Airshow with an Oly EM1, 40-150 Pro + MC14

Messages
6,469
Name
Ned
Edit My Images
Yes
I believe quite a few people wonder if this is a decent enough combo for an airshow vis-a-vis the AF speed so I thought I'd post my experience at Bournemouth Air Festival.

On the whole the setup performed fine and clearly my technique was the limiting factor but here are a few points:

AF acquisition was acceptable and once AF locked on it generally stayed there, not as quick as my D610 but then that was never 100% either.
I missed a few flybys as the lens has a habit of stalling at close focus when hunting against an empty sky, it was very hazy which didn't help.
As a result of this I would quite frequently pre-focus on one of the Navy ships
Using a slow shutter speed for blur props/rotors often meant dropping to f/22 which isn't ideal from a diffraction point of view so maybe a ND filter would be useful (although panning probably has as much an effect on sharpness so maybe not.
420mm (equivalent) is not really long enough for real close ups, certainly here at Bournemouth
9 FPS is great when trying to get blurred props as usually at least one of a seconds worth will be sharp
The white balance was constantly too cool, not sure why and not something I normally see with Olympus.
The new de-haze feature on Lightroom is really rather good :D

Anyway, here's a few shots:

1
Black Cats by Ned Awty, on Flickr

2
Red Arrows Smoking by Ned Awty, on Flickr

3
Red Arrows Split by Ned Awty, on Flickr

4
Bournemouth Air Festival by Ned Awty, on Flickr

5
Vulcan Bomber by Ned Awty, on Flickr

6
Sally B by Ned Awty, on Flickr

7
Typhoon by Ned Awty, on Flickr

8
Typhoon Landscape by Ned Awty, on Flickr

There are a few more on Flickr :)
 
Last edited:
Good set and numbers 2 and 3 for me are excellent.
 
Good set, great timing on no 3 and the hazy conditions certainly showed the "candles" lit on the Typhoon!
Cheers
 
Thanks peeps :)

Good set, great timing on no 3

That's where 9 fps helps :D

I've gone back and taken a look at my shots from last year, similar conditions (a bit less haze) with a D610 and a mix of 28-300 and 80-200+1.4TC (and 28-300+TC) and it is clear that the texture detail on the planes is definitely better with the Nikon but I suppose that isn't surprising. One thing is though, there doesn't seem to be that much difference between the percentage of shots where the focus is nailed - with the D610 they can look good until you look at 100%, with the EM1 they either look good or don't.
 
Have you got / had a 75-300 Ned and if so how does it compare ?

I'm wanting to upgrade so would have to sell mine but am not sure if it's worth the extra £600

This was taken at Eastbourne

hawk t2 by damianmkv, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Have you got / had a 75-300 Ned and if so how does it compare ?

I'm wanting to upgrade so would have to sell mine but am not sure if it's worth the extra £600

This was taken at Eastbourne

hawk t2 by damianmkv, on Flickr

I haven't I'm afraid - from what I've read on the net most people who have both tend to just use the pro set.

I have to say though, I am not yet 100% convinced about the TC, EVERY time I use the 40-150 I am amazed about the quality - it really is that good. With the TC attached there is a a slight reduction in quality and on occasion a bit of ghosting around white subjects, only sometimes mind and only at 100% but on its own the 40-150 is so good it sticks out a bit.
 
Yeah, know exactly what you mean. It's not a terrible reduction in quality, but the naked 40-150 is so stunning, that it just looks not quite so sharp with the TC on. I find stopping down to F5.6 tends to bring the quality back up, but it's certainly useable wide open @ F4, just not as breath-taking as the naked lens.
 
Back
Top