Pro wildlife photographer @wildmanrouse tests the new M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm f/5.0-6.3 IS
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 окт 2024
- So here is my field review of the new M.Zuiko Digital ED 150-600mm f/5.0-6.3 IS. I have had this lens for a month and have put it through it's paces. I do not care for politics or armchair photographers. I tested this camera as part of my professional life, where my images are the difference between a Barry Gibb style wig or my current "follicly challenged" status!!! If you want an assassination job then don't read this, if you don't use OM then don't bother either, this review is for OM System photographers out there who are genuinely interested in what this camera does.
If you want to see a more personal review, with more pics, plus my usual exclusive content of inspiring videos, image critiques and more tiger fun then check out my patreon and take a free 7 day trial of the combi membership - www.patreon.com/wildmanrouse
I will happily answer polite questions so feel free to stick then in the comments, rudeness just gets you deleted, let's all be decent to each other as life is too short. Be an idiot you will last a few seconds, be decent and I will try to help to the limit of my knowledge!!!
Links you might like.....
Our patreon channel is the goto place for in-depth photography hints and tips from a pro you can trust, videos, travel, amazing pics, podcasts you name it we have it, start your free trial here today www.patreon.com/wildmanrouse
Check out linktr.ee/wild... for my Tiger Tours, UK workshops, WildBunch, OM-1 Field Training Guide plus other great stuff .
Check out bit.ly/3fnTGTq for my online wildlife photography training course
For Flexshooter tripod heads please visit - www.flexshoote...
This is my Amazon Store Front for all kinds of cool photo stuff - www.amazon.co....
Don't forget to subscribe to this page and signup to my website newsletter for early news as my trips tend to book out quickly.
A lot of people are saying that this lens is not sharp enough and is not worth the money.
Well depends who you believe. I've sold images already from it.
:) lol AND a lot of folks have said that about the Canon R7 and the 800 F11, but I've taken thousands of very sharp shots with it. Either those folks are FOS, or I'm like a photo magician :) lol I'm super intrigued with OM systems. Might have to rent it, to see for myself.
Thanks for the hands-on review Andy. This is an interesting alternative to my m.Zuiko 100-400 with teleconverter. However, at my age, the size and weight of the lens does cause me to pause. I hope Olympus will soon release the 50-200 f/2.8 and 50-250 f/4 lenses, which are the lens I've been waiting for.
I have no idea when it if any lenses turn up but the 2.8 lens will be as heavy as this I suspect. For me I found it better to hold than my 100-400, which to be honest never gets used these days.
You're probably right about the f/2.8 lens. I was hoping for an alternative to the 40-150 f/2.8 (I have the f/4 version). I saw your Galapagos and Ecuador cloud forest videos, which is where I'm headed in March. Will my 100-400 (or this 150-600) be too slow, especially in the forests? I'll also be taking the 8-25 and/or 12-100 lenses. I'm now wondering whether to get the 40-150 f/2.8 for its speed and ability to take the 1.4x TC, or if I can just stick with the lenses I've got and use my $ on experiences.@@Wildmanrouse
@@lasticonoclast If you're worried about weight and low light performance, you should probably consider using prime lenses like the Olympus 300mm f/4 Pro and/or Panasonic/Leica 200mm f/2.8. You can always put teleconverters on them if you need some extra reach and the Pana/Leica 200mm with a 1.4x teleconverter is reported to be sharper than the Olympus 300mm without one, so which one is best just depends on how close you can get to your subjects and how dark it is. I'm really hoping OM System will step up their game with some better prime lenses like maybe a 250 or 300mm f/2.8 lens with a built-in teleconverter that doesn't weigh much more than the new Sony 300mm f/2.8. That would be a game changer! Zooms are great when you have plenty of light and weight isn't a concern, but when the light starts to fade or weight is a concern, prime lenses are the way to go!
@@lasticonoclast i use the 100-400 in forests every week. it can produce a lot of slightly blurry pics due to the shade and lack of light. it is use-able, but need to have realistic expectation about how crisp of images you'll typically get. its really ideal for subjects that are in sunlight. i would stick to the 2.8 or f4-4.5 lenses for stuff in the shade if u really need to get ultra crisp images. i would go with the 2.8 tbh if u want great images in a forest.
I saw Roger Hance was able to handhold it without too many problems.
I love the mud stains on the lens. Thanks for the review!
It's a field review!!
Thank you for the video. Why dont people understand the differens between rebranded and redesigned.
Thank you for standing up against all complainers.
Thanks for sticking up for me. You should join my Patreon community. Everyone is nice and I give them all my knowledge.
Considering that this is just a rebranded Sigma 150-600mm lens that looks almost identical to the Sony E-mount version, which was made for full frame cameras, how sharp is this lens when used with teleconverters? Also, why does it cost almost twice as much as the E-mount version of the same lens? They didn't even put the focus ring in front of the zoom ring on it or add the metal knurling that has been characteristic of all the other Olympus lenses in this price point! Speaking of which, do you ever find yourself turning the focus ring, thinking it's the zoom ring?
What a strange collection of questions. Did you watch the video? Why is it that nothing you say has anything to do with anyone using the lens? I don't sit in an armchair dreaming of taking pictures I use the kit in reality. And in my world of non cynicism it works great
@@Wildmanrouse Of course I watched the video! The reason I asked the questions is because I haven't had an opportunity to test the lens for myself and most of the questions I've had about this lens were not answered in the video. I can't put teleconverters on it and see if the images are sharp because it isn't available to rent at this time. Obviously, I'm accustomed to having the focus ring and zoom ring in the reverse configuration since all my other Olympus lenses are made that way, so I was wondering if you find yourself turning the wrong one when you're actually using it.
@@Wildmanrouse Do you get your equipment for free? Or you are paying for your equipment? His question is from someone that does not get money from RUclips or free stuff from manufactures. So he has to choose which one is more good price/ qquality ratio. So his question is correct.
"Considering that this is just a rebranded Sigma 150-600mm lens that looks almost identical to the Sony E-mount version"
Out of interest - do you have a source/reference for that?
@@davehenson5390 Take a look at the lens diagrams for both lenses. It should be easy to find. Hard to miss that this is merely a rebadge of the Sigma 150-600 DG DN Sport.
Great to read your credible review, Andy. Thank you.
How is the IQ at 600mm wide open at f/6.3?
I think it would be even better balanced with the battery grip on the OM-1.
Personally I hate an extra grip, just doesn't suit the way I shoot hut if you like it then great! As I said in the video the IQ is fine provided you remember it's a 1200mm len's and are a realist!
@Wildmanrouse yes I shoot at 1,200mm using the 300/4 and 2x.
It's easy enough with 20 years of bird photography experience.
I guess I'll just have to try it. I was happy using the Signa 150-600 Contemporary on a Canon 1DxII from time to time.
Thank you will start saving “pennies” like the idea of this lens. The 100- 400 wasn’t for me however if the image quality is good this is definitely an option. 📸🦉
You just have to be sensible Heather about this. I've had a few questions about this today on my Patreon community along similar lines and I have answered in more detail. You should join us as everyone is nice and the reaction to this today has been very different! Patreon.com/wildmanrouse
Hi I am a member and love it. 📸👏
For a safari trip, would you consider this lens or the 40-150 f2.8 to be a better complement to the 300 F4?
40-150 f2.8 with 1.4. Goes with me everywhere
Hi Andy, I've been following your work since your Canon days! How would you compare the sharpness and rendering of this lens at 600mm with the 300mm Pro + MC-20? Is it sharper or nearly as good as the prime, given that the prime would have a 2x TC to achieve the same reach? Also, what do you think of its background blur at max zoom? I understand that it's f6.3 vs f8 on the Pro + TC, but do you find the bokeh to be busier?
Sorry my friend I can't compare because I don't do this kind of review. Other will do clock faces and comparisons of things that don't re ally matter. I just use mine in the field and make my judgements in 25 years of pro experience. That counts for something I think!!!! Also I have not used the 300mm for several years, remember it was great but no way of comparing apologies sorry.
Thank you for the review! Would you mind sharing that the f values are at 200mm, 300mm, 400mm and 500mm please?
What*
Nope because it's not important my friend. Not enough f stop range to many any difference in the field as anything can be compensated by a slight increase in ISO.
It’s an over priced Sigma and £1,000 dearer than the Sony 200-600 mm ?
Don't think you know what you are taking about as you haven't used it. Stick to what you know rather than what you want to spread, which is basically lies.
@@Wildmanrouse Pray tell me how does it qualify as 'lies'? We understand that you are an OM 'Ambassador' but at least have the decency to accept that this is a rebadged Sigma. I want OM to succeed but I am not blind. It's clear that they're taking undue advantage of their loyal customer base.
@thrallingFRglory You can say it's lies because it's a vastly improved Sigma and equivalent to twice the length of the Sony lens.
Mark Rhodes is just another of those online whingers who heard the word 'Sigma' and made up his mind before knowing anything else about it. Andy is 100% right - Rhodes hasn't used it and doesn't know what he's talking about. I laughed when I saw his response, because more of you self-appointed camera-industry police should be told where to go.
If you don't like it then don't bloody buy it. Simples.
@@vermis8344Your abject loyalty to a corporate entity is admirable. I don’t know about the intention of other commenters disparaging this release but I will tell you mine. I have invested thousands of dollars into the MFT system and I want I want to believe that it has a future. But what OM has been doing since the last 2 years or so does not inspire a lot of confidence. As I have stated elsewhere, I do not begrudge them rebadging a Sigma and repurposing it for MFT. But they’re being dishonest in the way they are going about this. Discounting the astronomical price, there is nothing which makes this any different from a Sigma DG DN. Look at the reviews from neutral sources, there are no fancy improvements that OM has made. Even the Sync IS has merely been modified to work with OM bodies. The Sigma has the same stops of IS on L Mount.
So yes, I will not be buying this lens and I have every right to call out the BS that OM is on. I’m not sorry that it hurts your feelings to have your favourite corporate entity being called out.
@@vermis8344dvojnásobné ohnisko z toho dělá pouze snímač v těle, ne objektiv. Jinak je to prostě přepracovaná sigma co výstup ekvivalentní FF z ní se rovná sice 1200mm nicméně také hodnotě clony f12,6 lol a to celé se snaží atakovat cenou FF objektiv který vzhledem k velkému snímači a to opravdu velikém s obřím množstvím tranzistorů v případě Sony a7R V musí být opravdu kvalitně vyrobený, na rozdíl od objektivu pro 4/3 kde jednoduše není nárok na preciznost výroby skel tak vysoký.
it's too big and heavy for M4/3 system - kind of defeats the point of M4/3
Don't think you saw my video then or listened. If it's good for me it's good for you and it's certainly neither too big or heavy.
@@Wildmanrouse Hi Andy I have huge respect for you as a professional wildlife photographer and have learnt much from your videos. I did watch and did listen to the video all the way through. I have, just weeks ago come over to OM Systems buying the OM-1, 100-400 and 40-150 f2.8 pro and 1.4x tele by selling my Sony A9 and Sony 200-600mm Internal zoom lens because it was getting to heavy for me. The reason I moved to OM Systems was size and weight advantage. When I heard that OM Systems would be bringing out a new 150-600mm I was hoping it would be around 1600-1800 g max - Now this new lens ( which you didn't show it fully extended compared to the 150-400) weighs in at just over 2kg that's very close to the sony 200-600 i just sold - which is a non extending lens. To carry around for long period of time and hand hold is too heavy for me. I had originally considered the Fuji X-H2S and the 150-600 - which comes in at just over 1600g for the lens and around 2kg for lens and X-H2S combined. However after watching many youtube videos decided on the OM-1 kit which I am very pleased with. I was hoping that the new lens would be not much bigger or heavier than the Olympus 100-400 1120 g (maybe around 500-550g more) or similar in size and weight to the Fujifilm 150-600mm - but its considerably heavier and physically much bigger at over 2kg, from your video it looks even bigger than the Sony 200-600mm I just sold. that's all I'm saying, not trying to be argumentative or sound deliberately negative, hence my disappointment, especially being new to the OM Systems world.
Like me, many older people have been attracted to OM-1 with a variety of lenses because of the weight. I too sold Sony gear because weight started to become an issue just carrying it around and no roadmap of lighter longer lenses. Since changing I have also found manoeuvring the camera for birds in flight much easier. I’m sure it is a great lens but moving away from a market that was buying largely on lighter weight combos is an interesting move. As a hobbyist/enthusiast walk around shooter I am more than happy with my 100-400 and 300 f4. The new OM-1 ii camera seems great and if I didn’t have an OM-1 i I would be tempted to buy it but probably not the lens. 800mm ffe is enough for me. Maybe occasionally stick a 1.4tc on it but we’ll see. As a pro I am sure Andy you will get max benefit from an upgrade with the camera and lens. You have the skills to max out the potential as will others. It will be interesting down the track to compare the 150-400 pro with the tc built in with the 150-600. Thanks for the video Andy and half your luck being in Kenya.
@@tonyb736 I definitely see where you're coming from. In my opinion, this lens and the 150-400 are best used with a monopod for extended use. No need for a cumbersome tripod, but a monopod definitely makes the camera easier to stabilize if you're waiting a while for the action to happen. I think there are a lot of MFT users that will really appreciate this lens, especially after used ones start floating around on eBay for a somewhat reasonable price, but you're clearly not who this lens was designed for. You'll be probably be better off sticking with your 100-400 and maybe adding a teleconverter when you need more reach, provided you have adequate light. The reason the Fujifilm weighs less is that it's an f/8 lens and this one is f/6.3.
I've said this before: did you expect a 600mm 1200mm-equivalent lens to fit in your pocket?
If you _think_ (as opposed to _know)_ that this lens is too big and heavy for you, then _don't buy it._ I am staggered that so few youtube grumblers understand this concept. Good luck photographing birds two fields away with your 200mm f6.3 lens. Your photos will be atrocious but at least the lens is light, hey?
Hi Andy, great video by the way. Just wondering, currently i have the 300mm F4 PRO and am getting the most out of it on every widlife shooting. I have been doing photgraphy for just over a year now so am still learning across the board. I was looking to either invest into the 150-400 f/4.5 int he next 6 months or so. Do you think it is worth taking the 150-600mm instead, having previously shot with the 300mm? I understand that it is a bit of difficult question to answer because there are many factors involved in this, but overall i am just looking for some insight and how to spend my money in the best way possible. I know you cannot go wrong with the 150-400, it is a cracking lens and have borrowed it a couple of times for usage. Absolutely phenomenal to be honest. Any thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated!
I'd always go for the 150-400 mate! And did you know we have an OM Club where I pass on all my knowledge and answer questions there? Videos podcasts and pics all there, it's where all out OM stuff goes now. Have a look at a free trial here and you won't regret it www.patreon.com/wildmanrouse
@@Wildmanrousethanks for the advice ! Will look into this subscription also!
It' fantaaaaastic
Your 150-400mm with a 1.4 TC beats the reach of the 150-600mm.
Of course but putting a 1.4 on that lens is a bad idea.
People in the comments do seem to enjoy criticising anything you say...... Are they all professionals? I doubt so. (not to say there are no very knowledgeable amateurs)
There are no professionals on here as they would have professional decency. And they aren't jealous.
K čemu je toto reálně použitelné? Ten objektiv má v přepočtu clony proti FF na výsledné fotografii bokeh rovný f12.6 a stojí jako objektiv na FF který má poloviční hodnotu (f6,3) clony 😂 na čipu o třikrát větší hustotě tranzistorů a výrazně vyšším DR. Tohle je hodně odvážný tah od OM System, když už mám fotit na 4/3 budu si už kvůli přepočtu výsledné světelnosti snažit používat objektivy s co nejlepší světelností a ne naopak a jestli za to někomu stojí to ohnisko, tak už bych si za ty peníze koupil hvězdářský dalekohled. To sklo má na delší vzdálenosti asi kilometr hloubku ostrosti, nehledě na to, že za o něco horších světelných podmínek z toho polezou fotky v dramatické kvalitě, vzhledem k snášenlivosti vyšších ISO hodnot a m43. Za mě, pokud to někdo chce, ať si to koupí, nicméně smysl mi to nedává a cena? Ta je úplně mimo, ale OM System je poslední dobou hodně mimo. Jako první vydá nový makro objektiv zase na m43 a za opět šílenou cenu je z převážné části plastový. Pak přijde s “novým” tělem které vlastně dostalo jen vylepšený software a má pouze rebrandovanou značku a nestydí si za tyto drobné vylepšení říct částku rovnou novému fotoaparátu a další je tahle černá díra za cenu pevného skla.
Why say it is a 300-1200 when you don't say that the f stop needs to be changed too! If you crop you FF image 2x you may get a better image, just a different number of pixels. My Canon DSLR drops to 12mp, the Olympus has 20, which hardly matters in most cases [the A7s I think is 12!]
You aren't an OM photographer so it's only nit picking and jealousy. Why do you feel the need to be like this? I could pull apart what you say but I can't be bothered to be honest, I'd rather concentrate my energy on nice people with genuine questions!!!
@@Wildmanrouse sorry if you feel the need to sabre rattle, no way am I jealous, just sick of people with an over inflated opinion of themselves not pointing out the whole truth. I know several people using OM, they all say they miss the ability to crop heavily that you get with FF. I have been a pro photographer for 50 years, so I understand the idea of brand support, like using David Bailey. Using a crop sensor you can gain noise and lose sharpness, not that it matters if you only look at images on a computer. I have considered getting an Olympus body for the extended reach, only there is no need I still occasionally use images taken with a 2mp pro body, Joe Public won't generally notice that the image is 10mp or 60mp!
@@blisteringbooks2428 You also gain noise when using a Canon sensor instead of a Sony sensor. I believe I saw a review recently in which the noise from the sensor in the R7 was about the same as that of the OM-1 when used at the same aperture because the OM-1 uses a Sony sensor. So in other words, Canon sensors are about a stop worse than their Sony counterparts in terms of noise.
At a 1200mm equivalent FOV, why would the f-stop need to be changed? At that focal length equivalent most images need more DOF, not less, and f/6.3 on m4/3's might very well be too shallow. In addition, for wildlife photography, shutter speed is generally much more important than getting less noise, which can be easily cleaned up in post processing. Your comment is nothing but more FF 'Equivalence' nonsense. Andy is a professional wildlife photographer -- I suspect you are a professional keyboard warrior.
@@blisteringbooks2428 This is a whole new rabbit hole. If you put a 400mm lens on a Sony camera and a 400mm lens on an Olympus, the optical image projected onto the sensor will be exactly the same in both cases (in millimietre terms). If you have to heavily crop the Sony sensor (to below m4/3 framing) then sensor size is irrelevant and 'cropping heavily' is not an argument as it all comes down to pixel density and pixel 'quality'. The only difference is that if you are taking a picture of a bird, the size of the MFT sensor is effectively doing the cropping for you.
If you have a full frame image of a bird taken on MFT and on FF sensor (you would need to change lens or distance) I defy anyone to tell which camera took the picture when printed up to A3 (maybe bigger).