Is this the lens that will save Olympus?

[biglouis]

You gotta hand it to Olympus. Just when everyone is expecting them to become a fond memory they come up with a monster wildlife lens in a compact package.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/9921022118/hands-on-olympus-150-400mm-f4-5-tc1-25x

Too rich for my blood but the one additional piece of news which suddenly makes the EM1X a lot more interesting is the addition (finally) of eye/body AF for birds.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/6440267557/olympus-e-m1x-gets-bird-af-along-with-raw-video

LouisB

 

[Elderly]

£6500 price for that lens in the UK is one thing,
but for that money you'd think that they would include a lens hood .......

....... if you want a hood that will be an extra £579.00 sir.
or that's the way I read it from the email from SRS Microsystems today.

 

[Ranger Rick]

AFAIK, the hood is included. The "buzz" is up in arms over the price, but what about the FF sort-of-competition at $12-13k for a prime? No one blasted Nikon/Canon for that, but then that doesn't generate clicks. If I were a pro or even wealthy amateur birder for wildlife photographer, I'd be all over this. If one can make photos which the "competition" can't, that's how you get the edge.
Face it, the price is steep. Saying "outrageous for a m43 lens" , implying that the smaller sensor should always have everything "cheaper" makes no sense The key is: what can it help me accomplish?

 

[biglouis]

I have to reluctantly say hats off to Olympus for creating a specific wildlife and action lens. Nikon and Canon have no similar native mirrorless lenses with the same reach. The real issue is that you would have to be very brave or secure to invest this heavily in Olympus at the moment, imho.

PS A few minutes later: actually, thinking about it, at present Fuji are asking GBP5,000+ for their short 200mm f2 prime and I do now and then consider it, so it is not much more of a stretch to consider a GBP6,500 lens which gives you more reach and more features.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

If I were still shooting motor sports and had the money available, I would be all over this lens. This combination of reach, image quality, build quality, flexibility and weight/compactness simply isn't available anywhere else. I would even be willing to live with the Olympus user interface. If I had the money, I would even consider shooting sports again, just to have an excuse to buy it.

 

[Godfrey]

If I had a purpose for something like that, I'd have no problem buying it. Looks great for the birders and sports folks, reminds me of the SHG Zuiko Digital 90-280mm f/2.8 zoom they made for the FourThirds DSLRs. A spectacular lens, but very expensive and only useful in specific situations.

As long as you have an Olympus body and need it, it's a one time buy, use forever.

G

 

[ptomsu]

This lens is a beast and for wildlife shooters an absolutely dream lens. I wish Olympus (or however they call themselves) all the best with that lens and hope for some really interesting future products.

KUDOS to Olympus for this achievement - they show again what they are capable of doing.

Now that I am in the Nikon Z system and probably getting a 2.8/70-200 S and a TC2.0 soon I am not really interested at the moment - but when seeing the announcement and some reviews it started coming back - this must have feeling. Especially now when the price for the EM1X is down to €1999.- in Europe.

But then with the price tag of €6999.- for the lens this becomes a €9000.- combo - not bad. But this EM1X is still lagging behind when it comes to IQ. This became so obvious to me since shooting the Nikon Z7 that I feel I cannot move away from Nikon Z and the marvellous Z glass anytime soon.

Maybe when Olympus brings their EM1Xmark2 with the latest Sony 40MP sensor that will become a different game for me - at least I am happy that I did not sell any of my Olympus m43 equipment so far.

 

[raist3d]

You gotta hand it to Olympus. Just when everyone is expecting them to become a fond memory they come up with a monster wildlife lens in a compact package.

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/9921022118/hands-on-olympus-150-400mm-f4-5-tc1-25x

Too rich for my blood but the one additional piece of news which suddenly makes the EM1X a lot more interesting is the addition (finally) of eye/body AF for birds.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/6440267557/olympus-e-m1x-gets-bird-af-along-with-raw-video

LouisB

I don't think this lens will necessarily save Olympus at all. It's a good lens.

The EM1X didn't sell that well, I don't think that's the way to go. I rather have them focus on small pro- EM5 tops size.

- Ricardo

 

[Godfrey]

I dunno, ptomsu... I can immediately see the difference when I compare images from my Hasselblad 907x vs anything from the FF, APS-C, and FT cameras, of course, but between all the small formats the differences only seem a small matter of degree to me. If you want "ultimate IQ" the bigger, pro-grade cameras with larger sensors are obviously the way to go, but image quality is only one aspect of great photographs.

I'm happy with what I see out of my E-M1 and GX9, still astonished at what I see out of the E-1, but more recent sensors and bigger sensors obviously have the advantage of them in technical quality evaluation. Doesn't really matter ... I use every one of my cameras for what it works well at—so far, no one camera or format does everything best.

G

 

[r8n]

it would of been nice if Oly could of released this lens with the bird AF with the release of the E-M1X, to my eye they seem to made for each other. Better late than never.

 

[biglouis]

I'm not a great fan of Tony Northrup and started to watch this video expecting to dismiss his analysis but he makes a fair comparison. Is the 100-500 a last cynical ploy by Olympus to separate their loyal users from their money?

All things being equal it is hard to dismiss the poor value proposition and even comparative IQ.

 

[ptomsu]

I dunno, ptomsu... I can immediately see the difference when I compare images from my Hasselblad 907x vs anything from the FF, APS-C, and FT cameras, of course, but between all the small formats the differences only seem a small matter of degree to me. If you want "ultimate IQ" the bigger, pro-grade cameras with larger sensors are obviously the way to go, but image quality is only one aspect of great photographs.

I'm happy with what I see out of my E-M1 and GX9, still astonished at what I see out of the E-1, but more recent sensors and bigger sensors obviously have the advantage of them in technical quality evaluation. Doesn't really matter ... I use every one of my cameras for what it works well at—so far, no one camera or format does everything best.

G

Having shot MF/MFD for over 2 decades of my life I definitely see the differences between MF and all the other formats. Having said this, it is not deniable that today's FF offer more flexibility while meanwhile also allowing stunning IQ - still not MF like but great for most people and definitely also for what I do.

And I can clearly see the difference between 43/m43 and FF - this became so obvious to me in the past months while shooting my Nikon Z7.

If money would not be an issue I would maybe shoot MFD (Hasselblad) again but I think I will not reach that stage again in my life, so I am happy with what I can get and achieve.

Take care

Peter

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I'm not a great fan of Tony Northrup and started to watch this video expecting to dismiss his analysis but he makes a fair comparison. Is the 100-500 a last cynical ploy by Olympus to separate their loyal users from their money?

All things being equal it is hard to dismiss the poor value proposition and even comparative IQ.

The guy is an idiot, he has apparently never shot motor sports and he clearly hates Olympus.

- The 150-400 will be a perfect lens for motor sports and a number of other sports where one needs to cover a large area.
- One of the reasons why I stopped shooting motor sports was that I got tired of carrying all the heavy gear (3 camera bodies, 2 tele lenses and a wide angle), often more than 10 km per day, sometimes much more.
- The idea of crop mode with a A4R IV sounds like idea, but it isn't. While the camera has a decent burst rate, the buffer takes minimum 14 seconds to clear. That's an eternity in sports. In addition, switching between native and crop modes gives two files size which complicates fast post processing.
- Sony shooters who do sports use A9 cameras. There's a reason why all sports cameras, no exceptions, have 20-24 MP. Files are easy to handle, transfer and batch process after the competitions are over. I would rather shoot sports with 12 MP than 60.
- The Canon 100-500mm is a fine lens, but it expends and that sucks at a crowded stadium. There's a reason why it's cheap.
- The equivalence bullshit never ends. Sports with lots of movement is rarely shot at large apertures anyway, since depth of field is needed.

That guy makes me angry. There are many nutcases on the internet, but Mr. Northrup has 1.4 million followers, and many of them believe his drivel.

Rant over.

 

[k-hawinkler]

Oh well, that new lens deserves a better camera than Olympus currently offers.
Too bad for them, I am no longer interested adding additional gear to my FT, MFT collection.
My existing E-M1 III + 90-250 SHG + 2x TC + adapter is close enough for me if I should get the urge to shoot MFT.
For birding and such, Sony gear is my preferred choice these days.

 

[Godfrey]

Having shot MF/MFD for over 2 decades of my life I definitely see the differences between MF and all the other formats. Having said this, it is not deniable that today's FF offer more flexibility while meanwhile also allowing stunning IQ - still not MF like but great for most people and definitely also for what I do.

And I can clearly see the difference between 43/m43 and FF - this became so obvious to me in the past months while shooting my Nikon Z7.
...

Oh, I can see differences. But that's not the same as saying that what I see are significant or important to the photographs I am making. It's a matter of judgement and my personal imaging priorities.

G

 

[ptomsu]

Today I went out in the woods with my EM1.3 and the 4/300 PRO to take a few shots and get a feeling again for my Olympus gear. I was motivated by some YouTube videos that showed the 150-400 used in EM1X and EM1.3.

OK - so coming back to my initial thoughts about the IQ out of current Olympus models and the IQ out of Nikon Z7:

I had shot very often with the Z7 in the same forest over the past months and the images I got were all stunning mostly as they came out of camera. Really stunning. Today with the EM1.3 I had to tweak all the images pretty heavily in LR to get the IQ and look I wanted. BTW it was reasonable good light and I do not complain about grain etc.

What this tells me is what also KH mentioned in another post - the current Olympus cameras (sensors) are unfortunately not up to the game. So conclusion for me:

The 150-400 is definitely a stunning lens and could it be used on a sensor like the one of the Z7 it would be marvellous.

I really hope that Olympus (JIP) is able to bring such a new camera asap in order to do justice to that lens!!!!

For now - clearly no longer a buying desire for me with the current Olympus camera lineup.

 

[drofnad]

The guy is an idiot, he has apparently never shot motor sports and he clearly hates Olympus.

- The 150-400 will be a perfect lens for motor sports and a number of other sports where one needs to cover a large area
...
That guy makes me angry.

Unlike THIS guy, who even has "Olympus" on his shirt.
www.dpreview.com/articles/9921022118/hands-on-olympus-150-400mm-f4-5-tc1-25x

(-;

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Unlike THIS guy, who even has "Olympus" on his shirt.
www.dpreview.com/articles/9921022118/hands-on-olympus-150-400mm-f4-5-tc1-25x

(-;

Most of the "first responders" to new equipment are biased in some way or another. There's a reason why they get early access. The know-it-alls who publish their judgements even before they have tried the gear... anybody with even the slightest photography experience should know that it has zero value. It takes time to figure stuff out and understand what the best usage is. Northrup is the typical "It's not useful for me, so it's trash and the manufacturer is a scam artist trying to grab your money". He even says so directly.

I used to think that Ken Rockwell was bad, but Northrup is Ken multiplied by ∞. Mr. Rockwel has actually become rather civilised. Must be old age...

Compare this to this forum's own Jono Slack, who in spite of being a dedicated Leica fanboy manages to come up with real pros and cons for whatever gear he reviews. It's a difference in intellect that is mind blowing.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Today I went out in the woods with my EM1.3 and the 4/300 PRO to take a few shots and get a feeling again for my Olympus gear. I was motivated by some YouTube videos that showed the 150-400 used in EM1X and EM1.3.

OK - so coming back to my initial thoughts about the IQ out of current Olympus models and the IQ out of Nikon Z7:

I had shot very often with the Z7 in the same forest over the past months and the images I got were all stunning mostly as they came out of camera. Really stunning. Today with the EM1.3 I had to tweak all the images pretty heavily in LR to get the IQ and look I wanted. BTW it was reasonable good light and I do not complain about grain etc.

What this tells me is what also KH mentioned in another post - the current Olympus cameras (sensors) are unfortunately not up to the game. So conclusion for me:

The 150-400 is definitely a stunning lens and could it be used on a sensor like the one of the Z7 it would be marvellous.

I really hope that Olympus (JIP) is able to bring such a new camera asap in order to do justice to that lens!!!!

For now - clearly no longer a buying desire for me with the current Olympus camera lineup.

There's no doubt that MFT urgently needs a new sensor. Hopefully, something will happen with the next generation of Panasonic cameras.

 

[ptomsu]

There's no doubt that MFT urgently needs a new sensor. Hopefully, something will happen with the next generation of Panasonic cameras.

I agree so much! As I said in my previous comment there is much, Much, MUCH better outcome from sensors like in the Z7 and this is very obvious when shooting such a machine for a while now and coming back to m43 - in my case EM1.3.

I do not care so much about MP, although some more MP than 20 would be fine but I care much more about DR and noise. Even a ISO 10000 image out of the Z7 is much less noisy and more clear than a ISO 1600 image out of the EM1.3 - and this tells something. Also colours are more accurate and the whole image can be tweaked in whatever outcome as you like from the Z7.

I do hope these next m43 cameras are coming soon - might be with that new Sony m43 sensor with 40MP. Not sure if we need 40MP but this seems to be the way everybody is going today in order to support 8K - SIGH!