 16,647
Thanks: 891
Thanked 1,543 Times in 1,494 Posts
Likes: 1,999
Liked 4,374 Times in 1,975 Posts
40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD


Sadly not quite an apples to apples comparison as I forgot to remove the converter from the Pro but here is an OOC JPG comparison.


Of course the Pro wins, but I needed to know by how much. Next time I'll remember to remove the 1.4X converter.
__________________
My Flickr

* mark * Wangaratta, Victoria, Australia **
The OM-D E-M1 Mark II * OM-D M5 MkII * XZ2 * XZ1 * E3
On post-processing: The camera kneads the dough, PP bakes the bread - Greenhill
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 17th June 2019
Otto's Avatar
Otto Otto is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 3,154
Thanks: 97
Thanked 286 Times in 251 Posts
Likes: 1,088
Liked 935 Times in 592 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

On my screen I can't tell a difference at all Mark, so in what way do you think the Pro is better? The Pro possibly has a slightly higher contrast?
__________________
Regards
Richard
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 17th June 2019
drmarkf's Avatar
drmarkf drmarkf is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Posts: 5,644
Thanks: 359
Thanked 508 Times in 422 Posts
Likes: 2,218
Liked 1,281 Times in 728 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post
On my screen I can't tell a difference at all Mark, so in what way do you think the Pro is better? The Pro possibly has a slightly higher contrast?
Yes, that's the way it looks to me.

It would still be possible for the older lens to have higher ultimate resolving power, though, that could be brought out more in PP. Testing lenses for real-life use is quite tricky!
__________________
Regards,
Mark

------------------------------
http://www.microcontrast.com
Too much Oly gear.
Panasonic GM5, 12-32, 12-35, 15. Laowa 7.5.
Assorted legacy lenses, plus a Fuji X70 & a Sony A7S.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 17th June 2019
pdk42's Avatar
pdk42 pdk42 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Leamington Spa
Posts: 5,710
Thanks: 370
Thanked 1,257 Times in 942 Posts
Likes: 150
Liked 6,007 Times in 1,955 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

Contrast is slightly higher in the 40-150, but otherwise at this size it's hard to make a call on resolution. The other potential negative of the 40-150 - overly busy OOF blur - isn't evidenced on this shot since pretty well everything is in focus. Overall though I don't think image quality is a good reason to separate these lenses - size, AF speed, min focus distance, compatibility with focus stacking, and long term reliability are probably more important.
__________________
Paul
E-M1ii, Pen-F and too many lenses
flickr
Portfolio Site
Instagram
Reply With Quote
The Following Users Liked This Post:
drmarkf (17th June 2019), MJ224 (17th June 2019)
  #5  
Old 17th June 2019
MJ224's Avatar
MJ224 MJ224 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Carmarthenshire
Posts: 13,780
Thanks: 936
Thanked 744 Times in 691 Posts
Likes: 6,936
Liked 3,799 Times in 1,756 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

I think (occasionally) that the Pro has a tiniest bit better colour, but that could be down to many circumstances, PP, slightly different light at the time of pressing the shutter etc.

All a bit subjective as these photos are virtually identical to my eye anyway...
__________________
Mark Johnson

My Sailing Page

My Flickr
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 17th June 2019
Beagletorque's Avatar
Beagletorque Beagletorque is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Extreme South Midlands, England
Posts: 7,186
Thanks: 1,234
Thanked 870 Times in 787 Posts
Likes: 2,235
Liked 4,027 Times in 1,479 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

I think resolving power of the SWD is quite low compared to the pro. More apparent on the higher res sensors. You have not done the pro any favors by leaving the tc on and shooting at f8! At f4 naked the pro has nearly twice the resolving power of the SWD.

https://www.lenstip.com/201.4-Lens_r...esolution.html

https://www.lenstip.com/479.4-Lens_r...esolution.html
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 17th June 2019
Otto's Avatar
Otto Otto is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 3,154
Thanks: 97
Thanked 286 Times in 251 Posts
Likes: 1,088
Liked 935 Times in 592 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

In fairness to the SWD would it not be better to test it on one of the newer mFT bodies rather than the E3 used in the Lenstip tests?
__________________
Regards
Richard
Reply With Quote
The Following User Liked This Post:
drmarkf (17th June 2019)
  #8  
Old 17th June 2019
Tordan58's Avatar
Tordan58 Tordan58 is online now
Full member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 3,285
Thanks: 299
Thanked 409 Times in 337 Posts
Likes: 408
Liked 1,423 Times in 366 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

On my display the m.Zuiko lens delivers higher contrast. However it's hard to conclude from this as the light conditions could differ a bit between the photos and also since the angles of view are different it could result in more or less flares/contrast. A more fair and controlled test would have to use same focal length and aperture e.g. 50mm F/2.8 for both lenses, maybe same scene stopped down and also ensure that the same light elements are captured. Tripod?
__________________

My Gallery on 500px
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 17th June 2019
pandora's Avatar
pandora pandora is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 16,647
Thanks: 891
Thanked 1,543 Times in 1,494 Posts
Likes: 1,999
Liked 4,374 Times in 1,975 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

Otto, yes, tad higher contrast.

Dr Mark, Ageed, quite tricky.

Pdk42, thoughtful comments. The scene below was shot an hour or so earlier. Agree, IQ indistinguishable, other factors you mention maybe more important.

MJ224, The images below are hard to separate as far as IQ goes. No PP in either, light identical, two or three minutes apart.

Beag' For a fair and more controlled test I will apply your suggested settings on the next.

Otto, both lenses were used on the M1.2. The E-3 was not used.

Tordan58, both lenses are m.Zuiko.

Many thanks to you all for your observations and thoughts.
The images below were shot deliberately in direct, low contrast lighting at virtually the same focal length.
My own conclusion is that the Pro has somewhat more contrast as evidenced by cloud shadows on yon mountain and other elements. EXIF data intact.



__________________
My Flickr

* mark * Wangaratta, Victoria, Australia **
The OM-D E-M1 Mark II * OM-D M5 MkII * XZ2 * XZ1 * E3
On post-processing: The camera kneads the dough, PP bakes the bread - Greenhill
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 17th June 2019
Phill D's Avatar
Phill D Phill D is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 9,961
Thanks: 1,200
Thanked 1,435 Times in 1,325 Posts
Likes: 1,080
Liked 2,417 Times in 1,139 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

For me the IQ differences are pretty insignificant, they are both very good. Just wondered why you were so concerned about it Mark?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 17th June 2019
pandora's Avatar
pandora pandora is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 16,647
Thanks: 891
Thanked 1,543 Times in 1,494 Posts
Likes: 1,999
Liked 4,374 Times in 1,975 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

Phill, as both lenses have comparable focal lengths, I needed to know how they performed in the situations illustrated, whether one is better than the other, and in what respect, etc. For example, I think the SWD may be better for portraiture.
__________________
My Flickr

* mark * Wangaratta, Victoria, Australia **
The OM-D E-M1 Mark II * OM-D M5 MkII * XZ2 * XZ1 * E3
On post-processing: The camera kneads the dough, PP bakes the bread - Greenhill
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 17th June 2019
Phill D's Avatar
Phill D Phill D is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 9,961
Thanks: 1,200
Thanked 1,435 Times in 1,325 Posts
Likes: 1,080
Liked 2,417 Times in 1,139 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

It would be interesting to see the differences if you do a portrait back to back comparison.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 17th June 2019
pdk42's Avatar
pdk42 pdk42 is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Leamington Spa
Posts: 5,710
Thanks: 370
Thanked 1,257 Times in 942 Posts
Likes: 150
Liked 6,007 Times in 1,955 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

Worst characteristic of the 40-150 IMHO is the harsh OOF blur. For portraits, I think that would matter.
__________________
Paul
E-M1ii, Pen-F and too many lenses
flickr
Portfolio Site
Instagram
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 18th June 2019
pandora's Avatar
pandora pandora is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 16,647
Thanks: 891
Thanked 1,543 Times in 1,494 Posts
Likes: 1,999
Liked 4,374 Times in 1,975 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phill D View Post
It would be interesting to see the differences if you do a portrait back to back comparison.
I will try and arrange that with one of my grandkids whenever I can get hold of one. Grandkids have about as much interest in participating in Granddads' photography as cats have in swimming lessons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pdk42 View Post
Worst characteristic of the 40-150 IMHO is the harsh OOF blur. For portraits, I think that would matter.
Paul, what do you mean by "harsh OOF blur" (which I haven't noticed). Should I be looking more critically?

It is mid morning, cold, rain predicted, so I'm heading out to continue the comparison under different light altogether using Beag's suggested setup for the Pro.

EDIT: SEE POST #16 FOR TEST UPDATE
__________________
My Flickr

* mark * Wangaratta, Victoria, Australia **
The OM-D E-M1 Mark II * OM-D M5 MkII * XZ2 * XZ1 * E3
On post-processing: The camera kneads the dough, PP bakes the bread - Greenhill
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 18th June 2019
Phill D's Avatar
Phill D Phill D is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 9,961
Thanks: 1,200
Thanked 1,435 Times in 1,325 Posts
Likes: 1,080
Liked 2,417 Times in 1,139 Posts
Re: 40-150 Pro vs. 50-200 SWD

What Paul is talking about are the occasions when the 40-150 delivers really harsh or what I call nervous bokeh. If you remember I warned you about it before you got the lens. It's the only thing I don't like about that lens and it worries me that adding the x2 TC when it comes out will make it worse. We'll just have to see. A word of warning though DON'T go looking for it or you will see it all to often and it could spoil some of your best shots. Best if you don't notice it. Don't get me wrong the lens can deliver nice oof backgrounds but just with some certain subject to background distances and very busy backgrounds they do look horrible. Actually it's not just specific to this lens as I think the 50-200 does it too but just not quite as pronounced. Sigma make specific lenses called Art lenses that are designed specifically to show smoother oof areas. If Oly brought out a mk2 version of the lens designed in this way I'd buy one in a shot as it's just so annoying when it occurs especially on such an expensive lens. As Paul said it's probably going to be more noticeable as an issue doing portraits. I don't think anyone has done a systematic assessment of the issue, it would be really useful if they had.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:41 PM.


© The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger