Ahh, I've been waiting for this video! You did not disappoint me at all. I have the Oly 150-400 and love it, but as I am a tiny 84 yr old woman, I sometimes miss handheld shots just getting it in position. And there you are carrying both cameras and lenses! A few specific comments: - Sunglasses. Mine are not polarized and work just fine, but they do automatically darken a bit too much in very bright sun. If you can stand a bit of glare on shiny surfaces, you might consider switching. - Kayaking. I was terrified at first, kayaking with a $7500 lens, but your video is giving me courage. I spend a good amount of time on the water, and shooting video is part of the fun. I agree, it's not perfect when both the water and subject are moving, but not bad! - Balance with the EM1X vs the EM!iii. To reduce weight, I tried the smaller camera, but went back right away because of the balance. Seemed lighter! - Reach for wolves of Yellowstone. Perfect for shooting those little dots. Unfortunately, I, like you, was sure I had the 2.5 tc flipped on, but didn't--even though I did have the 20tc attached. Could have gotten an even closer view! When I left, and saw my mistake, I was very disappointed. :-( Some indication in the viewfinder would be lovely. - vs sony. The results that friends are getting with Sony are amazing, especially with birds in flight. The focus seems to stick on every image, vs the Oly inconsistency. But all other plusses outweigh this negative.
Joan I'm thrilled to hear about your amazing ability to still get out and have fun with your photography. I hope to be that mobile at 84. Yes, the AF in the Sony is still King but the EM1X is getting closer. Im hopeful the next firmware update will bring it closer to equality. Thanks for writing in and join gin the conservation. Alway love to hear from other in the filed.
@@danieljcox Yes, still mobile--but looking forward to getting my other hip replaced. :-) Oddly enough, I have an appointment in 45 minutes to schedule it! Thanks so much for your video. I know all too well how much work it is to create one, let alone one as beautiful as yours.
@@michaelhall2709 My secret weapon: a fitbit my employer gave me 15 years ago. I got hooked, bought a treadmill desk, and edit all my photos on it. 4-5 miles a day (including walking in nature). I swear that's what keeps me healthy. :-) Oh, and my mom lived to a hearty 97.
Thanks so much for your input Joan. Not sure why I didn't see this sooner. I agree with you on the AF superiority of the Sony cameras. Hoping Olympus can up their game in this department. But as you said, so many other benefits to the new Olympus lens. I just got back from a month in South Africa and the new lens was a dream tool for shooting from vehicles. I've also been getting some very good results on birds in flight. Not as good as my Sony gear but way better than what I was getting with my Lumix cameras. All we need now is a next-gen sensor and 50%. improvement in Predictive AF and we'll be in hog heaven. Let me know how things are going for you with your new lens.
I agree mark. The 150-400mm is out of reach for most shooters and even I had to swallow hard when I made the decision to buy mine. I've had a chance to shoot the 100-400mm and have been impressed. I think it's going to be a great option for many Olympus photographers. I actually know several people shooting the Lumix system who have switched their 100-400mm over to the Olympus lens.
With you there. This seems like a really inappropriate comparison unless you understand that the Olympus lens is like 4 times more money. That said, Sony doesn’t really have an ultra premium zoom. The only lenses in this price range are the 400/2.8 and 600/4. I’m glad he brings it up in the video. The total cost/equiv mm isn’t as different as it’d otherwise seem with 9.5 grand for OM-1 and 150-400 and 6.5 for the A7RV and 200-600 with 1.4 TC, but the huge price of the Olympus is worth considering. It’s still an incredible comparison that I’m glad happened though!
This was an excellent video! I have been using an Olympus system for quite some time, but with the uncertainty I was feeling as a result of the Olympus Imaging Division sale, when my long-in-the-tooth EM-1 finally died, I switched to a Canon EOS R for my last big camera purchase. While I do like the Canon, I routinely miss the easy handling, compact size, and versatile performance of my Olympus camera and lens kit. My Oly lenses were exceptional when it came to those three attributes, but they also excelled in the sharpness category. Right now, I am glad that I held on to my Olympus lenses, and I feel pretty confident that I will be sporting a new Olympus body at some point in the near future.
I love the Olympus system. I hope that new micro four thirds sensor makes its way to a new Olympus camera some time soon. I hope I can afford the 150-400 in the future. I am lucky enough to have found the 300mm f4 for a super cheap price. Albeit a little beat up lol.
Incidentally, I am glad the Olympus lens seems to have some edge over the Sony. Given the huge price difference in favour of the Sony, anything less would have been devastating for current and prospective Olympus users.
Excellent video, presentation and images and nice to find someone who finds value in a system that doesn't have to full-frame to achieve a good review.
When I started getting more into wildlife photography in 2018 (Tanzanian safari), I was using my Canon 5DMIV either with 70-200 or 100-400 w TCs. Already in my early 60s, that was quite cumbersome and oftentimes not long enough. I switched to OM1.3 and EM1.X two years ago, using 40-150 and 300 w the two TCs. But similar to your “wolf dots” dilemma (I had a Dall sheep dilemma last month in AK), I was still frustrated w lack of needed reach. So I ordered 150-400 last January and just learned that it will arrive in a few days! Even though I’ve already committed to the Oly system, there are times when I’ve wondered if I should have gone the Sony route. While I too have been frustrated w the inability to wear sunglasses while using the Oly, I now am even more stoked to have the 150-400 after watching your video. Your comparison couldn’t have come at a better time for me.
@@danieljcox I started shooting hummers in our backyard with my Canon system 3 years ago, then switched to Oly system. But am so excited about having the option to zoom in even closer, especially to shoot flight sequences! On a related note, Daniel, I'm thinking of going to Yellowstone in the winter for wildlife photography, especially the wolves. Any thoughts? Should I hire a local guide? Not sure if we should be planning to hike hip deep in the snow or if we'll be able to find enough wildlife from close to the roads. I would greatly appreciate any tips and thoughts.
@@dogs4399 regarding wolves in Yellowstone. Your absolute best option is from the road or the common viewing areas the wolf watchers use. That's where I shot all my footage. Keep in mind I was there for three months. They aren't easy and you have to understand it's all about having luck on your side. I really don't see any benefit to hiring a guide.There are only so many places you can access in the winter and you can see them on your own. Just my two cents.
@@dogs4399 I agree with Daniel about going it on your own. I just went to YTN during late May into June for a few weeks. I went with private guide once and regretted spending my $! I had better experiences when I was on my own. I think the guide would make sense if you do those very expensive 7-10 workshops. I have never done it so this is purely my assumption. Luck has a lot more do with it so you would need be there long enough to get good quality images. No one can predict how long, but the longer the better obviously. wolvesmiss enjoy
@@danieljcox Many thx to you and Narin! I hear you. I've sort of made peace with not being a local wildlife shooter or a pro who can spend 3 months there.
With respect I would say that I did compare the Oly to the Sony 100-400 for a week. My own thoughts match your impressions about balance. The Oly is much easier to hold and haul. The handling of the Sony lens and body is just harder on the hands and arms due precisely to those factors. Great real world review
This was, most likely, the finest presentation/comparison of lenses... I bought the em1m2 and the 40-150 a few years back... and really have enjoyed it. But I'm looking to amp up the reach. And yes, my polarized prescription sunglasses are a real problem for me as well. Well done, Daniel.
I happen to have the OM-1 along with the 100-400 Olympus lens. it's razor sharp throughout its entire range. I tried a Sony A7RV recently along with their 200-600 lens. it was NO sharper then the Olympus and was a ton heavier to deal with. Also the image stabilization isn't even close. I agree the IBIS Olympus has is top notch.
Foregone conclusion about the kit, but the B-roll and well-presented natural beauty made this an enjoyable film. Let's hear some more about the kayak as a photographic tool please.
Thanks Daniel for the excellent comparison and for your opinions. I think it's great to have good alternatives. It seems to me that we recently experienced a Hype Full Frame that tried to almost impose the idea that all photographers would need an FF camera and Bokeh! Naturally, the universe of us photographers is huge and very diverse! Some need huge performance in low light, some don't! Some need extreme performance for BiF, some don't! Others need portability or better stabilization! Like you I use different systems (in my case Nikon, Panasonic and Olympus) and I love them all. but I use my Olympus em1 iii and the trio leica 100-400 and Oly 40-150 and 300mm f4 (+ TC) 90% of the time! I would really like to see faster development in AF and I would like to see new releases of MFT Cameras with new Sensors, better evf and display that show that the system is healthy and prosperous! The new 150-400 is fantastic and I will definitely order mine as soon as we get news of an e-m1x Mark ii
Wow. Nice video. Especially loved those drone shots while kayaking. What a great time to be into photography. Amazing equipment by several manufacturers.
Daniel, this was one of the best done equipment comparison videos I've seen -- very well done! Love your work, and the objectivity of your analysis is refreshing.
So happy you enjoyed the video. The hand held video was only possible due to the amazing IS in the Olympus system. You might be surprised at what you can also do.
Thanks for that! On using the Sony 200-600 with a A7r4, I have a friend who does it a lot, as there's often water between him and his subject, so walking closer has issues.... :-) Note you don't need to have the crop mode on, you can still crop 20MP (for Oly compatibility) out of a full-sized image later. On the "Sunglasses" the M1X is a LCD and won't work in one orientation as then it's crossed polarisers and blocks the light) so you need Sunglasses that aren't polarised. Most Pannys are OLEDs and should be fine, if you still see a blackout in the vertical orientation then it's an LCD with the opposite polarisation (Horiz/Vert) to the Oly. BTW this is why vertical advertising boards, that are actually LCD TVs turned 90 degrees, tend to show as black in polarised glasses, TVs and Sunglasses are designed so in the normal orientation you can see the TV. One other point - the A7r4 gives similar pixel sizes on a subject to the Oly, but (in non-crop mode - you can crop in post, as mentioned above) the FF camera gives a much wider FoV, so it's easier to locate and stay on subjects. P.S. Pixel size on subject at 20m (at longest focal length): A7r4+600mm = 0.125mm (120cm HFoV) E-M1X+450mm+1.25x = 0.123mm (64cm HFoV) R5+100-500+1.4x = 1.2556mm (103cm HFoV) P.P.S. last time I looked the price difference was huge... OM-D E-M1X $2000 - 997g Oly 150-400 $7500 - 1875g A7rIV $3000 - 665g Sony 200-600mm $1900 - 2115g BTW I don't shoot Sony and only used adapted long lenses on m43 (which are unusable at 2x crop without IBIS), so have limited skin in the game.
I agree Daniel, I wish Olympus had a way to let you know if the 1.25 is engaged or not, if I'm not stopped down I can tell by looking at the f-stop, but I stop down often!
Great video. The Olympus 150-400 will be my all time like to have lens I guess. It's cool to see this beast in the field producing great footage. Thumbs up.
The Olympus tripod collar foot has the groove, for attachment to a head with Arca-Swiss clamp, already built in. So there is no need for a lens foot Arca-Swiss plate. Sony lenses, just like Canon and Nikon lenses, require the extra lens foot. This means extra cost and a little more weight. Thank you for creating a comprehensive comparison video. Well done. I am looking forward for my 150-400mm lens to arrive.
Very good point Don. I should have mentioned this since it's one of the things I love about Olympus. It's such a common sense approach. Thanks for pointing this out.
@@danieljcox I first found the groove in the foot on the Olympus 300mm f/4 and thought it is such smart an idea. I was not aware of the M1X viewfinder not being visible while using polarized sunglasses. Take care!
well done, and thank you for this. As a hobbyist, I'm still learning constantly even basics, so watching your techniques for handling the lenses, setting up shots, etc. is both helpful and inspiring to think I can do some of this good work too!. Your work honors the outdoors... thanks!
My first real wildlife lens is the OMD 300mm. I love this lens! Atm, no plans to upgrade to the 150-400, but as i only have a em5m3, i am waiting for the new cameras or to see a price drop in used em1x prices.
The E-M5ii is a keeper, a lovely little camera. It will work Olympus extra-long lenses best but, most of my lenses are Lumix - I have been using the Sigma EX full alphabet soup Bigma 50-500 (adapted 4/3 lens) on my E-M5ii for years, ancient, very heavy, no-OIS, AF is a bit rubbish but amazing glass. The E-M5ii handles the Lumix 50-200 mk.1 very well and the mk.2 no better (the mk.1 will be cheaper used). It is not quite so good with the Lumix 100-300 which for a long time was the only game in town for extra-long MFT lenses, that lens works better on a Lumix back. The E-M5ii will handle the Leica 100-400 but no Synch-IS/Dual-IS, it is Body /or/ lens-OIS only. Put that lens on a Lumix G9 though and it becomes a hand-held monster for wildlife, the Dual2 stabilisation is amazing, the AF speed is practically instantaneous. Fast aperture? An extra-long lens has a shallow DoF and wants the aperture closed down f/8-f/12, my 400 prime has a DoF of about 15mm at 25 metres wide open. There's little point making them super-fast when we have to shut them down. Is the Lumix G9 better than any E-M1, I don't know for sure but it probably is. However my E-M5ii has better haptics than my equally capable G7 (barring the IBIS), it just feels better in my hand. I've been using MFT since 2013 thereabouts. The problem now is the top end lenses are not fully interchangeable between Olympus and Panasonic. I reckon the E-M5ii is a keeper, it will Synch-IS but only on a couple of sell a kidney Pro lenses. Raw files? Adobe does not fully support MFT raw files and has issues converting them. The 'engines' in the cameras have got to the point where they generally make a better job of it than Photoshop/LR. Do shoot raw+jpeg but you can post process the jpeg with less hassle, especially if all you want to do is crop it a bit. The raw is for if it went pear shaped, and those normally bet binned.
Thank you for such a review! I really peeked my interest when you showed and spoke about the Nikkor ai-s 80-200mm f2.8 lens. I am having a hard time find one... definitely would love to add that for my F3
This Olympus 150-400 f4.5 is truly a stupendous lens. Light weight (for the reach and zooming capability), virtually silent and fast, precise AF (with higher end Olympus bodies with phase detection AF), incredibly effective image stabilization for handheld shooting that makes not only distant wildlife photography but video recording possible. I only wish I had the budget for the lens as it certainly not one of most shooter's affordable items but I do have the older Olympus 300 f4 that appears to have all of this zoom lens's capablity except for the zooming and built-in tele converter convenience and a slightly longer reach. At about 1/3 the price of this lens it also has the same, near faultless image quality and construction.
You described it well with all the superlatives this lens deserves. It's changed the way I shoot completely; almost never using a tripod, capturing lots more video hand held, and having reach like I've never had before. This lens would change wildlife photography for everyone if photographers could get past the brain washing of needing a full frame sensor. Canon and Nikon have felt the heat from this lens and have introduced much lighter optics such as the Nikon 800mm F/5.6. And Canon has released two EXCEPTIONALLY slow zooms the 100-500mm and now the 200-800mm, due to the competition of the Olympus system. But in the end of you want THE BEST optics possible this is the lens to beat.
The sony A1 will resolve the ff/crop setting you can now switch while buffer is being written, Its a massive upgrade in how you can use the ff/crop mode. On the A1 you can move from 600+tc1.4 = 840mm to 1260mm @ 21 megapixels at 30fps in crop mode and you can change without any delay... I do wish they would make this a part of the memory recall buttons instead of a toggle but for now its ok.
The viewfinder in the Olympus uses an LCD display. These displays work entirely by exploiting linear polarisation and the effect that two linear polarisers turned 90° to each other block most light. The liquid crystals can change their plane of polarisation when an electric current passes through them. Polarising sunglasses will defeat the way an LCD display works on a basic level, in one plane. The rear display on my E-M1 goes black in portrait orientation when viewed with polarising sunglasses, for instance, and I’d imagine the same would hold for the E-M1X. The original E-M5 had an OLED rear panel which doesn't rely on polarising filters to work and so doesn't black out. The answer is OLED viewfinder and rear displays, or just use non polarising sunglasses, which seems the easier option. Great review. I do wonder though why you would have bright white paddles when trying to be stealthy with wildlife - surely a dark colour would be less like shining a strobe light at anything with eyes?
I think the easiest solution for the LCD viewfinder issue would be to use sunglasses without linear polarization. Or see if you can get sunglasses with circular polarization. Cheapest test would be to try 3D Cinema glasses and see if it works for you.
Thank you so much for the video, I really appreciate your hard work. I have been waiting for this video for months but I made the change from Olympus to Sony FE for different reasons and I was still curious about these 2 lenses.
I use polarised sunglasses for driving but non polarised for photography - for the reason you have highlighted. My eyes are quite sensitive to light, so I wear sunglasses on cloudy days: I'm sure that if I can cope with non polarised sunglasses, most other people will be able to do so. Alternatively, purchase a pair of shooters glasses with yellow lenses (I broke mine), they will reduce the glare but brighten the subject. I have owned a Sony 100 - 400mm GMaster and a Sony 200 - 600mm and used them with an A9 and A7R4. The 200 - 600mm was my firm favourite. I now use an Olympus EM1X and EM1.3 with an Olympus 300mm f4 + MC14/MC20 and a PL 200mm f2.8 + TC14. Even if I could justify the cost of a 150 - 400mm, I think it would be wasted on me.
@Peter Draper. Since you have both bodies, when you know you will need the reach and not the zoom ability which combo do you personally prefer (and why) if you please?
Nice! I have a Sony a9 & 200-600 and just picked up a Oly M-1 mkII and have wondered much of what you've answered here. I love my Sony results, but it can be such a beast to lug around handheld. I'll have to see what you think about the 100-400, as I've considered the 70-300. One thing about the a9 AF, it rarely misses and the tracking is fantastic for sports such as soccer.
Interesting comparison. I’m actually most surprised that you are happy with the Olympus camera when you also use the Sony A9. I would think the camera is the weak link in the Olympus system. Is that not your experience?
Thank you for that good comparison! I wish so much you would have talked a bit more about picture quality of the build in TC at the Olympus glass. There is so little information about it in general on the net. The Oly TC 1,4 with my 300mm f4,0 brings quiet dissapointing results. They are acceptable if you „have to make the shot“ but I try to avoid using the TC. Would have been great learning from a very very good proffessional by how much the image quality drops when turning on the build in TC at this Olympus glass. Thanks
Unfortunately the much less expensive Olympus 100-400 does not support Olympus Sync IS, for body and lens IS combined, like the much more expensive lens can. As you proved in your test here, that extra stability from the kayak would not be available with the less expensive lens without Sync IS. Am very curious what your finding will be on the less expensive lenses IS capability. It is a great time to be a photographer, that is for sure. Very curious what the new Olympus cameras will have for resolution when they finally release them. Just picture a little extra resolution behind that 150-400mm. Keep on shooting!! Love your content.
You are correct about the dual IS. My personal experience with only photos is that it made no real difference. Although I didn’t take 20000 photos in my week with both systems I was able to get to the photo much easier with the Oly system. The way I see it, if I can’t get the system (the camera and lens) pointed at the subject, what good will 2 extra stops of IS do?
@@451804 I was specifically talking about the stability for video use when he was in the kayak. I also doubt you would really notice a difference with still photography, but for video this ability is astonishing at such a long focal length hand held in a moving kayak. Quite impressive.
Did I hear that Olympus did have a sort of kludge for the 100-400 IS? The body does two axis stab whiles the lens does whatever it does. Not quite Sync IS, but still somewhat effective? Not sure about video. Will be looking forward to further impressions of the 100-400.
@@15ThousandDayCrisis Yes, but the lens does 2 axis yaw and pitch, and the body does 1 axis roll, for 3 axis IS. Rob Knight has a wonderful video demonstrating the differences in IS on the 100-400, the 12-100 Pro, and the 300 Pro ua-cam.com/video/oYU46aHQoSo/v-deo.html. The 3 axis is a little jittery. Strange that Olympus did not include Sync IS in the cheaper 100-400, Panasonic includes their Dual IS in their 100-400 with Panasonic bodies.
@@DragonfireRC indeed it is a shame. Feels like a missed opportunity. The excellent stabilisation is one of the big attractions of micro four-thirds, and Olympus in particular. Thanks for pointing out Rob’s video.
I'm a lifetime Olympus shooter and I also have Sony, including the 200-600. I was also a Canon shooter for many years and owned both the 300 f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 with the 1.4 teleconverter. A couple of years ago I was faced with a dilemma. I was shooting motorsports and the Olympus (E-M1 Mk 1 with 40-150 'plastic fantastic' or 75-300) wasn't getting results. Not the ones I really wanted, anyway. Admittedly, those are only consumer lenses and don't have IS or focus limiters but I didn't get anything like what I wanted. Nary one. Head on it was fine but I was also doing high speed pans of cars going past at 1/30 sec, which I had done before with Canon but I could not get a successful shot, no matter what I did. When you get that right it looks amazing. My mate was using a Canon EOS 5D Mk IV with a 100-400 and he was nailing virtually every shot. We traded cameras for a while with no change. Ergo, it wasn't me, it was the camera. I already had an A7R but that was far from suitable and I didn't have any lenses with it. So I was in a quandary. The E-M1 Mk 1 wasn't cutting it. So did I go for a Mk 2? No way I could afford to go with the E-M1X at that time. Did I then shell out for a 40-150mm f/2.8? Well, that doesn't have an in-built stabiliser either so I saw only limited potential there. What about the 300mm f/4? Nice lens but it costs a lot of money too. Costs were going to be pretty high with potentially no appreciably better results. IMHO, it wasn't going to be worth it. I recently got an A7 III and followed that up with the 200-600. This is the best combination I have ever used. If you pick the right AF mode you pretty well can't miss. The Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 is cheaper than the Sony 200-600 but the 200-600 is cheaper than the Olympus 300mm f/4. All of that still comes to less than the cost of the Olympus 150-400. In fact, the Olympus 150-400 is about four times the price of the Sony 200-600 in Australia. To cover the gap between, there is the Sony 70-200 f/4 OSS, which I will eventually get. I realise Sony cheated on the 200mm end (someone measured it at 164mm) but I don't see that gap as a big problem. For wildlife, I guess reach is really important. I know this because I've already tried with the 200-600. Did you try crop mode with the 200-600 when you were shooting the wolves? You would have had 1800mm but less light than the Olympus. I have used my 200-600 for shooting superb blue fairy wrens in Melbourne and the results have been very good. The lens is undoubtedly a keeper and the A7 III nailed the AF more competently than any body I've used in the past. For macro - some of the best wildlife is tiny! - Olympus has no serious competitor, IMHO. With their focus stacking capability and their 60mm f/2.8 macro, the possibilities are incredible. Nikon (Oh God, when will Americanos learn to pronounce that name correctly?) seem to be the only competitor and really only because they also have focus stacking. But macro is one area where M.43 is a better choice. It's smaller, lighter and the magnification means that 1:1 is really huge, which way offsets any disadvantages of the crop format. And of course, the long-bemoaned depth-of-field Achilles' Heel becomes its ace card. For the time being though, I'm using my old A7R with a 30 year-old, all-manual 105mm f/2.8 AI-s and it's great. But I'll never be able to do some of the things I really want until I go with the Olympus 60mm.
Excellent video I have the em1x with the 300f4 pro I keep thinking should I switch to the a9 and the 200-600. However what stops me doing this is the weight and size between the 2 systems as the Olympus does take excellent photoS. Just need to know it’s limitations.
Thanks for making this video! Not many of us have the time or money to compare these sorts of things in such detail. One question though: What kind of a case do you use for those big lenses when kayaking? I've been thinking that the Olympus 300mm f/4 IS Pro and 100-400mm f/5-6.3 would probably be the largest lenses I could use from a kayak because anything larger simply wouldn't fit in a Pelican case that could be stowed either behind the kayak seat or between my feet when paddling in rough water. I actually have a larger off brand Pelican-style case and I tried using it to carry multiple cameras and lenses so that I could switch easily, but it was just too big and the only way I could carry the case was to have it sticking up between my legs, which was kind of in the way and annoying. I suppose I could use my canoe instead, but it's a lot more trouble to mount it on the roof of my car and it is much slower than my kayak, so that limits the number of places I could take it. I suppose another option would be to just use a waterproof bag like one of the ones from SealLine, but that has no padding. Is that what you do? Or do you just trust the weather sealing and hope it doesn't get too wet? In case you're wondering, my current setup is a 40-150 f/2.8 with a 2x teleconverter. I'd love to have one of the longer telephoto lenses, but it's not in the budget at this time.
Thanks Keith. When I was shooting from the kayak I had nothing but a towel placed on the floor of my boat. Keep in mind I only went out in great weather. Meaning calm, flat, water. If I was more adventurous I would be using something like the SealLine bag you mentioned. When I do want to protect my gear from water or dust I will often use these bags from #OutdoorResearch www.outdoorresearch.com/us/beaker-dry-bag-15l-279896. They are great for rainy wet conditions on the water as well as dusty dry conditions in places such as Africa or India. They're light weight, pack down very small and are totally waterproof. Like you I prefer a kayak due to its small size and weight. It's easily handleable for one guy to get it up on his truck. My brother-in-law had a fishing kayak that was much, much heavier and gave me more room to work from but I could've never used it if I had had to haul it to the lake. It's the kayak shown the. most in the video. Beautiful boat but very heavy..
@@danieljcox Thanks for your response! I actually have some similar OR waterproof bags myself as well as some heavier duty ones from another company. I'm currently using a 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro with a 2x teleconverter for most of my wildlife photography, but I'm thinking of renting either a 100-400mm f/5-6.3 or a 300mm f/4 to photograph river otters at a lake in western Maine. The last time I saw them there was several years ago and I was using a bridge camera with a 720mm FF equivalent lens and that just wasn't enough reach, so I'm pretty sure I'll need a 2x teleconverter on a 300mm f/4 or at least a 1.4x on a 100-400. I'll be shooting from a kayak and I'll have to go through some really rough water to get there, but the cove where the otters are is pretty calm. Which lens would you recommend?
Why would you want to shoot the A7RIV in crop mode instead of cropping in post? the additional frame helps with peripheral view, you have the option of changing the composition, and the AF works better in FF mode. It would be interesting in hearing more in the realm of DR and noise in less than optimal conditions. Some photographers might not shoot under the same extreme reach conditions as you do and other factor my play a more significant role. Thank you for sharing your fantastic experience!
The reason people do it is because its reducing the file size and helps storage and buffering. Sonys have particularly monstrous files. I don't do this, I prefer the bigger file and cropping on the computer. It depends on the circumstances.
@@markrigg6623 sure, but i'd see as a pretty extreme scenario. Buffer is pretty deep in the A7RIV, you can shoot compress raw too. In other words I would not want to do that much anyway.
@@uviciveengineering9911 Absolutely. Wouldn't be a worry for me ever. Personally I don't like the idea of lossy compressed either. But lots don't care.
All factors keep bringing me back to the Oly 150-400 - but darn : it's expensive. But why would I go with a telephoto that dosnt get me in reach of my subject. I just wish my wallet could zoom to £6500 faster! Thanks for the comparison, it was really helpful.
So true Callem. I was hopeful the lesser expensive zoom, in particular the Leica 100-400mm, would produce the results I used to get with my large expensive Nikon lenses. But alas you get what you pay for. And I’m afraid it’s true for the new 150-400 mm zoom as well. The new Olympus zoom has brought the quality of my images up to a truly professional level. Where the other zooms that I was using we’re always falling short. Seems strange this old dog had to be reminded of the age-old adage you get what you pay for.
@@danieljcox In this era of gimmicks and brand pedigrees, it's not always a given - but it's certainly been my experience with Olympus: when you pay out, you are not wasting your money. The sheer portability is also a major incentive for me, I like to be able to move fast and travel light whenever possible. I only hope the corporate changes dont make these lenses harder to obtain.
@@callemdavies8992 you won't be disappointed with the ability to be mobile with this lens. The first thing people who pick it up comment on is how light it is. Very deceiving for the size. And yes, I agree with your observation on not being disappointed with Olympus optics. I've been hearing fo several people who have finally received their lenses after a long wait. It seems the new company may be catching up.
There is much (much) talk in photo forums about the virtues of "animal eye detection," with much praise bestowed on both Canon and Sony for their implementation of this technology (whereas Nikon is pilloried for not yet having this feature). The Olympus OM-D E-M1X has "bird detection AF," which does endeavor to focus on the eye of the bird. Did you use these high-tech autofocus modes during your comparison, and if so, how did they compare? And if not, why not?
Douglas, I did have the EM1X st to Bird AF. But for the life of me, I was never able to see it do anything different than what I see when I just have a group of AF spots selected. I normally would shoot with a mid-sized grouping. Sometimes I did the All AF Spots across the entire EVF. But I never saw anything that suggested it was tracking a bird. I'm wondering if there is some other setting that I have set, or not set, that affects what you see in the EVF when the Bird AF is engaged. Even though I did not see any indication of Bird AF was working, the AF worked very well. As you can see in the short little video I created from the still photos of the loon flying at the camera, it tracked the subject very well.
@@danieljcox My experience is that if Bird Tracking AF is turned on (and the focus option is set to continuous tracking), when there is a bird in the field of view a white box will form around the bird, then the green target will appear over the bird, then this target migrates towards the bird's head. Without Bird Tracking AF, one certainly can focus on and track the eye (obviously), so it is a feature that is a luxury, and it doesn't always work, and it too often works too slowly if the bird is fast-moving. On Prairie chickens in Colorado, I found it worked amazingly well; when there is vegetation around, behind, or in front of the bird, the bird location process can get fooled. That said, did the Sony camera you used feature animal eye focus tracking? It's supposed to work on the A9 and A9II. If you are happy without this feature, more power to you, but lots of people are very interested in it and when it works, it's impressive.
@@DougGreenberg50 Do I understand that you have to have "AF-C + Tracking" on? If so that may be why I've not seen the white box since I don't use "Tracking" I've not had great luck with it so I simply use AF-C. I would love to see a bird setting that really works and I'm guessing we eventually will. I don't' recall that the Sony uses an actual bird setting. All I know is when it sees a target in the sky or against a confusing background, it locks on and stays locked on. It's really, really impressive. That said, the 200-600 would not always be dead accurate as the 100-400mm I've shot in similar situations. I'm guessing it's slower motors or something. Even so the Sony with the 200-600mm does a very good job at Predictive AF. Have you ever worked with the Gunnison Sage Grouse?
@@danieljcox Ok, I am bearing in mind the context here, that you have used the OM-D E-M1X to capture thousands of terrific images without utilizing Bird Tracking AF, so clearly you don't "need" it. That said, if you indeed use the AF-C + Tracking setting you might find it fun to play with the feature a bit. As I said, in some situations it works terrifically. In my backyard this afternoon I did well with my Mourning doves and California towhees. On the other hand, the situations where the feature works the best are ones where truthfully, it is not hard to achieve eye focus using other techniques. I have not had the pleasure of photographing the Gunnison sage grouse, alas. In April I went on a terrific photo tour with Ken Archer where we captured Greater prairie chicken (my favorite), Greater sage grouse, Sharp-tailed grouse, Dusky grouse, and White-tailed ptarmigan. It was a great trip! If you are comparing these lenses and by implication, the systems associated with the lenses, do you find Sony autofocus technology superior to Olympus? I think for some photographers this would steer them towards the 200-600 even if the Olympus 150-400 is itself superior. Not me.
I just re-watched the video. Excellent work and thank you. I shoot both the em1x with the 300 F4 Pro (sometimes with the mc-14/ Also own the Pana -100-400) and the Sony A7r4 with the 200-600. it's the Bird in flight where my Sony out performs my Old. as well as the ability to recover shadows (when I miss exposure). but, still after over 142K captures (1.6 years) of using both...I reach for the Olympus system the most (mostly for recon of a new location and travel)...but, as of late...the Birds in flight CAF+TR of the Sony A1 its grabbing my attention)....I've been on the waiting list for the Olympus 150-400 F4.5Pro for over a year...and just received my notification from OM-solutions that it's getting close...so I'm really thinking hard if I should get the Old lens or get the A1...(just a few hundred $ difference)... So I wonder if you what your take would be? Again, thank you for the excellent video and look forward to taking one of your tours. (BTW Joan Robins--Absolutely inspirational!!!)
Nice work, thanks for posting. It seemed in your video that you were usually using a tripod even though you mentioned that the Olympus was easier to handhold than the Sony because of its balance. Did you usually use a tripod or did you usually go handheld? Thanks, Joan
Joan, You bring up an excellent point. I actually shoot both the Sony and the Olympus hand held most the time. The video gives a false impression-unintentionally- due to it being easier to be on tripod, when shooting video of myself. I've often thought that if I could afford a camera person to follow me around it would shot a much different way of working.
I have a philosophical question regarding the use of the Sony cameras? (I shoot a Sony A7R3.) What is the advantage of shooting a Full Frame Sony camera in "crop mode" as compared to shooting it Full Frame and then cropping in post. By capturing the entire FF image, you will be able to crop to enhance composition, you lessen the odds of accidentally cutting a part of the bird or animal off in the image. To me, I can see no value added in shooting in crop mode, I see it only as having limitations.
In theory, you're right. Cropping after the fact is one way to do it. But for me personally, I like to do as much as possible to get the image as I see it in the field. Neither one of us is wrong or right. Just two different ways of accomplishing something similar. The one other thing that I often take into consideration is how big the final file is. When I was shooting the larger full-frame bodies I hardly ever needed the monster files from a 45-50+ megapixel sensor. They take up too much room on hard drives and I'm not excited to be shooting 10-30 FPS of files that size. Cropping makes the files smaller.
This might be 'splitting hairs' a bit, but remember that in-camera cropping is always done toward the center of the frame -- which is by definition the sharpest area. When you crop in post from a full frame image, depending on your subject placement and final composition you may actually end up cropping toward the edge of the frame, which may slightly degrade sharpness. As Daniel pointed out, shooting with an in camera crop gives you the benefit of composing the way you would want the final image to look -- and it is from the center of the image circle.
In the first 3 minutes, everyone can find how J.Cox has not just the experience to talk about lenses for nature photography, but that he put more effort into these two lenses than the majority of any gear reviewer would put to either one alone, not to forget that he actually did it "out there in the field" instead just snapping something on streets in a big city or going to nearby park or zoo. At 13:00 about the polarization, there is nothing to fix. As Olympus and Panasonic use polarization in their eye viewfinder to avoid direct sunlight damaging the display and lower the reflection inside it. The Olympus is by my experience the best one to do the eye viewfinders (Fuji is best to do the waist level viewfinders) by their pleasant use, optics, colors, refresh rate as other features. They don't anymore have the highest resolution (they did at one period) but it doesn't matter as it is already since VF-4 it is more than good enough. But the problem is that people wear polarization sunglasses as that is not good anyways unless you are sailing all the time. Sunglasses anyways destroy vision over time faster than not having them, but polarization as well causes problems for photographers to lose real colors, lighting and cause other problems with the equipment. So the "Solution" is simply get a sunglasses without polarization, and better to have ones that are cutting the UV but not so much the light and especially not use any tinted ones.
At 15:30 you talk about using the crop sensor setting on the Sony for an APS-C size image. Wouldn't it be easier to apply a crop in post to the image - would not this have the same effect but also allow you more compositional latitude in the field? I'm not sure that I understand the benefit of the crop sensor setting in the field.
I've seen some comparisons that show that using the crop sensor produces higher quality images than cropping. I'd imagine it has something to do with magnifying noise, but I'm no expert.
@@alexk7046 Actually, it is quite logical -- and you are correct regarding image quality. With a larger sensor and wider field of view, any photographer worth his or her salt will want to compose the image they are shooting for the best visual impact. If you are placing a subject near one of the 'rule of thirds' intersect points and then cropping in later in post, to get a tighter composition, you are cropping away from the center of the frame -- which by definition is the sharpest part of the frame. Using a crop sensor while shooting, you are placing the subject closer to the center of the frame, and thus a sharper image should be the result.
Hello Daniel, I would love to hear your thoughts on the Olympus 100-400mm Lens. I have just bought it myself and as a bird photographer from a 4X4 wheelchair I have found it to be an exceptional lens. I did own the Panasonic equivalent, but found it to hunt too much. The 150-400 would be lovely, but because of physical limitations, it is just out of the question. This video was very enjoyable. THANK YOU cheers from Australia
Happy to add a dose of reality to the mystique of a so-called professional photographer. None of us are perfect and I'll be the first to admit it. But I do love to keep trying😊
I am really interested in the Oly for video applications, especially for when Panasonic release the GH6. I would love to see you test the Oly lens on a Panasonic body such as the G9 or GH5! What is the focus breathing like and is it par focal?🙏🏾
Another excellent video Daniel. I would purchase the Olympus 150_400 in a second if I had more confidence in OMD letting us know that there will be a successor to EM1-X
Steven, there will definitely be a new MFT high-end camera from Olympus and Panasonic, most likely around a back-side illuminated stacked CMOS sensor, which should help with the noise and increase even further the readout speed. Otherwise, bar some improvements with the AF, I can't really see what's missing from the EM-1X.
Good review. 1st time visiting your channel and Really enjoyed your review. I shoot with Olympus and being wheelchair bound and unable to work due to my condition that 150-400mm is my dream lens. I did get the 100-400mm a couple of months back and it's on my camera 80% of time yes it's a bit slow and have to bump up the ISO but with current denoise software ( I used to use topaz denoiseAI but I am an affiliate for sklyum and their recent plugin nonoise AI for Luminar Neo is fantastic and my 1st stop at denoise) its lightweight and I got my best ever photograph the other week of a Jaguar prowling. I would love to see your review of the 100-400mm.
Ahh, I've been waiting for this video! You did not disappoint me at all. I have the Oly 150-400 and love it, but as I am a tiny 84 yr old woman, I sometimes miss handheld shots just getting it in position. And there you are carrying both cameras and lenses! A few specific comments:
- Sunglasses. Mine are not polarized and work just fine, but they do automatically darken a bit too much in very bright sun. If you can stand a bit of glare on shiny surfaces, you might consider switching.
- Kayaking. I was terrified at first, kayaking with a $7500 lens, but your video is giving me courage. I spend a good amount of time on the water, and shooting video is part of the fun. I agree, it's not perfect when both the water and subject are moving, but not bad!
- Balance with the EM1X vs the EM!iii. To reduce weight, I tried the smaller camera, but went back right away because of the balance. Seemed lighter!
- Reach for wolves of Yellowstone. Perfect for shooting those little dots. Unfortunately, I, like you, was sure I had the 2.5 tc flipped on, but didn't--even though I did have the 20tc attached. Could have gotten an even closer view! When I left, and saw my mistake, I was very disappointed. :-( Some indication in the viewfinder would be lovely.
- vs sony. The results that friends are getting with Sony are amazing, especially with birds in flight. The focus seems to stick on every image, vs the Oly inconsistency. But all other plusses outweigh this negative.
Joan I'm thrilled to hear about your amazing ability to still get out and have fun with your photography. I hope to be that mobile at 84. Yes, the AF in the Sony is still King but the EM1X is getting closer. Im hopeful the next firmware update will bring it closer to equality. Thanks for writing in and join gin the conservation. Alway love to hear from other in the filed.
@@danieljcox Yes, still mobile--but looking forward to getting my other hip replaced. :-) Oddly enough, I have an appointment in 45 minutes to schedule it! Thanks so much for your video. I know all too well how much work it is to create one, let alone one as beautiful as yours.
@@joanrob1 You are, if I may say so, one amazing 84 year-old woman. I’m twenty years-plus your junior, and your energy and dedication put me to shame.
@@michaelhall2709 My secret weapon: a fitbit my employer gave me 15 years ago. I got hooked, bought a treadmill desk, and edit all my photos on it. 4-5 miles a day (including walking in nature). I swear that's what keeps me healthy. :-) Oh, and my mom lived to a hearty 97.
Thanks so much for your input Joan. Not sure why I didn't see this sooner. I agree with you on the AF superiority of the Sony cameras. Hoping Olympus can up their game in this department. But as you said, so many other benefits to the new Olympus lens. I just got back from a month in South Africa and the new lens was a dream tool for shooting from vehicles. I've also been getting some very good results on birds in flight. Not as good as my Sony gear but way better than what I was getting with my Lumix cameras. All we need now is a next-gen sensor and 50%. improvement in Predictive AF and we'll be in hog heaven. Let me know how things are going for you with your new lens.
Looking forward to your thoughts on the Oly 100-400 , a lens that a lot more people can afford to purchase
I agree mark. The 150-400mm is out of reach for most shooters and even I had to swallow hard when I made the decision to buy mine. I've had a chance to shoot the 100-400mm and have been impressed. I think it's going to be a great option for many Olympus photographers. I actually know several people shooting the Lumix system who have switched their 100-400mm over to the Olympus lens.
Fan of Olympus all my life. This video confirms my belief - they make the best photographic equipment. Thanks Dan.
I love my E-M1X and my beloved Olympus M.ZUIKO Digital ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS Pro lens. A perfect combination
Great video Daniel. I've enjoyed listening to your thoughts on the two lenses, as well as see all the great locations you visited.
Good to see your comment here, the man who convinced me to buy an Olympus!
Thank you Mathieu, I enjoy your work as well. I appreciate yo stopping by to join the conversation.
Mathieu and Daniel are among my favourite reviewers on the whole internet. Thanks for your great reviews!
@@lucasthecurious1189 very kind of you Lucas.
Thanks for this honest comparison between 2 capable systems!
The price difference of these two lenses are so big that it makes the Sony A1 seem cheap.
With you there. This seems like a really inappropriate comparison unless you understand that the Olympus lens is like 4 times more money. That said, Sony doesn’t really have an ultra premium zoom. The only lenses in this price range are the 400/2.8 and 600/4. I’m glad he brings it up in the video. The total cost/equiv mm isn’t as different as it’d otherwise seem with 9.5 grand for OM-1 and 150-400 and 6.5 for the A7RV and 200-600 with 1.4 TC, but the huge price of the Olympus is worth considering. It’s still an incredible comparison that I’m glad happened though!
This was an excellent video! I have been using an Olympus system for quite some time, but with the uncertainty I was feeling as a result of the Olympus Imaging Division sale, when my long-in-the-tooth EM-1 finally died, I switched to a Canon EOS R for my last big camera purchase. While I do like the Canon, I routinely miss the easy handling, compact size, and versatile performance of my Olympus camera and lens kit. My Oly lenses were exceptional when it came to those three attributes, but they also excelled in the sharpness category. Right now, I am glad that I held on to my Olympus lenses, and I feel pretty confident that I will be sporting a new Olympus body at some point in the near future.
I love the Olympus system. I hope that new micro four thirds sensor makes its way to a new Olympus camera some time soon. I hope I can afford the 150-400 in the future. I am lucky enough to have found the 300mm f4 for a super cheap price. Albeit a little beat up lol.
hope you can afford the lens in your 80s
This is my most anticipated video of all time. I look forward to watching it and rewatching. Thanks for all of your efforts in putting this together!
Wow Thomas, I hope it doesn't let you down. Im very grateful for your enthusiasm and kind words. Be well and stay healthy.
Definitely did not disappoint! Thanks for your observations and sharing your extensive experience! I always thoroughly enjoy your videos.
@@allenthomas4280 thanks for the kind words Allen.
I'm a bit of a design geek, and I like the look of the Olympus combo so much. Just a beautifully designed thing.
Thanks for the excellent video and all the work you did for us.
Incidentally, I am glad the Olympus lens seems to have some edge over the Sony. Given the huge price difference in favour of the Sony, anything less would have been devastating for current and prospective Olympus users.
Really enjoyed this! A Oly 100-400 comparison would be awesome
Agréé!
Great video, lots to think about. Looking forward to any further thoughts you have about this lens and also the new 100-400.
A very impressive comparison. Thank you.
That Olympus combo is amazing! Great video Mr. Cox. 👍
Looks like you had a wonderful 18 months and captured some wonderful photos and video. Thanks for sharing.
Wow, the Olympus handheld video was awesome.
Jaw dropping... what I missed is wolf shot with Olympus and handheld kayaking video with Sony
Excellent video, presentation and images and nice to find someone who finds value in a system that doesn't have to full-frame to achieve a good review.
When I started getting more into wildlife photography in 2018 (Tanzanian safari), I was using my Canon 5DMIV either with 70-200 or 100-400 w TCs. Already in my early 60s, that was quite cumbersome and oftentimes not long enough. I switched to OM1.3 and EM1.X two years ago, using 40-150 and 300 w the two TCs. But similar to your “wolf dots” dilemma (I had a Dall sheep dilemma last month in AK), I was still frustrated w lack of needed reach. So I ordered 150-400 last January and just learned that it will arrive in a few days! Even though I’ve already committed to the Oly system, there are times when I’ve wondered if I should have gone the Sony route. While I too have been frustrated w the inability to wear sunglasses while using the Oly, I now am even more stoked to have the 150-400 after watching your video. Your comparison couldn’t have come at a better time for me.
You’re gong to love the new lens Ken.
@@danieljcox I started shooting hummers in our backyard with my Canon system 3 years ago, then switched to Oly system. But am so excited about having the option to zoom in even closer, especially to shoot flight sequences!
On a related note, Daniel, I'm thinking of going to Yellowstone in the winter for wildlife photography, especially the wolves. Any thoughts? Should I hire a local guide? Not sure if we should be planning to hike hip deep in the snow or if we'll be able to find enough wildlife from close to the roads. I would greatly appreciate any tips and thoughts.
@@dogs4399 regarding wolves in Yellowstone. Your absolute best option is from the road or the common viewing areas the wolf watchers use. That's where I shot all my footage. Keep in mind I was there for three months. They aren't easy and you have to understand it's all about having luck on your side. I really don't see any benefit to hiring a guide.There are only so many places you can access in the winter and you can see them on your own. Just my two cents.
@@dogs4399 I agree with Daniel about going it on your own. I just went to YTN during late May into June for a few weeks. I went with private guide once and regretted spending my $! I had better experiences when I was on my own. I think the guide would make sense if you do those very expensive 7-10 workshops. I have never done it so this is purely my assumption.
Luck has a lot more do with it so you would need be there long enough to get good quality images. No one can predict how long, but the longer the better obviously.
wolvesmiss
enjoy
@@danieljcox Many thx to you and Narin! I hear you. I've sort of made peace with not being a local wildlife shooter or a pro who can spend 3 months there.
With respect I would say that I did compare the Oly to the Sony 100-400 for a week. My own thoughts match your impressions about balance. The Oly is much easier to hold and haul. The handling of the Sony lens and body is just harder on the hands and arms due precisely to those factors.
Great real world review
Great comparison and loved the kayaking and paddling. Look forward to 100-400 video when it's convenient.
Terrific review and very encouraging for the M4/3. Your image of the deer at the end along with all your photographs are wonderful. Thank you.
You are so lucky
Can't wait for the oly 100-400mm video
This was, most likely, the finest presentation/comparison of lenses... I bought the em1m2 and the 40-150 a few years back... and really have enjoyed it. But I'm looking to amp up the reach. And yes, my polarized prescription sunglasses are a real problem for me as well.
Well done, Daniel.
I happen to have the OM-1 along with the 100-400 Olympus lens. it's razor sharp throughout its entire range. I tried a Sony A7RV recently along with their 200-600 lens. it was NO sharper then the Olympus and was a ton heavier to deal with. Also the image stabilization isn't even close. I agree the IBIS Olympus has is top notch.
Foregone conclusion about the kit, but the B-roll and well-presented natural beauty made this an enjoyable film. Let's hear some more about the kayak as a photographic tool please.
Thank you Daniel, very nice comparison and great images !
Thanks richard.
Thanks Daniel for the excellent comparison and for your opinions. I think it's great to have good alternatives. It seems to me that we recently experienced a Hype Full Frame that tried to almost impose the idea that all photographers would need an FF camera and Bokeh! Naturally, the universe of us photographers is huge and very diverse! Some need huge performance in low light, some don't! Some need extreme performance for BiF, some don't! Others need portability or better stabilization! Like you I use different systems (in my case Nikon, Panasonic and Olympus) and I love them all. but I use my Olympus em1 iii and the trio leica 100-400 and Oly 40-150 and 300mm f4 (+ TC) 90% of the time! I would really like to see faster development in AF and I would like to see new releases of MFT Cameras with new Sensors, better evf and display that show that the system is healthy and prosperous! The new 150-400 is fantastic and I will definitely order mine as soon as we get news of an e-m1x Mark ii
I ordered my Oly 150-400 lens for my M1X over a month ago. I was told I probably won't get it until around January 2022. The suspense is killing me!
And yet, he had to use the 150 400, as the 100 400 wasn't available. Weird world 😀
Awesome work. A true long term test. Looking forward to the Olympus 100-400 comparison!
Those were some fantastic images and footage. Thanks for sharing!
Wow. Nice video. Especially loved those drone shots while kayaking. What a great time to be into photography. Amazing equipment by several manufacturers.
Daniel, this was one of the best done equipment comparison videos I've seen -- very well done! Love your work, and the objectivity of your analysis is refreshing.
Same weight…but $5,500 more for the Olympus vs the Sony 200-600?
Wonderful comparison - thank you so much.
Thank you very much for the vdo, great photos and vdo.
The handheld vdo quality was amazing... I could not hold smoothly like that ....
So happy you enjoyed the video. The hand held video was only possible due to the amazing IS in the Olympus system. You might be surprised at what you can also do.
Thank you Sir, Great video
Thanks for that!
On using the Sony 200-600 with a A7r4, I have a friend who does it a lot, as there's often water between him and his subject, so walking closer has issues.... :-)
Note you don't need to have the crop mode on, you can still crop 20MP (for Oly compatibility) out of a full-sized image later.
On the "Sunglasses" the M1X is a LCD and won't work in one orientation as then it's crossed polarisers and blocks the light) so you need Sunglasses that aren't polarised. Most Pannys are OLEDs and should be fine, if you still see a blackout in the vertical orientation then it's an LCD with the opposite polarisation (Horiz/Vert) to the Oly. BTW this is why vertical advertising boards, that are actually LCD TVs turned 90 degrees, tend to show as black in polarised glasses, TVs and Sunglasses are designed so in the normal orientation you can see the TV.
One other point - the A7r4 gives similar pixel sizes on a subject to the Oly, but (in non-crop mode - you can crop in post, as mentioned above) the FF camera gives a much wider FoV, so it's easier to locate and stay on subjects.
P.S. Pixel size on subject at 20m (at longest focal length):
A7r4+600mm = 0.125mm (120cm HFoV)
E-M1X+450mm+1.25x = 0.123mm (64cm HFoV)
R5+100-500+1.4x = 1.2556mm (103cm HFoV)
P.P.S. last time I looked the price difference was huge...
OM-D E-M1X $2000 - 997g
Oly 150-400 $7500 - 1875g
A7rIV $3000 - 665g
Sony 200-600mm $1900 - 2115g
BTW I don't shoot Sony and only used adapted long lenses on m43 (which are unusable at 2x crop without IBIS), so have limited skin in the game.
N0
I agree Daniel, I wish Olympus had a way to let you know if the 1.25 is engaged or not, if I'm not stopped down I can tell by looking at the f-stop, but I stop down often!
Great video. The Olympus 150-400 will be my all time like to have lens I guess.
It's cool to see this beast in the field producing great footage. Thumbs up.
Awesome! A pro Oly rewiew in professional field work conditions!
Thank you very much for sharing. Lovely to see a pro at work. Thanks.......beautiful video btw
The Olympus tripod collar foot has the groove, for attachment to a head with Arca-Swiss clamp, already built in. So there is no need for a lens foot Arca-Swiss plate. Sony lenses, just like Canon and Nikon lenses, require the extra lens foot. This means extra cost and a little more weight. Thank you for creating a comprehensive comparison video. Well done. I am looking forward for my 150-400mm lens to arrive.
Very good point Don. I should have mentioned this since it's one of the things I love about Olympus. It's such a common sense approach. Thanks for pointing this out.
@@danieljcox I first found the groove in the foot on the Olympus 300mm f/4 and thought it is such smart an idea. I was not aware of the M1X viewfinder not being visible while using polarized sunglasses. Take care!
@@dons7991 about the sunglasses, please read my comment above, it should clarify the issue
Excellent review by a true master and professional. Both systems are superb and worth investing in, if your work requires the best.
Thanks so much Titus. I appreciate the kind words. Please help me spread the word about the Natural Exposures TV channel.
What an awesome video! Thanks for the in-depth comparison. Love the images.
well done, and thank you for this. As a hobbyist, I'm still learning constantly even basics, so watching your techniques for handling the lenses, setting up shots, etc. is both helpful and inspiring to think I can do some of this good work too!. Your work honors the outdoors... thanks!
Greatly appreciated Dan
Nice video footage you have there,salute.
My first real wildlife lens is the OMD 300mm. I love this lens! Atm, no plans to upgrade to the 150-400, but as i only have a em5m3, i am waiting for the new cameras or to see a price drop in used em1x prices.
The E-M5ii is a keeper, a lovely little camera. It will work Olympus extra-long lenses best but, most of my lenses are Lumix -
I have been using the Sigma EX full alphabet soup Bigma 50-500 (adapted 4/3 lens) on my E-M5ii for years, ancient, very heavy, no-OIS, AF is a bit rubbish but amazing glass. The E-M5ii handles the Lumix 50-200 mk.1 very well and the mk.2 no better (the mk.1 will be cheaper used). It is not quite so good with the Lumix 100-300 which for a long time was the only game in town for extra-long MFT lenses, that lens works better on a Lumix back. The E-M5ii will handle the Leica 100-400 but no Synch-IS/Dual-IS, it is Body /or/ lens-OIS only. Put that lens on a Lumix G9 though and it becomes a hand-held monster for wildlife, the Dual2 stabilisation is amazing, the AF speed is practically instantaneous.
Fast aperture? An extra-long lens has a shallow DoF and wants the aperture closed down f/8-f/12, my 400 prime has a DoF of about 15mm at 25 metres wide open. There's little point making them super-fast when we have to shut them down.
Is the Lumix G9 better than any E-M1, I don't know for sure but it probably is. However my E-M5ii has better haptics than my equally capable G7 (barring the IBIS), it just feels better in my hand. I've been using MFT since 2013 thereabouts. The problem now is the top end lenses are not fully interchangeable between Olympus and Panasonic. I reckon the E-M5ii is a keeper, it will Synch-IS but only on a couple of sell a kidney Pro lenses.
Raw files? Adobe does not fully support MFT raw files and has issues converting them. The 'engines' in the cameras have got to the point where they generally make a better job of it than Photoshop/LR. Do shoot raw+jpeg but you can post process the jpeg with less hassle, especially if all you want to do is crop it a bit. The raw is for if it went pear shaped, and those normally bet binned.
I’ve got the same setup - love it!!
Thank you for such a review! I really peeked my interest when you showed and spoke about the Nikkor ai-s 80-200mm f2.8 lens. I am having a hard time find one... definitely would love to add that for my F3
this is such a great movie about two different cameras ...amazing :o)
Thank you so much for the nice complement. I’m very grateful.
Keen to see your comparison with the 100 - 400 Olympus lens, also the 100 - 400 Leica lens
This Olympus 150-400 f4.5 is truly a stupendous lens. Light weight (for the reach and zooming capability), virtually silent and fast, precise AF (with higher end Olympus bodies with phase detection AF), incredibly effective image stabilization for handheld shooting that makes not only distant wildlife photography but video recording possible. I only wish I had the budget for the lens as it certainly not one of most shooter's affordable items but I do have the older Olympus 300 f4 that appears to have all of this zoom lens's capablity except for the zooming and built-in tele converter convenience and a slightly longer reach. At about 1/3 the price of this lens it also has the same, near faultless image quality and construction.
You described it well with all the superlatives this lens deserves. It's changed the way I shoot completely; almost never using a tripod, capturing lots more video hand held, and having reach like I've never had before. This lens would change wildlife photography for everyone if photographers could get past the brain washing of needing a full frame sensor. Canon and Nikon have felt the heat from this lens and have introduced much lighter optics such as the Nikon 800mm F/5.6. And Canon has released two EXCEPTIONALLY slow zooms the 100-500mm and now the 200-800mm, due to the competition of the Olympus system. But in the end of you want THE BEST optics possible this is the lens to beat.
The sony A1 will resolve the ff/crop setting you can now switch while buffer is being written, Its a massive upgrade in how you can use the ff/crop mode. On the A1 you can move from 600+tc1.4 = 840mm to 1260mm @ 21 megapixels at 30fps in crop mode and you can change without any delay... I do wish they would make this a part of the memory recall buttons instead of a toggle but for now its ok.
Just take full raw and crop later.
Wow what a place to live!
Fantastic shots and a most enjoyable video and comparison. Would love to a comparison with both of the 100.-400 Olympus lenses-
The viewfinder in the Olympus uses an LCD display. These displays work entirely by exploiting linear polarisation and the effect that two linear polarisers turned 90° to each other block most light. The liquid crystals can change their plane of polarisation when an electric current passes through them. Polarising sunglasses will defeat the way an LCD display works on a basic level, in one plane. The rear display on my E-M1 goes black in portrait orientation when viewed with polarising sunglasses, for instance, and I’d imagine the same would hold for the E-M1X. The original E-M5 had an OLED rear panel which doesn't rely on polarising filters to work and so doesn't black out. The answer is OLED viewfinder and rear displays, or just use non polarising sunglasses, which seems the easier option. Great review. I do wonder though why you would have bright white paddles when trying to be stealthy with wildlife - surely a dark colour would be less like shining a strobe light at anything with eyes?
I think the easiest solution for the LCD viewfinder issue would be to use sunglasses without linear polarization. Or see if you can get sunglasses with circular polarization.
Cheapest test would be to try 3D Cinema glasses and see if it works for you.
Thank you
Beautiful images Daniel.
Muy buen video, felicidades.
first video i've watched in this channel and I didnt hesitate to subscribe
Greatly appreciated.
I’m a big fan of the Olympus gears!
Thank you so much for the video, I really appreciate your hard work. I have been waiting for this video for months but I made the change from Olympus to Sony FE for different reasons and I was still curious about these 2 lenses.
This was very well done. Very helpful.
Thanks Jack. Glad yo liked it.
I use polarised sunglasses for driving but non polarised for photography - for the reason you have highlighted. My eyes are quite sensitive to light, so I wear sunglasses on cloudy days: I'm sure that if I can cope with non polarised sunglasses, most other people will be able to do so. Alternatively, purchase a pair of shooters glasses with yellow lenses (I broke mine), they will reduce the glare but brighten the subject. I have owned a Sony 100 - 400mm GMaster and a Sony 200 - 600mm and used them with an A9 and A7R4. The 200 - 600mm was my firm favourite. I now use an Olympus EM1X and EM1.3 with an Olympus 300mm f4 + MC14/MC20 and a PL 200mm f2.8 + TC14. Even if I could justify the cost of a 150 - 400mm, I think it would be wasted on me.
@Peter Draper. Since you have both bodies, when you know you will need the reach and not the zoom ability which combo do you personally prefer (and why) if you please?
Outstanding presentation.
Superb and informative. Thank you
Great len I had it and enjoy it so much but sometime I miss my 300 f4 too
I have the Olympus 100 to 400 and I like it very much.
Nice! I have a Sony a9 & 200-600 and just picked up a Oly M-1 mkII and have wondered much of what you've answered here. I love my Sony results, but it can be such a beast to lug around handheld. I'll have to see what you think about the 100-400, as I've considered the 70-300. One thing about the a9 AF, it rarely misses and the tracking is fantastic for sports such as soccer.
Beautiful. Thanks.
Interesting comparison. I’m actually most surprised that you are happy with the Olympus camera when you also use the Sony A9. I would think the camera is the weak link in the Olympus system. Is that not your experience?
Thx Daniel, what a great video! “Good eye!” greetings from Wis. subscribed
Great comparison!
Thank you for that good comparison! I wish so much you would have talked a bit more about picture quality of the build in TC at the Olympus glass. There is so little information about it in general on the net. The Oly TC 1,4 with my 300mm f4,0 brings quiet dissapointing results. They are acceptable if you „have to make the shot“ but I try to avoid using the TC. Would have been great learning from a very very good proffessional by how much the image quality drops when turning on the build in TC at this Olympus glass. Thanks
Well done! Thank you
Unfortunately the much less expensive Olympus 100-400 does not support Olympus Sync IS, for body and lens IS combined, like the much more expensive lens can. As you proved in your test here, that extra stability from the kayak would not be available with the less expensive lens without Sync IS. Am very curious what your finding will be on the less expensive lenses IS capability. It is a great time to be a photographer, that is for sure. Very curious what the new Olympus cameras will have for resolution when they finally release them. Just picture a little extra resolution behind that 150-400mm. Keep on shooting!! Love your content.
You are correct about the dual IS. My personal experience with only photos is that it made no real difference. Although I didn’t take 20000 photos in my week with both systems I was able to get to the photo much easier with the Oly system. The way I see it, if I can’t get the system (the camera and lens) pointed at the subject, what good will 2 extra stops of IS do?
@@451804 I was specifically talking about the stability for video use when he was in the kayak. I also doubt you would really notice a difference with still photography, but for video this ability is astonishing at such a long focal length hand held in a moving kayak. Quite impressive.
Did I hear that Olympus did have a sort of kludge for the 100-400 IS? The body does two axis stab whiles the lens does whatever it does. Not quite Sync IS, but still somewhat effective? Not sure about video.
Will be looking forward to further impressions of the 100-400.
@@15ThousandDayCrisis Yes, but the lens does 2 axis yaw and pitch, and the body does 1 axis roll, for 3 axis IS. Rob Knight has a wonderful video demonstrating the differences in IS on the 100-400, the 12-100 Pro, and the 300 Pro ua-cam.com/video/oYU46aHQoSo/v-deo.html. The 3 axis is a little jittery. Strange that Olympus did not include Sync IS in the cheaper 100-400, Panasonic includes their Dual IS in their 100-400 with Panasonic bodies.
@@DragonfireRC indeed it is a shame. Feels like a missed opportunity. The excellent stabilisation is one of the big attractions of micro four-thirds, and Olympus in particular. Thanks for pointing out Rob’s video.
Thx for sharing !!!
My pleasure!
I'm a lifetime Olympus shooter and I also have Sony, including the 200-600. I was also a Canon shooter for many years and owned both the 300 f/2.8 and 500mm f/4 with the 1.4 teleconverter.
A couple of years ago I was faced with a dilemma. I was shooting motorsports and the Olympus (E-M1 Mk 1 with 40-150 'plastic fantastic' or 75-300) wasn't getting results. Not the ones I really wanted, anyway. Admittedly, those are only consumer lenses and don't have IS or focus limiters but I didn't get anything like what I wanted. Nary one. Head on it was fine but I was also doing high speed pans of cars going past at 1/30 sec, which I had done before with Canon but I could not get a successful shot, no matter what I did. When you get that right it looks amazing. My mate was using a Canon EOS 5D Mk IV with a 100-400 and he was nailing virtually every shot. We traded cameras for a while with no change. Ergo, it wasn't me, it was the camera.
I already had an A7R but that was far from suitable and I didn't have any lenses with it. So I was in a quandary. The E-M1 Mk 1 wasn't cutting it. So did I go for a Mk 2? No way I could afford to go with the E-M1X at that time. Did I then shell out for a 40-150mm f/2.8? Well, that doesn't have an in-built stabiliser either so I saw only limited potential there. What about the 300mm f/4? Nice lens but it costs a lot of money too. Costs were going to be pretty high with potentially no appreciably better results. IMHO, it wasn't going to be worth it.
I recently got an A7 III and followed that up with the 200-600. This is the best combination I have ever used. If you pick the right AF mode you pretty well can't miss. The Olympus 40-150 f/2.8 is cheaper than the Sony 200-600 but the 200-600 is cheaper than the Olympus 300mm f/4. All of that still comes to less than the cost of the Olympus 150-400. In fact, the Olympus 150-400 is about four times the price of the Sony 200-600 in Australia. To cover the gap between, there is the Sony 70-200 f/4 OSS, which I will eventually get. I realise Sony cheated on the 200mm end (someone measured it at 164mm) but I don't see that gap as a big problem.
For wildlife, I guess reach is really important. I know this because I've already tried with the 200-600. Did you try crop mode with the 200-600 when you were shooting the wolves? You would have had 1800mm but less light than the Olympus.
I have used my 200-600 for shooting superb blue fairy wrens in Melbourne and the results have been very good. The lens is undoubtedly a keeper and the A7 III nailed the AF more competently than any body I've used in the past.
For macro - some of the best wildlife is tiny! - Olympus has no serious competitor, IMHO. With their focus stacking capability and their 60mm f/2.8 macro, the possibilities are incredible. Nikon (Oh God, when will Americanos learn to pronounce that name correctly?) seem to be the only competitor and really only because they also have focus stacking. But macro is one area where M.43 is a better choice. It's smaller, lighter and the magnification means that 1:1 is really huge, which way offsets any disadvantages of the crop format. And of course, the long-bemoaned depth-of-field Achilles' Heel becomes its ace card. For the time being though, I'm using my old A7R with a 30 year-old, all-manual 105mm f/2.8 AI-s and it's great. But I'll never be able to do some of the things I really want until I go with the Olympus 60mm.
Excellent video I have the em1x with the 300f4 pro I keep thinking should I switch to the a9 and the 200-600. However what stops me doing this is the weight and size between the 2 systems as the Olympus does take excellent photoS. Just need to know it’s limitations.
Thanks for making this video! Not many of us have the time or money to compare these sorts of things in such detail. One question though: What kind of a case do you use for those big lenses when kayaking? I've been thinking that the Olympus 300mm f/4 IS Pro and 100-400mm f/5-6.3 would probably be the largest lenses I could use from a kayak because anything larger simply wouldn't fit in a Pelican case that could be stowed either behind the kayak seat or between my feet when paddling in rough water. I actually have a larger off brand Pelican-style case and I tried using it to carry multiple cameras and lenses so that I could switch easily, but it was just too big and the only way I could carry the case was to have it sticking up between my legs, which was kind of in the way and annoying. I suppose I could use my canoe instead, but it's a lot more trouble to mount it on the roof of my car and it is much slower than my kayak, so that limits the number of places I could take it. I suppose another option would be to just use a waterproof bag like one of the ones from SealLine, but that has no padding. Is that what you do? Or do you just trust the weather sealing and hope it doesn't get too wet?
In case you're wondering, my current setup is a 40-150 f/2.8 with a 2x teleconverter. I'd love to have one of the longer telephoto lenses, but it's not in the budget at this time.
Thanks Keith. When I was shooting from the kayak I had nothing but a towel placed on the floor of my boat. Keep in mind I only went out in great weather. Meaning calm, flat, water. If I was more adventurous I would be using something like the SealLine bag you mentioned. When I do want to protect my gear from water or dust I will often use these bags from #OutdoorResearch www.outdoorresearch.com/us/beaker-dry-bag-15l-279896. They are great for rainy wet conditions on the water as well as dusty dry conditions in places such as Africa or India. They're light weight, pack down very small and are totally waterproof.
Like you I prefer a kayak due to its small size and weight. It's easily handleable for one guy to get it up on his truck. My brother-in-law had a fishing kayak that was much, much heavier and gave me more room to work from but I could've never used it if I had had to haul it to the lake. It's the kayak shown the. most in the video. Beautiful boat but very heavy..
@@danieljcox Thanks for your response! I actually have some similar OR waterproof bags myself as well as some heavier duty ones from another company.
I'm currently using a 40-150mm f/2.8 Pro with a 2x teleconverter for most of my wildlife photography, but I'm thinking of renting either a 100-400mm f/5-6.3 or a 300mm f/4 to photograph river otters at a lake in western Maine. The last time I saw them there was several years ago and I was using a bridge camera with a 720mm FF equivalent lens and that just wasn't enough reach, so I'm pretty sure I'll need a 2x teleconverter on a 300mm f/4 or at least a 1.4x on a 100-400. I'll be shooting from a kayak and I'll have to go through some really rough water to get there, but the cove where the otters are is pretty calm. Which lens would you recommend?
Nice comparison. Concerning the issue with sun glasses, it might be because you use polarizing glasses. No promblem with normal glasses.
Great video! I wonder if the OM1 Mk II has the same issue with polarized sunglasses.
Why would you want to shoot the A7RIV in crop mode instead of cropping in post? the additional frame helps with peripheral view, you have the option of changing the composition, and the AF works better in FF mode. It would be interesting in hearing more in the realm of DR and noise in less than optimal conditions. Some photographers might not shoot under the same extreme reach conditions as you do and other factor my play a more significant role. Thank you for sharing your fantastic experience!
The reason people do it is because its reducing the file size and helps storage and buffering. Sonys have particularly monstrous files. I don't do this, I prefer the bigger file and cropping on the computer. It depends on the circumstances.
@@markrigg6623 sure, but i'd see as a pretty extreme scenario. Buffer is pretty deep in the A7RIV, you can shoot compress raw too. In other words I would not want to do that much anyway.
@@uviciveengineering9911 Absolutely. Wouldn't be a worry for me ever. Personally I don't like the idea of lossy compressed either. But lots don't care.
All factors keep bringing me back to the Oly 150-400 - but darn : it's expensive. But why would I go with a telephoto that dosnt get me in reach of my subject. I just wish my wallet could zoom to £6500 faster! Thanks for the comparison, it was really helpful.
So true Callem. I was hopeful the lesser expensive zoom, in particular the Leica 100-400mm, would produce the results I used to get with my large expensive Nikon lenses. But alas you get what you pay for. And I’m afraid it’s true for the new 150-400 mm zoom as well. The new Olympus zoom has brought the quality of my images up to a truly professional level. Where the other zooms that I was using we’re always falling short. Seems strange this old dog had to be reminded of the age-old adage you get what you pay for.
@@danieljcox In this era of gimmicks and brand pedigrees, it's not always a given - but it's certainly been my experience with Olympus: when you pay out, you are not wasting your money. The sheer portability is also a major incentive for me, I like to be able to move fast and travel light whenever possible. I only hope the corporate changes dont make these lenses harder to obtain.
@@callemdavies8992 you won't be disappointed with the ability to be mobile with this lens. The first thing people who pick it up comment on is how light it is. Very deceiving for the size. And yes, I agree with your observation on not being disappointed with Olympus optics. I've been hearing fo several people who have finally received their lenses after a long wait. It seems the new company may be catching up.
Great review! I love my Sony system but I miss the reach on micro 4/3
Never underestimate smaller system.
Tiny yet deadly...
There is much (much) talk in photo forums about the virtues of "animal eye detection," with much praise bestowed on both Canon and Sony for their implementation of this technology (whereas Nikon is pilloried for not yet having this feature). The Olympus OM-D E-M1X has "bird detection AF," which does endeavor to focus on the eye of the bird. Did you use these high-tech autofocus modes during your comparison, and if so, how did they compare? And if not, why not?
Douglas, I did have the EM1X st to Bird AF. But for the life of me, I was never able to see it do anything different than what I see when I just have a group of AF spots selected. I normally would shoot with a mid-sized grouping. Sometimes I did the All AF Spots across the entire EVF. But I never saw anything that suggested it was tracking a bird. I'm wondering if there is some other setting that I have set, or not set, that affects what you see in the EVF when the Bird AF is engaged. Even though I did not see any indication of Bird AF was working, the AF worked very well. As you can see in the short little video I created from the still photos of the loon flying at the camera, it tracked the subject very well.
@@danieljcox My experience is that if Bird Tracking AF is turned on (and the focus option is set to continuous tracking), when there is a bird in the field of view a white box will form around the bird, then the green target will appear over the bird, then this target migrates towards the bird's head. Without Bird Tracking AF, one certainly can focus on and track the eye (obviously), so it is a feature that is a luxury, and it doesn't always work, and it too often works too slowly if the bird is fast-moving. On Prairie chickens in Colorado, I found it worked amazingly well; when there is vegetation around, behind, or in front of the bird, the bird location process can get fooled. That said, did the Sony camera you used feature animal eye focus tracking? It's supposed to work on the A9 and A9II. If you are happy without this feature, more power to you, but lots of people are very interested in it and when it works, it's impressive.
@@DougGreenberg50 Do I understand that you have to have "AF-C + Tracking" on? If so that may be why I've not seen the white box since I don't use "Tracking" I've not had great luck with it so I simply use AF-C. I would love to see a bird setting that really works and I'm guessing we eventually will.
I don't' recall that the Sony uses an actual bird setting. All I know is when it sees a target in the sky or against a confusing background, it locks on and stays locked on. It's really, really impressive. That said, the 200-600 would not always be dead accurate as the 100-400mm I've shot in similar situations. I'm guessing it's slower motors or something. Even so the Sony with the 200-600mm does a very good job at Predictive AF.
Have you ever worked with the Gunnison Sage Grouse?
@@danieljcox Ok, I am bearing in mind the context here, that you have used the OM-D E-M1X to capture thousands of terrific images without utilizing Bird Tracking AF, so clearly you don't "need" it. That said, if you indeed use the AF-C + Tracking setting you might find it fun to play with the feature a bit. As I said, in some situations it works terrifically. In my backyard this afternoon I did well with my Mourning doves and California towhees. On the other hand, the situations where the feature works the best are ones where truthfully, it is not hard to achieve eye focus using other techniques.
I have not had the pleasure of photographing the Gunnison sage grouse, alas. In April I went on a terrific photo tour with Ken Archer where we captured Greater prairie chicken (my favorite), Greater sage grouse, Sharp-tailed grouse, Dusky grouse, and White-tailed ptarmigan. It was a great trip!
If you are comparing these lenses and by implication, the systems associated with the lenses, do you find Sony autofocus technology superior to Olympus? I think for some photographers this would steer them towards the 200-600 even if the Olympus 150-400 is itself superior. Not me.
I just re-watched the video. Excellent work and thank you. I shoot both the em1x with the 300 F4 Pro (sometimes with the mc-14/ Also own the Pana -100-400) and the Sony A7r4 with the 200-600. it's the Bird in flight where my Sony out performs my Old. as well as the ability to recover shadows (when I miss exposure). but, still after over 142K captures (1.6 years) of using both...I reach for the Olympus system the most (mostly for recon of a new location and travel)...but, as of late...the Birds in flight CAF+TR of the Sony A1 its grabbing my attention)....I've been on the waiting list for the Olympus 150-400 F4.5Pro for over a year...and just received my notification from OM-solutions that it's getting close...so I'm really thinking hard if I should get the Old lens or get the A1...(just a few hundred $ difference)... So I wonder if you what your take would be? Again, thank you for the excellent video and look forward to taking one of your tours. (BTW Joan Robins--Absolutely inspirational!!!)
New sub, definitely enjoy the content! What part of Montana?
Nice work, thanks for posting. It seemed in your video that you were usually using a tripod even though you mentioned that the Olympus was easier to handhold than the Sony because of its balance. Did you usually use a tripod or did you usually go handheld? Thanks, Joan
Joan, You bring up an excellent point. I actually shoot both the Sony and the Olympus hand held most the time. The video gives a false impression-unintentionally- due to it being easier to be on tripod, when shooting video of myself. I've often thought that if I could afford a camera person to follow me around it would shot a much different way of working.
Now that the OM-1 is out, you can wear your polarized sunglasses!
Some incredible images. Curious as to the kayak you’re paddling....could you provide more info?
I have a philosophical question regarding the use of the Sony cameras? (I shoot a Sony A7R3.) What is the advantage of shooting a Full Frame Sony camera in "crop mode" as compared to shooting it Full Frame and then cropping in post. By capturing the entire FF image, you will be able to crop to enhance composition, you lessen the odds of accidentally cutting a part of the bird or animal off in the image. To me, I can see no value added in shooting in crop mode, I see it only as having limitations.
In theory, you're right. Cropping after the fact is one way to do it. But for me personally, I like to do as much as possible to get the image as I see it in the field. Neither one of us is wrong or right. Just two different ways of accomplishing something similar. The one other thing that I often take into consideration is how big the final file is. When I was shooting the larger full-frame bodies I hardly ever needed the monster files from a 45-50+ megapixel sensor. They take up too much room on hard drives and I'm not excited to be shooting 10-30 FPS of files that size. Cropping makes the files smaller.
This might be 'splitting hairs' a bit, but remember that in-camera cropping is always done toward the center of the frame -- which is by definition the sharpest area. When you crop in post from a full frame image, depending on your subject placement and final composition you may actually end up cropping toward the edge of the frame, which may slightly degrade sharpness.
As Daniel pointed out, shooting with an in camera crop gives you the benefit of composing the way you would want the final image to look -- and it is from the center of the image circle.
In the first 3 minutes, everyone can find how J.Cox has not just the experience to talk about lenses for nature photography, but that he put more effort into these two lenses than the majority of any gear reviewer would put to either one alone, not to forget that he actually did it "out there in the field" instead just snapping something on streets in a big city or going to nearby park or zoo.
At 13:00 about the polarization, there is nothing to fix. As Olympus and Panasonic use polarization in their eye viewfinder to avoid direct sunlight damaging the display and lower the reflection inside it. The Olympus is by my experience the best one to do the eye viewfinders (Fuji is best to do the waist level viewfinders) by their pleasant use, optics, colors, refresh rate as other features. They don't anymore have the highest resolution (they did at one period) but it doesn't matter as it is already since VF-4 it is more than good enough.
But the problem is that people wear polarization sunglasses as that is not good anyways unless you are sailing all the time. Sunglasses anyways destroy vision over time faster than not having them, but polarization as well causes problems for photographers to lose real colors, lighting and cause other problems with the equipment.
So the "Solution" is simply get a sunglasses without polarization, and better to have ones that are cutting the UV but not so much the light and especially not use any tinted ones.
Thank you for you keen observation and kind comments.
At 15:30 you talk about using the crop sensor setting on the Sony for an APS-C size image. Wouldn't it be easier to apply a crop in post to the image - would not this have the same effect but also allow you more compositional latitude in the field? I'm not sure that I understand the benefit of the crop sensor setting in the field.
I've seen some comparisons that show that using the crop sensor produces higher quality images than cropping. I'd imagine it has something to do with magnifying noise, but I'm no expert.
@@alexk7046 Actually, it is quite logical -- and you are correct regarding image quality. With a larger sensor and wider field of view, any photographer worth his or her salt will want to compose the image they are shooting for the best visual impact. If you are placing a subject near one of the 'rule of thirds' intersect points and then cropping in later in post, to get a tighter composition, you are cropping away from the center of the frame -- which by definition is the sharpest part of the frame. Using a crop sensor while shooting, you are placing the subject closer to the center of the frame, and thus a sharper image should be the result.
Hello Daniel, I would love to hear your thoughts on the Olympus 100-400mm Lens. I have just bought it myself and as a bird photographer from a 4X4 wheelchair I have found it to be an exceptional lens. I did own the Panasonic equivalent, but found it to hunt too much. The 150-400 would be lovely, but because of physical limitations, it is just out of the question. This video was very enjoyable. THANK YOU
cheers from Australia
Panasonic hunts too much? What camera? Oly or Panasonic?
I used it on a Olympus om-d e-m1 mkll & a Panasonic G9
4:00
Must admit, it's somewhat cathartic to see that even professionals miss fly bys like this every once in a while.
Never a fun feeling, ha!
Happy to add a dose of reality to the mystique of a so-called professional photographer. None of us are perfect and I'll be the first to admit it. But I do love to keep trying😊
I am really interested in the Oly for video applications, especially for when Panasonic release the GH6. I would love to see you test the Oly lens on a Panasonic body such as the G9 or GH5! What is the focus breathing like and is it par focal?🙏🏾
Great video Daniel..Can you please let me know which tripod model are you using ?
Another excellent video Daniel. I would purchase the Olympus 150_400 in a second if I had more confidence in OMD letting us know that there will be a successor to EM1-X
Steven, there will definitely be a new MFT high-end camera from Olympus and Panasonic, most likely around a back-side illuminated stacked CMOS sensor, which should help with the noise and increase even further the readout speed. Otherwise, bar some improvements with the AF, I can't really see what's missing from the EM-1X.
Good review. 1st time visiting your channel and Really enjoyed your review. I shoot with Olympus and being wheelchair bound and unable to work due to my condition that 150-400mm is my dream lens. I did get the 100-400mm a couple of months back and it's on my camera 80% of time yes it's a bit slow and have to bump up the ISO but with current denoise software ( I used to use topaz denoiseAI but I am an affiliate for sklyum and their recent plugin nonoise AI for Luminar Neo is fantastic and my 1st stop at denoise) its lightweight and I got my best ever photograph the other week of a Jaguar prowling. I would love to see your review of the 100-400mm.
Great video!