Thanks, Cdouhitt. Fabulous pictures. That's my other thought is the EM1ii. Problem is I like the GX-8 so much I want to keep shooting with it. Other than my problems addressed in the thread, it produces fantastic pictures. We'll see what happens.

Thank you all for your thoughts. Many good ideas and some here-to-fore lacking new knowledge. Don't have time to post example pictures now, but I think the drift of the comments is accurate without actually seeing them; maybe I'll post tomorrow.

Let me respond randomly to some of the questions asked: Morrison 1116- I am not still getting soft at high shutter speeds, so I think focus is fine. Also, it is excellent with other lenses and shorter focal lengths on both cameras. Brucej67- I like the confirmation that your combination works. Several people- Thanks for the thought that IS is actually counterproductive at high shutter speeds; I was unaware of that. Cdouthitt- Thanks for your thoughts; I use an old Nikon 5100 and a Panasonic GX8, which takes fantastic pictures most of the time. It is the 100 - 300, which does seem to be a little soft anyway at the long end. I have some very sharp pictures with that lens at shorter lengths. That is part off the dilemma...do I buy the quite expensive 100 - 400, which is apparently fantastic. I wouldn't mind the expense if it produced the desired result, but sure would feel stupid spending the money if I still couldn't get the shots I want. I will probably rent it somewhere along the line and see.

Again, thank you everyone. I appreciate the help.

Thanks for the quick responses. I didn't know about potential dynamic range reduction, and will monitor same. I have done the tripod tests, finding great improvement, but still not tack sharp. The high shutter speeds actually yielded better images than the tripod. I think I need to try a 2 second delay in the tripod. I'll see about posting some images later today.

Thanks

I have recently been taking hand held eagle, wood stork, and egret pictures with medium telephoto (Nikon 55-300 and Panasonic 100-300) lenses. In most cases there is a little softness, not enough to totally ruin the picture, but not the sharpness I would like. I have experimented to try to determine if the problem is focus, camera shake, or inferior lens. Depending on the answer, the solution could be new camera, new lens, or always use tripod. I would hate to lay out the money only to find I have diagnosed incorrectly and there is no improvement.

I have concluded that the problem is camera shake (I have reasonably steady hands, but am 72, so not perfect). With cameras like the new Olympus advertising 5.5 "stops" of IS, it occurred to me why not just move the ISO 3 or 4 stops in my existing cameras and gain the resulting shutter speed. If my camera and lens IS is 2 or 3, maybe that would accomplish the same thing. There is no appreciable noise at 800 or even 1600, especially in sun light. I tried it and got much improved results. (I was already shooting at 1/effective focal length or more, so the above was at numbers like 1/3000.)

So my question is what am I missing? The above seems way too simple. Is there a direct correlation with shutter speed and image stabilization, or is something else going on? Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

So, what am I missing?

Both Photos and iPhoto will open NEF files. Even though iPhoto and Aperture are no longer supported, Apple supports new RAW formats in its routine updates of the operating system, which then allows Photos, Aperture, and iPhoto to read them.

I went off Aperture a year ago anticipating eventual non-ability to open, but it still functions just fine with Sierra.

Do you have a "review" setting of some sort turned on? If so, the camera may be showing the shot you just took for a second or two, thus blocking out the viewfinder.

Make sure to follow and let us know when someone gets it right

I do pretty much what you propose, and it works very well. I import my RAW pictures (Capture One instead of Lightroom, but same difference), process them, and then export as JPEG's. I put about 1/3 of the JPEG's into Photos and thus I have all the organization, search capabilities, albums, location, etc, and most important, it syncs across all my and my wife's iPhones and iPads. That way, at any time, I can access to show someone or see myself any picture.

There are iPhone apps that will create GPX files. I use one called GPX Master. The files sync with your computer over Dropbox, and then can be synced with your photos through Lightroom or other choices if standalone programs. I use one called Photolinker, and it is excellent.

I used to attach a unit to my camera, but found it cumbersome and gave up a few years ago.

No, Photolinker is correct, and I am running it on Sierra.

I might have the name photolinker wrong, because mine runs fine on Sierra. I will look when I get home and let you know. Look in the App Store; there are several that will work or just Google geotagging software for Mac. If you do the latter, you can go on free trials and choose the one you like best.

I have given up on external units in favor of an iPhone app. There are several available for free or nominal prices. I use one called GPX Master. It will create a GPX file track of where you have been with very little battery drain. The file then syncs with your computer through Dropbox.

Then there are several programs that will match up you photos with the locations on the GPX file. Lightroom includes this function and many other pp programs (Apple Photos, Aperture, for example) at least allow you to geotag manually by dragging pictures onto a map. I use a standalone program called Photolinker, which does a fantastic job.

As with iPhoto or Aperture, Photos allows you to store them in the "proprietary" folder by importing them into Photos, or they can remain in the folders on the computer and be "referenced" in Photos. Either way, Photos organizes them all by date, searchable by location, file name, title, keywords, etc.

In your situation, it probably defaulted to storing in Photos, which you can change in Preferences. It is very simple to get at them. Simply select the pictures you want, right click, and select export original, and a copy will go wherever you want. Sounds like you are better off importing straight to Lightroom.

Yes. It processes RAW, and Apple very quickly updates to accommodate new camera models.

Photos is absolutely wonderful for what it is. Editing is quite basic, but also a lot better than people realize. Color, light, etc all expand into several individual sliders that can be adjusted. For those who don't want to get too deeply into post processing, it is excellent.

Where it really shines is organization. One can easily keyword, title, geotag, caption, etc in batches or picture by picture. The search function is almost instant after typing in just a few letters. The "Places" function shows a map of the world with all your pictures located, which expands out as much as you want, right down to whether the picture was taken in your front yard or back. And pleas try the "memories" function, which puts forth a new small collage around a different central theme every day. A nice touch.

I personally use other software for post processing (Capture One) but love Photos for its other features.