More thoughts on the M.Zuiko 150-600mm, Bird Photography, and Processing

1982 words; 12 photographs; 10-minute read

Spring migration is upon us here in southern Ontario. The warblers and many others are passing through and our summer residents have arrived and have begun nesting — a great time to be photographing with a long telephoto.

In previous years, I’ve used the M.Zuiko 100-400mm with great success, though rarely as close as I’d like to be. Aside from the greater magnification, I’m really appreciating how much faster I can lock onto a distant bird with the 150-600.

Zoom Technique

For one thing, the AF is faster in acquiring sharp focus. It’s almost instantaneous, at least more instantaneous than the 100-400. However, the real game changer has been the zoom itself.

My friend Tom Stirr, from SmallSensorPhotography.com, told me about this. On the right side of the lens is a tension setting. Aside from “Lock” (helpful when carrying the lens), there are two options: Tight (T) and Loose (L). On the ‘Loose” setting, the lens becomes a very smooth-operating push-pull zoom, a style I haven’t used since the 1970s.

Finding a small bird in a mess of tree branches and leaves is a challenge. What I’ve learned is that I can instantly locate the bird at 150mm or 200mm, then quickly push to zoom in. As I zoom, AF is acquired and maintained and I am already making exposures.

In the second it takes to do this, some birds will already be moving again, so a quick pull back to re-acquire the bird is followed by a quick push forward while autofocussing and exposing. Using this technique has easily doubled my capture and keeper rate. I can pick-up a bird much faster and have that crucial first exposure made in no time.

Aside from quick AF, the other feature that has allowed a higher success rate is SyncIS. The three-EV advantage in stabilization over the 100-400 is not only evident, it’s obvious, and it’s instant. The moment I depress the shutter release halfway, everything freezes and AF is locked on.

Zooming to 600mm also means I am putting more pixels on the bird, significantly more. This, combined with improvements in sharpness and stability have also contributed to a higher success rate.

I often have half a dozen or more tack-sharp frames to choose from. From there, it’s just a matter of selecting the best body posture of the bird. Even then, I find I’m deleting dozens of sharp frames I would have agonized to capture just a few years ago.

Am I successful all the time? Hell no! I have hundreds of duds with every shoot. They are mostly the result of a three things: (1) me not keeping a close enough eye on shutter speed as I move from sun to shade (I’m not a fan of AutoISO); (2) me using poor technique in not using my arms as a tripod; and (3) poor AF acquisition.

AF Fine Tuning

Yes, the AF is not 100% perfect. With Subject Tracking set to Bird, the system is looking for an eye, so a Brown Creeper on tree bark results in slightly inaccurate AF when the eye is not visible. Twigs and thin branches are also a problem. I have a couple of dozen frames of the Cerulean Warbler that are almost in focus. But with the eye partially hidden behind a twig, the AF had trouble.

Up to now, I’ve had the OM-1 set to average ‘stickiness’ or Sensitivity. This is a function that determines how well the AF will stay with a moving subject when other things, like twigs and branches, get in the way. I’ve just decrease the Sensitivity to –2 to improve the stickiness (OM-1 Mark 1 Manual p85). On my OM-1 Mark1, it’s at Menu > AF > 3. AF > C-AF Sensitivity. If you’ve saved settings as a Custom mode (e.g. C1, C2, C3 or C4), don’t forget to update it to save any changes: Menu > Camera1 > 1.Basic Settings > Custom Mode > Select the mode > Assign > Set.

A note on weight

Yes, I’m feeling it, though I’m fine when I’m out shooting. For example, on Friday, we were out for a few hours and except for a bit of stiffness in my wrist, I was fine. Earlier in the week I was out for four hours and began to feel it in my left wrist. A few hours afterwards, I could feel it in my shoulders. This was likely from trying to hold steady for about 15 minutes while focussed on a distant swallow, using PreCapture while waiting for it to take off. And yes, I need to get to the gym more often!

So, while my muscles are recognizing the weight difference, I can swing the camera + HLD-10 + lens combo from being cradled in my left arm to acquiring focus in seconds. I’m not quite at the speed of Chuck Connors (for those old enough to remember The Rifleman), but I’m getting there.

Close Focus

I’ve always enjoyed photographing close-ups of wildflowers with a long telephotos. It was such a revelation 25 years ago using the E-1 followed by the E-30 with the 50-200 at 200mm (400mm efov). The 100-400 on the OM-1 has been equally useful. And the 150-600 takes it up a significant notch or two.

I find the working distance ideal as I don’t feel the same need to leave the pathway for a particular flower. But the real improvement has come from, again, SyncIS, providing noticeably greater stabilization. It’s rated at +6EV at 150mm and +5EV at 600mm. And it works! The photo above was made at 1/30 at an equivalent focal length of 1200mm.

The Lightroom Factor

I really need to give a shout out to Lightroom and its ability to denoise. Most images could be presented with no noise reduction, particularly full frame images downsized for online viewing. However, when I’ve had to crop, which is necessary even at 1200mm equivalent, noise is more noticeable. Once I’ve made my final selections for processing, I prefer to denoise.

On the laptop version of Lightroom Cloud, I created a couple of Denoise pre-sets for ISO 800 and ISO 3200:

• ISO 800: Denoise = 50; Sharpening = 80; Masking = 30; Clarity. 10
• ISO 3200: Denoise = 75; Sharpening = 100; Masking = 30; Clarity = 10.

Each of these gets me in the right ball park. If the bird is smaller in the frame then I will increase Denoise and Sharpening.

DxO PureRAW does a slightly better job of denoising, and I use it in two situations:

1. When feather details are being masked by the denoising in Lightroom; e.g. on the Rose-breasted Grosbeak below; and
2. When the photo is to be viewed at a size larger than on-screen; e.g. as a print or printed in a book.

Otherwise, I stick to Lightroom Denoise and carefully check to ensure the edges aren’t sloppy.

The other advantage of Lightroom is that I can use masks to subtly give better background separation. Masking in Lightroom intuitive, The masks are also saved as part of the instruction set for each raw image, so they can be edited at any time in the future. I’ve often worked on an image, left it, then came back to it days or weeks later and noticed some tweaks needed to keep it natural-looking.

My masking varies with the image. Sometimes it’s a Radial Mask on the bird then Duplicated and Inverted for the background. Other times, it’s a Subject Mask, Duplicated and Inverted for the background. And, sometimes I just use a Background Mask. Typically, each of the masks will need some touching up, but that’s easily done with “Add > Brush” and/or “Subtract > Brush. Holding the Option key (Windows, Alt) allows you to quickly make brush adjustments; e.g. with an ’Add’ brush, Opt/Alt subtracts anything you’ve added in error, like trying to stay within the lines!

My edits are subtle. The bird or flower should look the same as it did when I photographed it.

I don’t have a problem removing small distractions using the Remove tool; it’s better than pulling grass or breaking twigs. I use a combination of Remove, Clone, and Heal in that order. My goal is always to do this without the aid of AI Removal and so far this year, I’ve needed it only twice. When I’ve had to resort to using AI Removal, I clearly state this when the image is shown, as in the examples above.

I know, Lightroom is a subscription, but I look at it this way. The Lightroom (only) plan without Photoshop costs me CA$150/year. Back in the closing days of film, $150 would have been the cost of 5 rolls of 36exp. slides purchased, processed and mounted. Five rolls. 180 frames. Or about a month or two of photography, back then. And, with Lightroom, the labelling is done for me.

When you want to go beyond the simple edits provided by the free apps, it’s going to cost you. The difference between anything else and Lightroom is chump change in the grand scheme of the cost of photography—less than half a tank of gas at today’s prices.

If you want to learn the ins and outs of Lightroom, I might be able to help you. No, I don’t make technique videos, but send me an email and we can talk about where you’re at and what you want to achieve.

Thanks for reading. Be sure to add a LIKE, continue the discussion by adding your COMMENTS, questions or observations, and feel free to SHARE this post with others. 

NOTE: This blog is completely free and does not include any commercial affiliate links. To help keep it free, consider buying me a coffee . . .