Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
OM System M.Zuiko 150-600mm IS ED, the LONGEST M43 lens, and it's GREAT! - RED35 Review
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 сер 2024
- OM System just launched the LONGEST optical zoom for micro four thirds. The M.Zuiko 150-600mm f5-6.3 IS ED gives photographers a full frame equivalence of 1200mm in a package that can fit in a normal sized backpack. It's compatible with Olympus 1.4x and 2x tele converters, which means that produce a reach of a whopping 2400mm in full frame term! This is extreme telephotography that requires more than just standard photography skills. I am here to give a full run down and my impression on the lens. #omsystem #microfourthirds #photography
For more information
explore.omsyst...
Support me and this channel
buymeacoff.ee/j...
paypal.me/jimmy...
** Contents of this video **
0:00 - Video Start
0:44 - Introduction
2:01 - Design & Build
4:39 - Handling
6:03 - Image Quality
6:40 - Sample Pictures
9:21 - Bokeh & Rendering
10:05 - Distortion, CA & Flare
12:06 - IS Performance
13:28 - Tele Converters
14:22 - Conclusion
17:07 - Outtro
17:23 - BONUS
Claim your 2-month extra music subscription from our music provider "Artlist". Visit the website here: tiny.cc/artlist
Remember to also follow us at the following links:
FB - / red35photography
Instagram - / red35photography
Twitter - / red35photo
Inb4 all the 'OM Ambassadors' bend over backwards trying to justify the price. To clarify, I think this is a great move by OM. But the price is simply too much. The L-mount and E Mount versions can be had for less than 1500 USD. I want OM to succeed but they got the pricing wrong on this one.
It irks me that OM just rebranded a sigma FF lens and jacked up the price. It's as if M43 shooters deserve to be punished for choosing this system.
If I thought the price of f1.2 was hard to justify over E Mount f1.8 how exactly am I going to justify extra +30% reach but same weight and price as purchasing a 200-600 and a crop body for it? What is the target audience of this new lens... it's not the wildlife pros, since they can afford the 7.5k$ better version and it's not the enthusiasts either or the entry level bargain consumers... are they entering a new market for vloggers that have higher budget but don't earn yet 10k $ from their work?
@@theWZZAHow do you know?
Is the Sigma lens compatible with M43, without losing a stop through adapters?
Does the Sigma lens have OM sync IS?
Is the Sigma lens compatible with OM teleconverters?
What other magic does the Sigma lens possess, that already makes it the perfect fit for OM cameras? Tell us, do.
It's a pricey lens, yes. I winced, myself. (But not as much as I winced at the 150-400) But the amount of bullshit I read when people jumped to conclusions about the base body design, that they still haven't given up now the thing's been showcased... I swear...
@@vermis8344 Even if all you said was actually done, is that worth the hike in price? Doesn't OM system need to invest a modicum of effort to earn our money? I would say a premium barely makes sense if they produced a smaller, bespoke M43 version, but this is not the case. FF bodies and lenses are getting smaller, so there is no advantage to go M43 anymore. OM System is doing nothing to make the format stand out.
@@vermis8344 I'm sorry but this is a SIGMA lens through and through. If you can't see that then I don't know what else to tell you. Brand loyalty is one thing but I refuse to be taken along for a ride by OM.
For those who wonder, you can get this exact same lens in L or E mount + a full frame body like a S5ii for the same price as the lens with a M4/3 mount alone.
But it won't be the same field of view
@@A1BokehThen crop the middle part to get more reach. With all the money that you save by buying this lens in L or E mount you can definitely get a high resolution FF instead of an OM1 II.
There is no reason to defend OM, what they did is completely anti-consumer. (Except for RED35 who is paid for this) This lens costs 1500$ to be profitable, not more. If they charge more, they just take advantage of people who trust their brand.
Or sync IS.
Or teleconverter compatibility.
So it's not... uh... the 'exact same lens'.
Didn't you notice?
@@vermis8344 The lens is natively teleconverter compatible with mirrorless cameras. They didn't change anything. And Sync-IS is software, Panasonic added it to most of their lenses with a free update. But maybe you can explain to me why these features are worth more than 1500$.
@@vermis8344As a DSLR lens adapted to mirrorless, it is compatible with teleconverters. No difference here. And sync-IS doesn't require any change either, everything is done in camera. So yeah, that's the same lens. The only difference is the ecosystem. You could also say that it has slightly different colors than the Sigma, which would be a real difference compared to the other two.
A really useful review, Jimmy. Very important that you pointed out that with such extreme reach lenses, it's crucial people understand that atmospheric conditions begin to be as important a limiting image quality factor as the technical details of the lens! This cannot be overemphasised, even with the 300mm let alone this Monster.
Something you didn't mention (although you crammed in an incredibe amount already) is a little trick for fast zooming. If we're looking at one of those zoom lenses where the barrel goes in and out (as is the case on this lens, but not on the PRO 40-150 by contrast) you're not limited to rotating the zoom ring to zoom in or out. You can also "pull" your zoom by actually grabbing the front of the lens and push-pulling the zoom in and out. Many people aren't aware of this, but it is available on a lot of the Olympus zoom lenses. Very useful for wildlife and aviation photographers and particularly useful for video work.
My own thoughts are that this lens will be a big seller for OM Systems, yet I also expect that we'll see a very high number of those lenses quickly coming up for sale on eBay, as people are disappointed by the results. The issue won't be the fault of the lens, but with the atmospheric issues you mentioned earlier, Jimmy. In my view, most enthusiast photographers will begin encouraging atmospheric issues if they go beyond the 40-150 PRO zoom, or might be better advised to invest in a used f/4 300mm PRO, where there are some really amazing "used" bargain prices available right now.
Thanks for the very detailed review, Jimmy. [ I replayed at 75% speed, so I could keep up with the speed you were getting your words out 😂 😉 ],
Rick
Your last line got a chuckle out of me. Jimmy talks like a firehose! Hadn't thought about slowing the video down; good idea!
The new OM telezoom is a full frame Sigma lens with the OM logo, which is why it's so big and heavy, isn't that right?
absolutely, for double of the price...of the E and L mount versions
@@palpacher1968 Yes it's the same construction and size glass as the Sigma lens for Fe-mount and L-mount
To be fair, you wouldn't be able to shrink it much with a bespoke MFT design. You'd be limited by the aperture - which, at F6.3 at 600mm, gives a 95mm diameter, and you can't really make the front element smaller than that. So that accounts for the heaviest elements and much of the barrel.
The 150-400mm, designed for MFT, has a similar aperture diameter at full zoom, and is a bigger lens. Slightly lighter thanks to different materials, but it's also three times the price. Not suggesting that they're the same caliber of lens, they obviously aren't, but that's not the point.
On the other hand, criticising the _price,_ compared to the same lens for other mounts, is entirely fair. It's too expensive.
For those who'd be happy with 600mm-equivalent reach, there's the 300mm F4 Pro. Half the weight, significantly smaller, it's probably the sharpest MFT glass out there, and it's been around long enough that they can be bought used at a good price.
@@BlazeFirereign Well said, not many people realize this, but there was indeed no way to make it smaller than this. In fact, even if you wanted to make a 600 f6.3 for a 1 inch sensor, it would still be pretty much the same size...
For me this really made me rethink of the whole "MFT lenses are smaller", because while it is absolutely true at shorter focals, that rule completely falls appart past 200mm...
Makes you rethink, why go MFT for wildlife in the first place, if you can just get more sensor for "free" without extra glass weight? MFT can never, by definition, "get the most" of an optical design like this 600 f6.3, they cannot ever beat high MP FF flagships with 600 f6.3 zooms at the highest tier, it's literally impossible.
As long as you have high pixel density, cost/value for the camera feature set at good enough high pixel density, at the cost of sensor size, are the only redeeming factors going on for MFT. Which to an extent is still the case, the OM1 being great value. But at the cost of these lenses, and the competition catching up with camera bodies and MPs, OM not innovating since the acquisition, I gotta say, it's not looking good for them as far as enticing new people into their system goes, for wildlife anyway...
I can't stress it enough, you're absolutely right, this lens is way overpriced. It could've been OM's saving grace if they had just let Sigma port over the E mount version without all that extra rehousing and slapping their brand tax on it.
My friend who shoots an EM1iii atm with the 75-300 has been looking to upgrade his lens/kit for a while. He was so excited for this launch, I was excited for him, then we saw the price... Hell no. For that kind of money in other brands, you can get so much better lenses, pass those savings into a better body, AND as previously mentioned, you can get so much more out of a 600 f6.3 (or 800 f9) zoom on other systems, because extra sensor size doesn't translate to more glass weight anyway while often retaining that reach.
Had OM systems priced the lens fairly as it is on E mount, he would've bought it in an instant and upgraded his camera to the OM1. But now it's literally more worth it for him to sell his OM gear and switch if he wants anything above 300mm... Weight, cost, performance wise, there was nothing in it for OM other than the novelty, the smaller lenses (at shorter focals, but they're also out of budget anyway), the very few features the OM1 still has in it that the others don't really have. But even then, it seems like switching to a g9ii + their 100-400 was a better choice too, they're not even the better value on MFT!
How can they not see how ridiculous this is? It's so sad to see a company that was so revolutionary for the first decade of mirrorless go down that path. And I really, truly have a hard NOT seeing how this is just a final cash grab for the people already loyal to them, as much good faith as I try to have. Because, unless you're already 10k+$ invested in OM, ain't no way this camera and lens combo is worth it for anyone outside of the ecosystem. You can get so much more out of the 5k-ish total $ the combo used in this vid elsewhere, sorry but it is just true...
And to reiterate, I'm not an MFT hater far from it, just, from my outside perspective this makes zero sense to people who aren't already stuck with OM...
@@simonthibodeau7082 A lot of the justification for MFT having smaller telephoto glass is equivalence - the idea that, for example, aforementioned 300mm Pro lens gives equivalent reach to 600mm on FF.
The argument isn't that simple of course, given that FF cameras can sport higher pixel counts and, at least in Sony's case, better autofocus. That said, an OM-1 with a 300mm lens is still putting more pixels on a subject than an A7R5 with a 300mm lens. And if OM can improve their autofocus software, they've got the advantage of more *autofocus* points on target as well.
I'm still happy with my MFT kit, the weather sealing is important to me and OM appears to be one of the few willing to put proper IP ratings on their kit. I do feel like it's increasingly hard to justify the system to new buyers - and I say that as someone who bought into it 1.5 years ago. With that said, there's a very healthy market of older MFT gear, and plenty of merit to it.
Don't know what's the point of buying a full frame lens adapted to m43 bodies at a higher than full frame price
Why didn't you tell us that is the rebranded Sigma lens, Jimmy? Or OM System did not allow you to say that. I remember you always say that you are objective and fair in your videos but after all, you are still their ambassador and you can only say what they allow you to say.
Who say it is? Sony fanboys?
@@hemligx-sson8202 Just search and compare them by yourself, my friend. It's not difficult.
Just search and compare them by yourself, my friend. It's not difficult.
@@vukhuat4251 The reason I question that, because people have started rumors abut almost every Olympus lens that they are designed by Sigma. So far it’s all speculation. Olympus made high quality lenses 40 years before Sigma was founded, so they and OM are fully capable to design their own lenses. These rumors are almost all started by fanboys of other brands. With this lens, perhaps the rumors are true, perhaps not. So far there is no official confirmation from either Sigma or OM.
The Sigma 150-600mm lens for Canon was the reason I switched to M4/3. it was just too heavy. The OM 150-600MM lens is even heavier and nearly 3 times the cost of the Sigma 150-600mm. I won't be buying it.
If this is the direction they’re headed, I think my Olympus love affair will end with what I currently have: OM-1 + 150-400 / 300.
I don't understand your comment. Both your listed lenses are more expensive than this lens (heck the 150-400 is 3x the price) and have higher IQ. This lens is for a different consumer. One that doesn't have the $$ for lenses that you do. All good that you have the resources for those world class lenses. I'm glad there is a viable option for a super zoom for others such as myself. This will increase my love affair with OMDS. Previous OMDS releases were small, f4 lenses that are also top shelf...so this is an option for a different segment of consumer. I think it is spot on that there are offerings for all varieties of photographers.
As a full time bird photographer I cannot see any reason why anyone would consider the Sigmalympus 150-600 given the 300mm F4 can be had for less money and is vastly superior optically and plenty long enough to photograph even the smallest birds and fill the frame. If image quality doesn't matter and you need to photograph apex predators, then it might be an option - but for birds most people [everyone] is going to get far more joy from the 300mm F4.
Even the sample images on OM systems website look very soft.
300mmf4pro is a gem in the m43 lineup.
I'm a professional aviation photographer, so you might expect that I'd love a really powerful zoom lens. But, for exactly the same reasons stated by tdunster, I recommend the f/4 300mm PRO prime lens over a zoom. I need sharp images for magazine publication. Okay, if I was a photojournalist, where image quality isn't important, this zoom might be useful, but the more I think about it this lens is only useful as an amateur gimmick. My biggest question is why OM Systems went for a Zoom, rather than a much cheaper and better quality 600mm Prime lens?
Right now I have the 300 F4 and the 100-400. I use the 300mm about 95% of the time since I got it, adding or subtracting the 1.4X TC depending on light and what I'm expecting to see. This has worked well, and has made the 100-400 nearly redundant, though potentially useful on a backup body. In my mind, I'm keeping a close eye on the 150-600 to complement the 300 and replace the 100-400. If I have good light, I can get much more reach from this lens. That said, I think that similarly to the 100-400, the price of this is going to be subject to a bunch of sales and probably pretty low used prices. It's just so big/heavy.
It is not the same lens as the Sigma version. That has 20 lens elements vs 25 in this, only 4 stops vs 6 stops of lens IS and is also not weather-sealed. There are also some other differences, but you can check it up on line.
@@rickbear7249 They went for a zoom because they could just get Sigma to license the 150-600mm lens that was already being produced for Sony E-mount and Leica L-mount and double the price without having to put so much money into R&D to make their own prime. Also, at extreme focal lengths like that, having a zoom can make it easier to find the subject, especially when used with a teleconverter. But I totally agree that the 300mm prime is a much better value for money, especially if you can find a good used one.
The new 150-600 mm rebranded full frame Sigma lens for double of the price of the E or L mount version is very disappointing. It shows that OM SYSTEM is not interested in any R&D and just wants to full the loyal customers and make more money. Very sad. The image quality based on pictures of OM System ambassadors I seen is not even close to the image quality of the 300 mmF4 or 150-400 mmF4.5. Furthermore, most reviews forgot to mention or hide that this lens is not capable to achieve the highest frame rates of the OM-1 or OM-1 Mark II.
at this point Ambassadors should be renamed to Internet Salesmen... untrustworthy bunch
FF lens for M4/3😢 Where is the M4/3 small size??? And the price 😂😂😂
I don't mind the size. It's barely a few hundred grams heavier than the 150-400 pro. But what I do take issue with is the price. I don't know what the folks over at OM are smoking but no one should pay this much for a sigma rebrand.
It's a 600mm zoom. How small do you expect it to be?!
@@thrallingFRgloryDon't buy it then.
hey, you still get the M4/3 noise. that should count for something 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Exactly. Small size is their biggest advantage. If their gear is becoming FF size then may as well go with Nikon or Canon.
New lens I want! A couple of years ago I sold my 100-400 f5-6.3 to fund the 300 f4, I have been rethinking that decision. Now that the 150-600 is out, I might want to get that first. I love the 300 for it's total sharpness, period. But having to zoom with your feet gets old quickly. What I like about the 150-600, is the same focal range as the 100-400, but with Sync IS added on for a bonus. Some will say this is a reworked Sigma but as Thomas Stirr says, SO WHAT! It would fill my needs for the price and performance. In my post retirement dream world, I would have the 100-400 for it small size, and the 150-600 Oly "bigma" for it's reach. I know cost wise I would be getting near the 150-400 f4.5 dream lens, but having two for the price of one is my way to go! And BTW, the Sigma 150-600, has only 6 special glass elements for the FF cameras, this however has 14 special glass elements, and also has been engineered to "talk' to the OM cameras effortlessly, and the features are amazing, down to the lens creep options, to the shoulder strap option etc etc etc.. Also, I had the Nikon 200-500 f5.6 which was heavy, so this is a 'little" lighter, and I could hand hold the Nikon for a bit. This would also complement the 40-150 f2.8 for sure.
Cheers jimmy!
Hi all. Thanks for the review.
This lens is somehow suspiciously similar to the Sigma 150-600, or is it just me?
Based on the quality of the images shown, this is Sigma.
My Sigma 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 lens, in combination with the Olympus OM - D1 Mark III, produces exactly the same picture as the lens in this review.
The color of the pictures in the review is a little better, I think due to the newer coating and backlight, the new lens holds better. But overall it's a Sigma, possibly a Sigma Sport.
But then it’s not clear why the price is so high?
So how does Sync Is work on that Sigma lens? Do you know how Sync IS works?
I have now seen some videos that say it's a Sigma lens, and as one of them says it, it's the same construction and glass size as the Sigma lens for Fe-mount and L-mount for full frame , so it is a Sigma lens adapted to MFT 😉
Sorry, Jimmy for the first time I found both of your 2 videos more an OM Systems advertisement.
This heavy lens is due to the Full Frame optics in a FF lens, big and heavy. You have swiftly talk as a sales person eluding the rebadging of a FF lens for the m43, which negates all features like small size and weight of the m43 system. Besides this they charge you more then 1000 Euros above the Sigma lens. So the rebadging cost = 1000 Euro.
Lets wait the review from Tony Northrup and others to knew the problems and critical review of the rebadging process.
Confused... a Sigma lens for almost €3000, hey you can get a used 300 F4 Pro and both teleconverters and still keep some change in your wallet and have the same reach of 1200mm at a much smaller size.
Pretty sure you can buy most things cheaper when they're used.
you can get a nikon 500mm PF for less money nowadays
I'm going to stick with the 300mm f4 Pro with the 1.4tc and the OM-1's internal 2x converter which works surprisingly well (it's not just a crop file) see Andy Rouse's excellent video on the subject
It is hard to deny that this looks like the Sigma 150-600mm but there are things that some are not considering.
It's firmware is programmed to properly work with the camera such as Sync IS, teleconverter, pro-capture and auto focus. This would not be the case with adapting the Sigma.
They could have had some lens elements coated differently, added weather sealing and adjusted the button settings and design. It would be interesting to compare the two side by side.
With that said there are two things that do bother me, price and not a pro lens for the price. Nikon made a 28-75mm f/2.8 which was likely a rebranded Tamron but only made a 25% mark up. Just like the Nikon, OM-SYSTEM is not claiming it is a pro lens but OM-SYSTEM marked up $1,200 more than the Sigma. Wow! That is some expensive R&D for not a pro lens. Which means you won't be getting 50fps but only 25 for this price. For once I agree with other people on it being too high of a price. $2000 or maybe $2,200 at the most.
Nikon have done a partnership with Tamron to manufacture some lenses for them. However, what all the people who apparently have some inside information about this new lens that the rest of us don't haven't considered is, Sigma have a partnership with Panasonic Lumix. Surely there would be a conflict of interest clause about not producing lenses for their direct M4/3 competitor. Surely Lumix would have wanted to get one up on OM Systems in the ultra telephoto zoom range if Sigma were adapting their lens? The Sigma and M.Zuiko lenses look similar but not the same. Sigma 35 mm has features that aren't in the M.Zuiko version, and vice versa. It's all speculation. If folks don't want to buy it and prefer to use another system and lenses, they are at liberty to do so. People who actually want to use a lens like this because it serves their needs of getting the photos they want, don't really care about poorly informed online opinions, and will happily pay for it because there isn't anything else like it available for M4/3.
@@chrispatmore8944Your are insinuating that other people does not have information but say about a Sigma and Lumix cooperation that you don’t have inside information.
@@angeloplayforone The fact that Sigma is part of the L-Mount Alliance with Panasonic and Leica is well-known public knowledge. There has been no general press release or official statement from OM System saying they have collaborated with Sigma. I was just getting fed up with all the pointless speculation about this lens, I wanted to give a speculative counter argument. All their whinging doesn’t change anything. If they want/ need it, they have to pay the asking price, or buy a different camera and use a Sigma labelled version. From the reviews I’ve seen it seems a fair price for what it is. What were people expecting: that it would be bundled with the OM-1ii as a kit lens?
Hi Jimmy... I enjoyed your review... thanks!
The M4/3 bashers are already out in full. Many complaining about the price of the OM 150-600 and claiming that it is identical to the Sigma 150-600 for Sony. Unfortunately they haven't done their homework. And, many don't realize that contract manufacturing has long been a part of the photographic market.
There are meaningful differences between the OM 150-600 and the Sigma 150-600 for Sony (i.e. their mirrorless model). The Sigma has 6 special elements... the OM 150-600 has 13 special elements including 2 ED, 4 Super ED, 6 HR and 1 HD element. The OM 150-600 has IPX1 weather sealing certification... the Sigma does not. The OM 150-600 has Sync-IS of 7 stops on the wide end and 6 stops on the telephoto end. The Sigma does not. Not all of the computational photography technology resident in Olympus/OM System bodies is compatible with third party lenses. And, there is a difference in used equipment prices between OEM branded lens and third party lenses. This is typically in the 30% range but can be as high as 45% depending on the specific lens.
If you want a cheaper lens then go ahead and buy. Just don't expect the same optical quality, weather sealing, image stabilization and compatibility with computation photography technology.
Tom
I cannot disagree with you more and I've tried to explain but of course, many have different feeling/view on this. To put it simply, I would definitely scream if there's another 'identical' 150-600mm lens for micro four thirds platform, or 300-1200mm full frame lens for £2k or less. There isn't. I am not talking about adapting lenses via adaptors, or cropping from high resolution cameras. There isn't a proposition that offer same performance, shooting experience or better still, full Sync-IS compatibility. ahaha Nevermind, only those who eventually buy and use it will show and tell just how good it is.
Hi Jimmy, do you mean that you cannot agree more? @@Red35Photography
How is IPX1 in line with the pro bodies & lenses? Those are IP53.
IPX1 is the lowest possible certification; it means it's not rated for dust/particle ingress (that's what X stnds for) and is rated for basically light drizzle falling vertically on it (the 1 rating).
Jimmy got it early for a reason, probably because OMS knew he would say good things about it.
What whould you expect from an ambassador?
So why are you here? Are you a Sony ambassador?
@@hemligx-sson8202 you are totally wrong. I actually use the Panasonic G9. Just as a user of the system it makes me sad.
thanks so much Jimmy you cove it all, even when Heat haze was crossing my mind, you were there talking about it.
Hey Jimmy.. I really enjoy the enthusiasm and the expertise that you bring to these new OMS product releases.. but I just can't help but feel that the price is very... Aspirational. I guess they sold every one of the 150 - 400s they could make for 2 years.. so they're probably thinking they will get the same response here and maybe they will.. I think if they were more straightforward about this being a Sigma product and then explaining what they did to it to make it compatible and viable with the OM.. I would really feel a lot better about saving my USD and maybe selling a kidney.
"There are no cheaper alternatives for 1200mm FOV unless you pay 2-4x the price of this kit", was total bullshit. R7+200-800 yields around the same apparent fov and apparent aperture for much cheaper...
In fact, you CAN literally crop the R7 itself down to 20mp MFT, it's got similar pixel density as the OM1... You could literally get the older but extremely similar version of this lens (the EF150-600C) and get a lighter combo that gives incredibly similar optical performance, and just as much FOV+extra sensor real estate. For less than 2k total... Used that for years and it gives wonderful results.
Honestly, this lens looks very good, although overpriced, and this guy is way overselling it to the point where I'd question his ethics as an "ambassador". That's like rule number one of sponsored reviews, if you wanna rave about a product, sure, go for it, but if you wanna talk about how it competes with the rest and do not actually do your due diligence, you deserve backlash. This video earned a dislike for me which I don't give out often.
He also plays into the whole "it's a 1200mm f6.3" thing. Also bullshit. If you multiply your focal length by the crop factor, you better do it do the aperture as well. It's been over 10 years and people are still doing this very misleading thing. It's not okay to mislead potential buyers like that. Ofc they're gonna think it's a killer deal, "wow, better than an RF1200 F8, this one is f6.3!" I just can't with that misinformation, this honestly infuriates me. This lens will perform as a 1200mm f12.6 would on FF, if you're not conveying that info, stop using the 1200mm figure and stick to "600mm f6.3 projected to MFT". Seriously, are we still in 2015? Even Tony of all people knew that 9 years ago. You can't pick and choose whichever value makes the product look better and discard the ones that don't.
The "2400mm" with TC is equally bull. Yes, it'll be f25 by then and unusable. None of the 600mm f6.3 zooms (by sigma or otherwise) have been shown to handle a 2x well, and cropping in post or falling back to a 1.4x always gives at best equal, often better results. And that's on FF!!! Where sensors aren't fully resolving these lenses. If you think 2x will be anything more than a blurry mess you are a fool, or sigma somehow invented the sharpest glass in the world here. Not to mention how ridiculously deep you'll be in diffraction territory at f25.
This whole video screams so many red flags. You should do better man, misleading people like that is not okay! Tell it like it is, its a great lens, slightly overpriced, but mainly a good option for people already invested in OM who want a relatively cheaper alternative to the 400 f4 pro zoom. That's it! This is honestly one of the most biased gear reviews I've ever seen... And I'm not an MFT hater at all myself.
You didn't even need to talk about the competition, you could've stick with what you knew. But you did, and said it was better than the competition with no further explanation or mentions of the drawbacks of choosing OM as a system. Just don't talk about the competition if you're not gonna do your due diligence, that's it, that's the only thing I hate about your review but it's a serious ethical mishap here... Do you have any idea of the level of performance you can get elsewhere for the price of an OM1 ii + this lens, or even for much cheaper? Either you're at best a little bit clueless, at worse you're greedy and unethical. I can give you the benefit of the doubt, but seriously, that is such a terrible review video...
One thing I find really funny too: this lens physically could not have been smaller or lighter even if designed from the ground up for MFT (which it may or may not have been). People who say things like "OM could and should have made this smaller because it's for MFT" are completely mistaken.
If you wanna make ANY 600 f6.3 zoom, no matter the sensor, you need a 95mm front element thats the basic mathematical formula of aperture that dictates it. Which these lenses already have and have had since the dslr days, they're 95mm entry pupil AND filter thread, they literally cannot be further optimized. The whole "MFT lenses can be made smaller" thing completely falls apart beyond 200mm for the majority of optical designs!
If you wanted to make a 600 f6.3 zoom for a 1 inch sensor, it'd be as big as this one too! These 600 f6.3 are already as optimized as they can be and have been for decades. Yes, that should also make you re-think your perspective of the advantages of MFT for wildlife! ANY 600 f6.3 zoom for APSC or MFT, will never be that much smaller than this one, or any 600mm f6.3 zoom for FF. This is why all the pros just use larger, similar density sensors now! It's literally like having your cake and eating it too! MFT's only saving grace for supertelephoto shooting can only be price and features for a good pixel density. Which the competition has just caught up to by now...
I saw a lot of criticism comments about the new 150-600 and the sigma relationship, but when you are olympus photographer since film, you easily can know that olympus (now om) and sigma was working together since the film era, no mention about the great sigma/olympus lenses in 4/3 dslr platform. So yes, the new 150-600 lens can be a rebuilt and better crafted lens than the sigma sports version, but, How many of you who comment in a bad way that it is the same sigma lens have used that lens on Olympus/panasonic cameras? Do they retain the focus speed, sync IS and compatibility with teleconverters using that version of sigma for Canon along with an autofocus adapter? The answer is NO, even for Sony or Fuji users, they will not have full IS sync compatibility with their cameras. There is great fanaticism in wanting to show who uses the best brand, and very few signs of union and support to experiment a little of each brand in a constructive way, it is one of the things I admire most about Jimmy, who is a true ambassador of all the MFT system, and still uses other brands such as Nikon, giving us the public an excellent reference and user experience of each equipment it uses
I want to add i'm more than happy to see this new lens, and daydreaming to have one for myself to use with my two E-M1X and maybe soon an OM-1. Those of us who are loyal and traditional users of the Olympus/OM System are happy to see how we continue adding good lenses to our ecosystem, maintaining ourselves as one of the systems with the largest number of lenses and cameras, and where all the lenses are good. Many of us even hope for a quick renewal of the great ZD lenses of the 4/3 era, the magnificent Zuiko 14-35 f2, 35-100 f2, 90-250 f2.8, and the magnificent 150 f2 and 300 f2.8, Being able to have these lenses in a native MFT version would be an excellent opportunity for us. Let's bet on the growth of OM System and Micro 4/3 in general terms.
Dang. If I didn't already have the 100-400 and a 1.5 tele combo, this would be my next lens.
It would be your next hernia.
Not a single word about this beeing an adapted full frame lens?
I find this really disappointing. I mean, yes, they may have improved the Sigma lens in a couple of areas, even when it comes to glasses used (as far as I know this version uses more special glasses than the original Sigma - probably). And this would have been totally fine if they've adapted an APS-C lens, but full frame? This means the lens is twice as big and heavy as it needs to be.
So this is a re-housed Sigma 150-600mm lens, orginally built for full frame cameras. A lens I actually formerly owned. I got rid of it because it was just too big/ heavy for the way I like to shoot wildlife. On an MFT system this camera isn't just equivalent to 300mm - 1200mm, it's also acts like a f/10 - f/13. The Sigma branded version of this lens cost £1400 less, but will give you a 1 stop boost in performance on FujiFilm and 2 stops on Pansonic/ Sony. Like some of OM Systems other lenses, this is greatly over priced and kind of insulting.
It's equivalent to 300-1,000mm. But I don't know where you got the f/10 from. If you attach the 2x TC then you will have something like f/10 but your equivalent focal length is now 600-2,400mm.
@@Biosynchro He was multiplying the aperture by the crop factor, which gives you the depth-of-field equivalent and gives you a rough idea of the amount of noise you can expect, at least with a comparable quality sensor. Obviously, if you're comparing a Canon sensor to the Sony sensors used in Olympus and OM System cameras, the Canon is going to lose about a stop of light just because it's a lower quality sensor. And if you're comparing a Sigma sensor...well, you really can't because you're pretty much limited to base ISO with the Sigma.
@@keithholland4322Then again you can buy Sony or Nikon to get Sony sensor 😂
@@danielsvoboda198 Almost every camera brand except Canon and Sigma use Sony sensors. I heard that some of Panasonic's new sensors are made by an Israeli company that I don't remember the name of and there was at least one Nikon camera that used a Toshiba sensor, but aside from that, they've all been using Sony sensors for the past 10-15 years as far as I am aware.
The lens is large and heavy but has twice the reach on Micro 4/3 and up to 2400mm reach with the 2x teleconverter. OM System us obviously trying to save money on development, which definitely helps with the bottom line. This is not a bad thing if it helps them stay in business.
Was this guy as excited about this lens at half the price in "E" and "L" mount? Shouldn't MFT lenses be designed around the smaller sensor? Like smaller and lighter? Terrible review. I wonder how much OM paid for this review.....
It looks "small" and "light". Perfect for the m4/3 system haha. This glass is made for a full frame. It would have some justification for its weight if it had a built-in speedbooster that could be turned on and off, but it doesn't. Plus it's very expensive. This is close to the same setup with the a7RV. The price is similar, the weight is the same, the flexibility of the Sony set is much greater with 61 megapixels. Is this the right path for the m4/3 system?
Yes, it is a good path IMO. There is no "THE right path." Previous OMDS releases were small, f4 lenses that are also top shelf...so this is an option for a different segment of consumer. One that doesn't have the $$ for lenses such as 150-400 white lens or 300 f4. I'm glad there is a viable option for a super zoom for others such as myself. This will increase my love affair with OMDS. I think it is spot on that there are offerings for all varieties of photographers.
I borrowed it for 4 days, using the OM Test and Wow program. I need to return it tomorrow, but I will be getting one soon. The Sync IS is amazing!
I feel that OM took the exact external lens design of the sigma 150-600mm dg dn Sport 😅
I photograph birds. Right now the 100-400 is enough reach for me. As Jimmy pointed out, atmospheric haze and distortion negate the advantage of reach. It's more important to get close to the subject.
Absolutely agreed
I find all my birds are shot at 400mm today, and then I crop in... just can't get much closer to some subjects (nesting herons, Eagles, wood ducks, etc). I walk and shoot, no blinds to hide in. I will probably buy this lens if its as sharp as they say, though the weight will be a pain. I may wait for sale though. Would the 300mm f/4 with 2x tele be sharper or softer?
@@tim1398 I walk and shoot also. If you constantly need the extra FL, go for it. But the walking will harder with a heavier lens, and you might need extra support shooting at 1200 equivalent FL.
The point of longer focal length lens is generally to have the subject larger in the frame, not to shoot very far away subjects. In these cases, atmospheric haze doesn’t cause a problem.
Even at 2kg, I reckon this lens will be extremely popular. Yes the Sigma design will annoy a lot of people with the price hike but you can't get this specs anywhere else. OM system has modified it and put Sync IS at 6ev for the long end, if that's true and 1200 at 6 EV, that's even better than the 150-400 pro because with the built in teleconverter, I don't think it will have 6 EV anymore. It has better weather sealing than the Sigma and it works with the two MC teleconverter, you are not getting these features with the Sigma lens alone and you can to 1200mm with m43 instead of a crop in 900mm with either APSC bodies or full frame. OM system knows it and that's why it charge us the premium
I expect at the extreme focal length of 2400mm FF with the TC trying to track anything would be next to impossible. Only guessing as longest lens I have used was a 500mm mirror lens in the film days and that was difficult enough.
Lovely, realy lovely. I actually changed my mind about the lens since past days. It has OM IS in that Sigma lens redesign by OM System.
I could love it
Ok, its not PRO, but it doesnt cost 100000 £ eather.
It might be bulky for an mft lens, but still acceptable.
The real downside is, that it is a Sigma lens that will generate people to think it is just one with integrated lens adapter.
They can not overcome the fact that what the lens really is for the 4/3" format shooter...
Nikon should rebrand this lens to their Nikon 1 system, and sell it for $2900
Or Pentax Q
I prefer my 300 mm F4 PRO.
Concerned about OMS. Bought into the system primarily based on the quality of lens design and manufacture. The fact that this lens is a m.Sigiko causes me to question the future of OMS. Not what I was expecting.
It does break my bank indeed. 25% more expensive than Canon 200-800. At least in my country. Considering the price of Canon R7…. this is more than normal amateur would spend
"There are no cheaper alternatives for 1200mm FOV unless you pay 2-4x the price of this kit", was total bullshit. R7+200-800 yields around the same apparent fov and apparent aperture for much cheaper...
In fact, you CAN literally crop the R7 itself down to 20mp MFT, it's got similar pixel density as the OM1... You could literally get the older but extremely similar version of this lens (the EF150-600C) and get a lighter combo that gives incredibly similar optical performance, and just as much FOV+extra sensor real estate. For less than 2k total... Used that for years and it gives wonderful results.
Honestly, this lens looks very good, although overpriced, and this guy is way overselling it to the point where I'd question his ethics as an "ambassador". That's like rule number one of sponsored reviews, if you wanna rave about a product, sure, to for it, but if you wanna talk about how it competes with the rest and do not do your due diligence, you deserve backlash. This video earned a dislike for me which I don't give out often.
He also plays into the whole "it's a 1200mm f6.3" thing. Also bullshit. If you multiply your focal length by the crop factor, you better do it do the aperture as well. It's been over 10 years and people are still doing this very misleading thing. It's not okay to mislead potential buyers like that. Ofc they're gonna think it's a killer deal, "wow, better than an RF1200 F8, this one is f6.3!" I just can't, this honestly infuriates me. This lens will perform as a 1200mm f12.6 would on FF, if you're not conveying that info, stop using the 1200mm.
The "2400mm" with TC is equally bull. Yes, it'll be f25 by then and unusable. None of the 600mm f6.3 zooms (by sigma or otherwise) have been shown to handle a 2x well, and cropping in post or falling back to a 1.4x always gives at best equal, often better results. And that's on FF!!! Where sensors aren't fully resolving these lenses. If you think 2x will be anything more than a blurry mess you are a fool, or sigma somehow invented the sharpest glass in the world here. Not to mention how ridiculously deep you'll be in diffraction territory at f25.
This whole video screams so many red flags. You should do better man, misleading people like that is not okay!
Is there a Canon to M43 adapter? Then buy the Sigma 150-600 for half the price.
There is an adapter but focus will be slow and no dual-IS.
€2700 for a rebranded Sigma lens designed for FF? No, thanks. If I would want to use a converted lens in that range I’ld just buy the Contemporary version of that lens in EF mount for €1000, or the Sports version for €1840, and adapt or speedboost it. The Canon 2x TC would probably also work. No sync IS or CAF, I could live with that. I should mention that I already have an EF-MFT adapter and speedbooster.
Of course I’ld rather see a MFT dedicated 600mm pro prime. One can always dream.
The Canon R7 32MP has a slightly higher pixel density 9.81 MP/cm² vs OM-1 9.06 MP/cm² so if you cropped it to 20MP like the OM-1 the Canon 200-800mm becomes 400-1600mm. Thats without any extenders! When you are shooting BIF the extra space for cropping from 32mp to 20 is nice. Don't get me wrong I do like the OM-1 system Olympus did a lot of ground work and gave it away to this OM sales/marketing type company. Have you checked on Amazon UK the Nikon and Canon versions of that lens go for £849 asking £2499 pre order for the OM version is laughable. They need to invest in pf lenses like Nikon did the 500mm F5.6pf, 300mm F4pf etc as they are marketing themselves as lightweight high performance camera systems. Using a Full-frame lens design not good bro.
I have the 300 f4 pro, and have recently traded in my panny 100-400 for the Olympus 100-400, in order to be able to use the teleconverters. I ordered the 150-600 on day one of UK release. (Gulp!) I use the 300 f4 for duller days and the 100-400 for brighter days, So I foresee that the 150-600 will become my hide lens on brighter days. Leaving the 100-400 for walk around the reserve on those days. I'll post again once I receive my new lens.
Is it April 1st?
Best review I have yet seen of it as your using a om1 not the mkii just wish you gave longer to look at the photos less is more
Great video! I really would like to get this lens for my OM-D E-M5 (Mark 1) but I really would like to get new camera too. I hope I’ll get the money for both somehow soon.
And if you're cropping in further, you're getting 100,000mm in focal length!!! 🤯
That's not how that works... Also, this is more expensive than the full frame 600mm f/6.3 zooms, and weighs just as much, makes no sense.
It would be interesting to stage an optical quality comparison between the 150-600 and the 100-400 with the MC14 (140-560).
I will see what I can do.
"...this is a lens you can actually afford" $2700? What a bargain.
USD939 for exactly the same lens on Canon EF mount. And 235g lighter too. Just to add insult to injury.
It is much, much cheaper than ff equivalent...that would be a 300-1200mm F5 at about 20K. There are also differences and improvements on coats, stabilization and weather sealing compared to the sigma standard. Is it top $$? Yes. However, compared to alternatives...reasonable.
This does seem like an interesting lens, however I have trouble viewing this as a real review. To me it seems more like a commercial. There are some real downsides to this lens which you do not give the attention they deserve. The IPX1 rating does not make it close to a PRO lens, it is actually hard to call it a real wildlife lens with this rating. I would not be confident in using it in any rain at all. You did give good attention to the higher weight though, which is very fair. Lastly the price seems fair for what it is on MFT. But when you take into account this lens is a lot cheaper on FF it does sting. The other specs I of course can not comment on.
The 150/600mm when it is at 400mm, the aperture should be below f6.3?
If so, this lens probably interests me.
I do like the look of this lens and I would have plenty of use for it. I can't afford it yet, but it's definitely on my radar!
Skip it.
Some beautiful images with this lens Jimmy 👍
Thanks :)
Great addition/option for OMDS and mft. Previous OMDS releases were small, f4 lenses that are also top shelf...so this is an option for a different segment of consumer. One that wants reach and doesn't have the $$ for lenses such as 150-400 white lens or 300 f4. I'm glad there is a viable option for a super zoom for others such as myself. This will increase my love affair with OMDS. I think it is spot on that there are offerings for all varieties of photographers. (PS. a comparable performance ff lens...300-1200 f5...would be about 20K Nikon, and weigh many times more too.)
It looks exactly like a Sigma 150-600 sport rebranded to OM System and double the price. This and the lack of new firmware for OM1 shows that OM System do not care about customer loyalty and I will now be switching to Lumix
I got caught up in the comments sections, and some of the negativity on forums, but the more I look into this lens, the more I want to order it. It's not a Pro Lens, if I was a Pro, or wanted a Pro lens, I would order the 150-400mm Pro Lens, but I think I'll get this one, since I have the 12-40mm Pro, 40-150mm Pro, and love both.
Why not get the 100-400? It's substantially smaller and lighter, you still get insane reach (and TC compatibility) and it's half the price. Also, you can buy it used and save even more, if you're so inclined.
All of a sudden I feel lucky that I only have the Panasonic 100-300mm 🙂
I'm curious to know how this new lens will work on a G9 with respect to image stabilization?
Wonderful Review Jimmy! This Lens is Perfect for my Bird Photography!
What the hell is he talking about? This is FF Sigma lens with new housing, and it's heavier than FF version and 2.5x more expensive.
I don't know man.. In OM Systems they must eat some dangerous things, to make absurd releases like this.
Ridiculous, how influencers sell this adapted old Sigma lens for an almost 100% uplift as something special. How much does OM Systems pay?
Interesting that old people like you behave like you do. Must be a Merkin.
If I want to upgrade the Olympus 300mm prime to 150-600mm,, then will it be a right decision? Pls tell me your view on this lens. For this I have to sold olympus 300mm and buy 150-600mm.
Love it.
Heck of a reach!
Sorry but OM Systems are ripping us all off.. Sigma re brand x2
I just received this lens the other day. What I noticed is that the IS works great when focusing but when I push the shutter button down to take a photo the image jumps erratically, which produces not so sharp images. However, when I turn off IS and when I press the shutter button it doesn't do this. Is anyone else having this issue?
Interesting addition to the MFT line up, but much too expensive! In comparison to the original siblings a price below 2000 would be adequate…
But maybe the next cashback from OMDS in summer is already included 😁
IMHO it will drop soon to 1999 range. Now they just collect money from first year early adopters and then sustain sales with low price and eventually with Cashback programs that will make it about 1699-1899 price in 18 months.
Jimmy I appreciate you are giving it all you’ve got. I really do. But OMD has entered a complete lala land. How is this better than the same lens mounted on a proper FF body? Now FW upgrade is presented as new model and rebadged FF Sigma lens is a major announcement. If anyone thought that change of ownership will bring an investment to this platform, the message can not be ignored. We are now firmly in the circling around the toilet phase.
This is pure fanboy insanity. Comparing it to the 150-400 price wise is gaslighting the reality. A non pro lens that in Australia is nearly 3 times the price of a sigma version. It may be time to change systems if this is the rubbish OM Systems is coming up with. I think they are like a car maker who decides to make refrigerators, photography not their gig.
But does it work with sync IS in older bodies like e-m1 mk2?
Yes, it may not be as effective but it should work. I still have my EM1 II and I can try and let you know.
That would be much appreciated.
I heard 5 stops of is synch with the om1x information from a om abasador
Hello, what kind of accessory are you using on 5:19 ?
It’s an accessory call Dot Sight. It’s like a sniper scope with a laser red dot to help you track your subject with extreme long lens.
@@Red35Photography Thank you for your reply ! I suppose it's independant of OM1, and you could install it as a flash on any camera ...
Wow Jimmy that lens has amazing reach! The sample images are top notch. Any moon shots? :)
I liked the photo of the airplane!
The only person's opinion that matters is from someone who will actually buy this - you can sing it's praises, but it won't matter if it doesn't sell. We'll just have to wait and see, but I'm guessing this is a fail.
Hi, Good review. Now is this lens compatible with my OM D E5 II ? Or do I need a recent OM model ?
Yes, fully compatible. But just remember that E-M5 II has contrast detect AF and older IBIS, so you may not get the speed. However, it works just fine. I have E-M5 II.
@@Red35Photography thank you 🙏
Afford? In my country it's more than 2x vs Sigma 150-600 for E-mount ... seems it's the same lens rebranded. Come on ...
Buy the Sigma E mount, then.
On one hand, I want this lens, on the other hand I'm wondering if I need to replace the 100-400mm with this one!
I very much appreciate your channel for the positive energy it spreads in showcasing m43 system strengths to the wide world!
It's a gorgeous lens for 2x crop and adding another 2x TC, especially since I'm always around 350mm on my Olympus 100-400mm, therefore the extra range would be helpful to catch those annoying small fluffballs up in 10m trees!!! The range is totally worth it over the alternatives, if one needs higher than 800mm range and shoots during cloudy winter time - that's where the extra 800-1200mm reach is for, since the TC will reach that, however, we don't really like to trade light for range if we have a choice.
The weight is interesting; from my vantage point of shopping for a lens with more than 800mm range, there are some options that stop at 900mm so it's really a question of what should be prioritized based on use case - and Olympus is really the only one that does 900-1200mm without a TC on top, so I hope even if it's 2kg, they managed to balance it and make it a size that allows better handling than a telescope (I used an XT8 for a while so I'm intrigued to be able to see Jupiter's moon without having to lift 25kg over short distances - this might actually be preferable to a telescope to enjoy astronomy with my kids !)
I am interested in the switching of f stop by focal length.
- f5 from 150mm to ?
- f5.6 from / to ?
- f6.3 from to 600mm?
It's the same optical design as the L mount and E mount versions so you can look for the aperture change in one of those reviews.
Anyone know if this len can support sync IS with Lumix G9m2？
I think the rebranding of a Sigma lens and cosmetic change to the 9-18m just indicates JIP are trying to keep the Olympus pulse alive while they monetise Olympus IP and goodwill as part of a managed exit from the industry. There is no sign they have produced any new product that wasn’t already in the Olympus pipeline.
They will eventually become Pentax 2.0, a company on life support, releasing reskinned old a$$ products
Based on the images shown, this new lens is excellent in the range 150-400 but then it goes off. Its little brother the 100-400 is good up to 350mm, but then loses it. I'd love to see a comparison for sharpness of this new lens vs the 300mm F4 PRO with MC-14 or MC-20. Against the older zoom, the 300mm F4 plus MC-14 is significantly sharper than the zoom at 400mm, although much heavier.
Jimmy will any of the let's features work with the Lumix G9?
Sorry, fat fingers, I meant len's.
You could buy the original version of this lens and a full frame camera body second hand for cheaper than OM are charging for the lens only. Think OM are done to be honest.
Let’s be honest about the 2x Tele adapter. I have it, and it degrades the image quality a lot. Also have the 1.4, and the same goes for it, to a lesser degree. If you want sharp quality images, you cannot use them. So don’t bother unless you absolutely need the reach, but don’t need the quality.
I wouldn't disagree, all teleconverter will degrade quality. I had Canon and Nikon converters before, they all do the same thing. They are there for the 'emergency reach' if you can't move but need extra reach. Hence I shot mostly this review without converter, as I much prefer the quality of the lens than adding an extra layer. But it's shocking to see what a 2400mm look like, just a bit of fun.
I’ve found that teleconverter performance varies with distance. I took some photos with a background which was c.4 miles away and what detail there was there was better resolved without the teleconverter. A crop in on a photo taken at 150mm with 40-150 f/2.8 worked better than one at 300mm using the 2xTC. However, at closer distances of less than a mile I found the teleconverters do a good job on both the 40-150 and the 300mm lenses. This is for aircraft at Goodwood or Eastbourne and my latest published calendar photo was a crop in using the 40-150 and 2x TC.
@@patrickhopkinson1851 interesting! I shoot mostly birds. And have the 40-150 2.8 and the 100-400 lenses. But have been disappointed at the results with the teleconverters. Will experiment with the distances! Thanks for sharing.
One thing I want to say is that I am using the micro four thirds format for its compact size and less expensive lenses. I like the range of the new lens but the size is too big for me to carry. Panasonic has a 50-200mm f2. 8 with a 67mm filter thread. OM System should collaborate with Panasonic for R&D to come out with compact micro four thirds lenses. They are already designing lenses for this format so you won't need to revise a full frame lens to fit a micro four thirds camera body.
Lens expensive lenses for same focal distance or less expensive for equivalend focal distance? I think you are confused…
I now have it! 🎉🎊🎉🎊🎉🎊🎆🎆🎆🎆
Thanks
Thank you for your support
You are more than welcome Jimmy. I really appreciate your photographic knowledge and enthusiasm you input into your videos.
And now, will Panasonic strike back? Imagine a Panasonic Leica 150-600, all metal, a little more compact.
A dead ringer for the Sigma 150-600 DG DN.... surely they had their hands in this construction (my opinion)
exactly the same optics designed for full frame with MFT mount for the double of the price of the E and L mount versions
Just out of curiosity, how much of a factor does that sync IS make when taking photos at the various distances? Would be neat to see a comparison of it with the option on and off. Handheld of course
Useful review Jimmy. This lens is not for me. Too big and too heavy if I am out walking all day shooting wildlife. And to take a tripod as well that is large enough to be stable !! I only take heavy equipment if I am going to be stationary in one defined area usually shooting video and then I use my Sony a1 and 200-600mm lens with x1.4TC and a Manfrotto tripod and fluid head. My OM-1 camera and 150-400mm + 1.25TC lens with x1.4 and x2.0 TCs are all I need to cover my photography, especially for overseas trips. But as you say it’s all down to cost. Peace ✌️😊
Surely nothing is really usable at these high iso values other than using on social media size imagery ?
I love the waterproof design and look of this lens and it clearly is an optical performer. That being said, it seems to be priced a bit too high to attract a large audience in a diminishing m43 market. I have the 300 f/4 Pro and 1.4x and 2.0x extenders, so I will stand pat.
IPX1. Not weatherproof. "Splash Proof". So only recommend for an indirect light drizzle, or condensation. No dust resistance either.
Sorry buy I would rather go 300 mm F4 Pro + 2x teleconverter, including IP53 and lightweight, than this zoom lens. I think Olympus made bad decision there.
Nice review, but an honest review would have mentioned that this a Sigma lens and frankly it is overpriced by a lot. Be interesting to see if this thing salls at this price point given the fact it is a APS-C / Full Frame lens adapted for micro-four thirds, meaning you lose the size and weight advantage of micro-four thirds with a lens that is overpriced by about $1,000. Really hard to get excited about this lens.
He is a paid ambassador, you shouldn't expect any honest comments from him, just marketing nonsense only.
I never knew unfaithful biased paid reviewers were actually a thing before watching this. Always thought it was an exaggeration by "fanboys" of other brands or what not. But, holy hell, I can't believe what I just watched. That was the most biased reviewer I think I have ever watched.
He called it "affordable", said it was better than the competition unless you pay 2-4x more and that no alternatives really exists (it's so, so obviously not, quite the opposite), said a 2x TC was usable with it with zero disclaimers just to shout the "2400mm" big number (it's f25 by then lmao and clearly unusable), played into the whole "it's a 1200mm f6.3, better than an rf1200mmf8 amirite" nonsense (if you call it 1200mm, call it f12.6 too, are we in Tony Northrup's comment section in 2015, wth is this???).
I can't believe what I just watched, seriously 😂 the lens is not even bad, I bet it's great, but clearly calling affordable is completely ridiculous and out of touch with reality. Honestly my biggest gripe is that, raving about a product in a sponsored review is fine. I for example have no issues with Topaz reviewers that chant its glory, as long as they don't explicitly state false stuff, like that it's the best out there and trumps the competition in every way. Most Topaz reviewers are smart enough not to do that and just review the product as it is and whether they like it or not and avoid mentioning the alternatives, that's the smartest way to do it.
But saying how cheaper and better it is than the competition (!)without doing your due diligence is just reckless, unethical and leads to customers being misled with misinformation. This is one of the few rare times I think the words "paid shill" completely apply to a reviewer lol
@@Misigun99So why do you feel the need to post this in every thread? Is there some kind of OCD?
I can see it coming down in price soon. It is extremely front heavy @ 600mm and the weather sealing is only IPX1. It is not a pro grade package. I tried a loan unit for a couple of days and the good points are 1. Quite sharp even at edges at wide open however I found @ 600mm f/8 is much better. 2. The bokeh is the best I’ve ever seen on a MFT lens. 3. Point toward light and the contrast is terrible. 4. Very front heavy on my OM-1 @ 600mm. 5. Price here in NZ is $4,900 very high IMO. Wanted to try moon shots but alas the cloudy nights put an end to that dream. If money was not an issue I would buy it.
Great video. How end heavy is it at 600mm? Really wish it had internal zoom. Your thoughts?
I have the Sigma branded version of this lens (which is the same) and it's really heavy at 600mm. There's a lot of glass at the front, so when it's fully extended the lens is very long and very front heavy, especially compared to other m43 telephoto lenses.
@@jamese4729 Got it. Thanks.
With the 2x teleconverter, it's almost got the reach of a Nikon P1000 😉.
I wonder what kind of moonshots you can take with this lens.
I think you should have mentioned that this is a lens that was designed by Sigma for Full Frame Jimmy. I can understand that OM can‘t afford to design a new lens and despite the size and weight this Sigma design works fine on mft. BUT the price they ask for it is just crazy… On FF this lens is almost half the price.
I was about to adapt a Sigma version with Canon mount and an AF adapter. But this will be smaller, better weathersealed and autofocus should be much better. The only drawback for now is the cost.
With my PL 100-400mm I‘m at 400mm for about 80% of the images and often it‘s just not long enough.
Why not add a 1.4 TC to the 100-400? It's way less money, you lose one stop of light and save about a kilogram. This lens is absolutely massive and really heavy compared the 100-400, especially when it's extended to 600mm.
This lens is a scam. JIP is killing MFT.